United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-454/R-99-053
September 1999
Air
r/EPA
1998 Nonmethane Organic
Compounds (NMOC)
And
Speciated Nonmethane
Organic Compounds (SNMOC)
Monitoring Program
-------
1998 Nonmethane Organic Compound (NMOC)
and Speciated Nonmethane Organic
Compound (SNMOC) Monitoring Program
Final Report
EPA Contract No. 68-D3-0095
Delivery Order 16
Prepared for:
Kathy Weant and Mike Jones
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared by:
Eastern Research Group, Inc.
110 Hartwell Avenue
Lexington, MA 02421
January 1999
-------
DISCLAIMER
Through its Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency funded and managed the research described in this report under EPA Contract
No. 68-D3-0095 to Eastern Research Group, Inc. This report has been subjected to the Agency's
administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of
trade names or commercial products in this report does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for their use.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Figures vi
List of Tables viii
List of Abbreviations x
About This Report xi
1.0 Introduction 1-1
2.0 The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program 2-1
2.1 Monitoring Locations 2-1
2.2 Compounds Selected for Monitoring 2-2
2.3 Sampling and Analytical Methods 2-4
2.3.1 Total NMOC 2-6
2.3.2 SNMOC 2-7
2.3.3 VOC 2-9
2.3.4 Carbonyls 2-9
2.4 Sampling Schedules 2-10
3.0 Data Analysis Methodology 3-1
3.1 Data Summary Parameters 3-1
3.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Parameters 3-3
3.3 Analyses of Annual Variations 3-5
3.4 Other Analyses 3-7
4.0 General Results of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Program 4-1
4.1 Total NMOC Concentrations During the 1998 Program 4-1
4.2 Total NMOC Concentrations During the 1995-1997 Programs 4-2
5.0 Monitoring Results for Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas (CAMS5, CAMS13,
DLTX) 5-1
5.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data 5-2
5.1.1 Data Summary 5-3
5.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions 5-4
5.1.3 Annual Variations 5-7
5.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data 5-9
5.2.1 Data Summary 5-10
5.2.2 Composition of Air Samples 5-12
in
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
5.2.3 Annual Variations 5-18
5.2.4 Reactivity of the Air Mass 5-21
5.3 Carbonyl Monitoring Data 5-22
5.4 Chapter Summary 5-24
6.0 Monitoring Results for Juarez, Mexico (JUMX) 6-1
6.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data 6-2
6.1.1 Data Summary 6-2
6.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions 6-4
6.1.3 Annual Variations 6-6
6.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data 6-8
6.2.1 Data Summary 6-8
6.2.2 Composition of Air Samples 6-10
6.2.3 Annual Variations 6-12
6.2.4 Reactivity of the Air Mass 6-13
6.3 Carbonyl Monitoring Data 6-14
6.4 Chapter Summary 6-16
7.0 Monitoring Results for Long Island, New York (LINY) 7-1
7.1 Data Summary 7-1
7.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions 7-3
7.3 Annual Variations 7-6
7.4 Chapter Summary 7-7
8.0 Monitoring Results for Newark, New Jersey (NWNJ) 8-1
8.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data 8-2
8.1.1 Data Summary 8-2
8.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions 8-4
8.1.3 Annual Variations 8-7
8.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data 8-8
8.2.1 Data Summary 8-9
8.2.2 Composition of Air Samples 8-10
8.2.3 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured by Two
Different Methods 8-11
8.3 VOC Monitoring Data 8-12
8.3.1 Data Summary 8-12
8.3.2 Data Trends for MTBE 8-13
8.3.3 Comparison of VOC and SNMOC Analytical Methods 8-15
8.4 Carbonyl Monitoring Data 8-15
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
8.5 Chapter Summary 8-17
9.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 9-1
9.1 Conclusions 9-1
9.2 Recommendations 9-4
10.0 References 10-1
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
2-1 Locations of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Stations 2-12
4-1 Average Concentrations of Total NMOC for the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program 4-4
4-2 Average Concentrations of Total NMOC Observed During the 1995-1997
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs 4-5
5-1 Dallas, Texas (CAMS5), Monitoring Station 5-27
5-2 Fort Worth, Texas (CAMS13), Monitoring Station 5-28
5-3 Dallas, Texas (DLTX), Monitoring Station 5-29
5-4 Distributions of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort Worth 5-30
5-5 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX to
Selected Meteorological Parameters 5-31
5-6 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX to
Wind Direction 5-34
5-7 Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort
Worth 5-35
5-8 Annual Variations in the Frequency of Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC in the
Dallas-Fort Worth Area 5-36
5-9 Relative Amounts of Alkanes, Olefms, and Aromatic Compounds (on a ppbv basis)
at the Dallas-Fort Worth Monitoring Stations 5-37
5-10 Composition Data for the Most Abundant Olefms at CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX 5-38
5-11 Composition Data for the Most Abundant Alkanes at CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX 5-39
5-12 BTEX Concentration Ratios Calculated from the SNMOC Monitoring Data 5-40
5-13 Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS5 5-41
5-14 Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS13 5-45
5-15 Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at DLTX 5-49
5-16 Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations
at CAMS5 5-53
5-17 Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations
at CAMS13 5-54
5-18 Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations
at DLTX 5-55
6-1 Juarez, Mexico (JUMX), Monitoring Station 6-18
6-2 Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at JUMX 6-19
6-3 Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at JUMX to Selected Meteorological
Parameters 6-20
6-4 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at JUMX to Wind Direction 6-21
6-5 Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at JUMX 6-22
vi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
6-6 Annual Variations in the Frequency of Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC
at JUMX 6-23
6-7 Contribution of "Identified" and "Unknown" Compounds to Total NMOC
Concentrations at JUMX 6-24
6-8 Annual Variations in Concentrations of Selected SNMOC at JUMX 6-25
6-9 Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with Highest Geometric Mean Concentration
at JUMX 6-29
7-1 Long Island, New York (LINY), Monitoring Station 7-9
7-2 Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at LINY 7-10
7-3 Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at LINY to Selected Meteorological
Parameters 7-11
7-4 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at LINY to Wind Direction 7-12
7-5 Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY 7-13
7-6 Annual Variations in Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY 7-14
8-1 Newark, New Jersey (NWNJ), Monitoring Station 8-19
8-2 Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at NWNJ 8-20
8-3 Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at NWNJ to Selected Meteorological
Parameters 8-21
8-4 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at NWNJ to Wind Direction 8-22
8-5 Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ 8-23
8-6 Annual Variations in Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ 8-24
8-7 Data Correlations for Ambient Air Concentrations of Selected Compounds 8-25
vn
-------
LIST OF TABLES
1-1 Organization of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Summary Report 1-4
2-1 Background Information for the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Stations 2-13
2-2 Summary of Sampling and Analytical Methods 2-14
2-3 SNMOC Detection Limits 2-15
2-4 Precision Estimates for SNMOC Measurements 2-16
2-5 VOC Detection Limits 2-19
2-6 Carbonyl Detection Limits 2-20
2-7 Precision Estimates for Carbonyl Measurements 2-21
2-8 Sampling Schedules Implemented During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Program 2-22
3-1 Maximum Incremental Reactivities (MIRs) for SNMOC 3-8
5-1 Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort Worth . . 5-56
5-2 Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX
(CAMS5) 5-57
5-3 Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX
(CAMS13) 5-62
5-4 Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX) . 5-67
5-5 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations 5-72
5-6 Emissions Source Profiles for Selected SNMOC 5-73
5-7 Abbreviations Used in Figures 5-16, 5-17, and 5-18 5-74
5-8 Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX
(CAMS5) 5-75
5-9 Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX
(CAMS13) 5-76
5-10 Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX) . 5-77
6-1 Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at JUMX 6-30
6-2 Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico
(JUMX) 6-31
6-3 Abbreviations Used in Figure 6-9 6-36
6-4 Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico
(JUMX) 6-37
7-1 Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY 7-15
8-1 Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ 8-26
8-2 Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ
(NWNJ) 8-27
8-3 Summary Statistics for VOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ) . . . 8-32
8-4 Comparison of Concentrations for Compounds Measured by Both the VOC and
viii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
SNMOC Analytical Methods 8-35
-5 Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ
(NWNJ) 8-36
IX
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System
AQS Air Quality Subsystem (of the Aerometric Information and Retrieval System)
BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (o-, m-, and/?-xylene)
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FID flame ionization detection
GC gas chromatography
HPLC high-performance liquid chromatography
MIR maximum incremental reactivity
mph miles per hour
MSD mass selective detection
MTBE methyl fert-butyl ether
NAAQS national ambient air quality standard
NCDC National Climatic Data Center
ND nondetect
NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
PDFID preconcentration direct flame ionization detection
ppbC parts per billion (by volume, on a carbon basis)
ppbv parts per billion (by volume)
RPD relative percent difference
SNMOC speciated nonmethane organic compound
TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
total NMOC total nonmethane organic compounds
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
UV ultraviolet
VOC volatile organic compounds
Monitoring Stations
CAMS5 Dallas, Texas (1)
CAMS 13 Fort Worth, Texas
DLTX Dallas, Texas (2)
JUMX Juarez, Mexico
LINY Long Island, New York
NWNJ Newark, New Jersey
x
-------
ABOUT THIS REPORT
This report summarizes and interprets ambient air monitoring data collected during the
summer of 1998 as part of the National Nonmethane Organic Compound and Speciated
Nonmethane Organic Compound Monitoring Program, which is also called the NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program. Designed to characterize levels of air pollution in regions with ground-level
ozone problems, the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program measures air concentrations of several
groups of pollutants that participate in the photochemical reactions that form "smog." The 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program spanned 4 months (June to September), during which
ambient air samples were collected daily between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., local time, at six
monitoring locations. These samples were analyzed for NMOC, SNMOC, volatile organic
compounds (VOC), carbonyls, or some combination of these categories. Overall, nearly 30,000
ambient air concentrations were measured during the 1998 program.
This report uses various graphical, numerical, and statistical analyses to identify and
illustrate meaningful trends and patterns in this large volume of ambient air monitoring data. Some
of the analyses in this report, such as the concise data summary tables, intentionally follow the
same data analysis framework used in earlier reports on past National Program elements. This
consistent use of certain analyses facilitates comparisons between the 1998 program and earlier
NMOC/SNMOC programs. To provide the reader with a new perspective on the NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring data, however, this report includes several analyses that have not been addressed
previously, such as a detailed review of annual variations in air quality. Though the analyses in
this report highlight many trends in the data collected during the 1998 program, researchers are
encouraged to further examine the NMOC/SNMOC ambient air monitoring data to better
understand the complex ozone formation processes. Accordingly, the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring data have been made publicly available in electronic format on the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS).
The structure of this report differs significantly from that of earlier NMOC/SNMOC reports
in one important regard: instead of commenting primarily on the compound-specific trends
observed during the air monitoring program, as was done previously, this report instead focuses on
site-specific air quality trends. This revised structure allows for a much more thorough review of
data trends that are unique to a given metropolitan area—a topic suspected to be of interest to the
agencies that sponsor the NMOC/SNMOC monitoring stations. Site-specific trends presented in
this report should not be assumed to apply to geographical areas not considered in the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
Though readers are encouraged to read this report in its entirety, a quick overview of the
major site-specific findings can be found in the following sections: Section 5 addresses the
monitoring data collected in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area; Section 6, the data collected
in Juarez, Mexico; Section 7, the data collected on Long Island, New York; and Section 8, the data
collected in Newark, New Jersey.
XI
-------
1.0 Introduction
This report summarizes ambient air monitoring data collected in or near three
metropolitan areas as part of the National "1998 Nonmethane Organic Compounds (NMOC) and
Speciated Nonmethane Organic Compounds (SNMOC) Monitoring Program." Every year since
1984, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has sponsored the NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program to provide state and local environmental agencies with important
information on the composition and magnitude of air pollution in or near areas that are not in
attainment with the Agency's national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. In
recent years, this program has entailed intensive field sampling—up to 4 months of daily
measurements—of four groups of compounds that affect ozone formation: total NMOC,
SNMOC, volatile organic compounds (VOC), and carbonyls. This report summarizes and
interprets the nearly 30,000 air quality measurements that were made during the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
To supplement findings from previous NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs and other
local air monitoring efforts, this report includes detailed numerical and statistical analyses of
the ambient air monitoring data collected during the 1998 program. So that new and historical
data can easily be compared, the descriptive summary statistics presented in this report have a
format identical to previous NMOC/SNMOC reports. To offer greater insight into the current
data, however, much of this report focuses on topics that previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have
not addressed in detail. Overall, there are four basic goals for this report:
To provide thorough, site-specific summaries of the data collected during the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
To identify and characterize associations between levels of air pollution and variations
in selected meteorological conditions.
To illustrate how ambient air concentrations of the most prevalent components of air
pollution changed from one year to the next.
1-1
-------
To conduct additional data analyses, as appropriate, to explain noteworthy trends and
patterns in the large volume of air monitoring data.
Unlike previous NMOC/SNMOC reports, which focused on compound-specific air
quality trends, this report focuses on site-specific air quality trends. Thus, rather than
presenting separate analyses for NMOC, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyls, as was done in prior
reports, this report instead presents separate analyses for monitoring data collected at
Dallas-Fort Worth, Juarez (Mexico), Long Island, and Newark. This site-specific approach
allows for much more detailed analyses of the local factors (e.g., unique meteorological
conditions, motor vehicle sources, industrial sources) that affect air quality differently from one
metropolitan area to the next.
As previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have explained, the series of photochemical
reactions that contribute to ozone formation are extremely complex. As a result, the analyses in
this report, though extensive, do not offer a comprehensive description of air quality at the
monitoring stations that participated in the 1998 program. For a more informed understanding of
air pollution in ozone non-attainment areas, state and local environmental agencies are
encouraged to evaluate emission inventories, photochemical dispersion modeling results, and
additional monitoring data on ozone precursors (e.g., nitrogen oxides), in addition to evaluating
the data presented in this report. To facilitate further analysis of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
sampling results, appendices to this report present the entire set of ambient air monitoring data.
Moreover, these data have been made available in electronic format on the Air Quality
Subsystem (AQS) of the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), an electronic
database that EPA maintains.
This report is organized into ten sections; Table 1-1 lists the contents of each section.
Sections 2 and 3 present necessary background information on the monitoring program and the
methodology used to interpret the monitoring data, and Section 4 provides an overview of the
total NMOC measurements collected during the 1998 program. Sections 5 through 8 then
present detailed analyses of the data collected at the six monitoring stations that comprised the
1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. Finally, Section 9 reviews the major findings of
1-2
-------
the report and offers several recommendations for future programs. Section 10 lists the
references cited throughout the report. As with previous NMOC/SNMOC reports, all figures
and tables in this report appear at the ends of their respective sections (figures first, followed by
tables).
1-3
-------
Table 1-1
Organization of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Summary Report
Report
Section
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Section Title
The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program
Data Analysis Methodology
General Results from the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program
Monitoring Results for Dallas and
Fort Worth
Monitoring Results for Juarez
Monitoring Results for Long Island
Monitoring Results for Newark
Conclusions and Recommendations
References
Overview of Contents
This section provides background information on how the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program was implemented. Topics of discussion include sampling
locations, compounds selected for sampling, sampling and analytical methods,
measurement accuracy and precision, and sampling schedules.
This section outlines the data analysis methodology used in Sections 5 through 9 to
analyze and interpret the large volume of NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data.
This section presents a general overview of the sampling results from the 1998
program, by comparing average concentrations of total NMOC that were observed ai
the six monitoring stations that participated in the program. The section compares
this general trend to relevant data from previous NMOC/SNMOC reports.
These sections provide site-specific summaries of sampling results collected during
the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. Each section summarizes the data
collected during the 1998 program, compares trends in the monitoring data to trends
in local meteorological conditions, and examines how concentrations of certain
compounds have changed over the past couple of years.
This section summarizes the most significant findings of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program and makes several recommendations for future programs.
This section lists the references cited throughout this report.
-------
2.0 The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program
This section describes four fundamental features—the monitoring locations, compounds
selected for monitoring, sampling and analytical methods, and sampling schedules—of the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. These four features are important to consider when
interpreting the results of any ambient air monitoring program. In general, the 1998 program
included six monitoring stations, all of which have participated in previous NMOC/SNMOC
programs. Monitoring devices at these stations collected 3-hour integrated samples according to
site-specific schedules, from June 1998 to September 1998. During this time frame, more than
600 air samples were collected and nearly 30,000 ambient air concentrations were measured,
including concentrations of total NMOC, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyls. The remainder of this
section describes in greater detail these relevant features of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program.
2.1 Monitoring Locations
The NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program is an EPA-sponsored program, in which state
and local environmental agencies can voluntarily participate. EPA works with participating
agencies to select appropriate monitoring locations. Figure 2-1 shows the locations of the six
monitoring stations that participated in the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
Table 2-1 presents additional information on these monitoring stations, including (1) each
station's NMOC/SNMOC site code, which was used to track samples from the field to the
laboratory, (2) each station's unique nine-digit AIRS site code, which was used to index
monitoring results in the AIRS database, and (3) each station's starting and ending sampling
dates for the 1998 program, which Section 2.4 describes further.
At each of the monitoring stations, air sampling equipment was installed in a small
enclosure (e.g., a trailer or a shed) with air sampling probes protruding through the roof; every
air monitor in this program sampled air at heights of approximately 5 to 20 feet above local
ground level. Sections 5 through 8 of this report include detailed maps and descriptions of the
2-1
-------
surroundings of the six monitoring stations. These descriptions identify local emissions sources
that might have affected each station's monitoring results.
The locations of the monitoring stations shown in Figure 2-1 present two important
limitations on the data analyses documented throughout this report:
The monitoring stations that participated in the 1998 program are located in or near only
three metropolitan areas in the United States and Mexico: the Dallas-Fort Worth
metropolitan area, the El Paso-Juarez metropolitan area, and the New York-Newark
metropolitan area. As a result, the monitoring data characterize air quality in a very
small subset of ozone nonattainment areas, and trends in the data presented in this report
should not be viewed as being representative of air quality trends in other ozone
nonattainment areas in the United States or Mexico.
The monitoring stations shown in Figure 2-1 characterize air quality at only discrete
locations within the three metropolitan areas. Because the number of emissions sources,
such as freeways and industrial facilities, varies with location in any given metropolitan
area, ambient air concentrations of certain compounds also vary within metropolitan
areas, sometimes by many orders of magnitude and over very short distances. Therefore,
the air quality data presented in this report should be viewed as a depiction of air quality
in the immediate vicinity of the monitoring stations and not necessarily as a depiction of
air quality for an entire metropolitan area.
To ensure that the NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data are interpreted in proper context, the
implications of the aforementioned data limitations are revisited throughout this report.
2.2 Compounds Selected for Monitoring
The agencies that sponsor NMOC/SNMOC monitoring stations decide what compounds
are to be measured. Agencies that participated in the 1998 program selected their monitoring
options from the following four groups of compounds:
TotalNMOC. In this option, air samples are analyzed to obtain a single value (total
NMOC) that characterizes the overall levels of hydrocarbons in the air. Some computer
models use total NMOC concentrations as a critical input for forecasting ozone
2-2
-------
concentrations. Section 2.3.1 describes the NMOC sampling and analytical method in
greater detail.
SNMOC. Stations implementing this option collect air samples that are analyzed for
ambient air concentrations of 80 hydrocarbons, as well as for the concentration of total
NMOC. SNMOC concentrations also are used as inputs to certain ozone forecasting
simulations. Table 2-3 lists the 80 compounds identified by this monitoring option, and
Section 2.3.2 describes the SNMOC sampling and analytical method in greater detail.1
VOC. With this monitoring option, ambient air samples are analyzed for concentrations
of 47 compounds, which include hydrocarbons, halogenated hydrocarbons, oxygenated
compounds, and nitriles.2 Most of these 47 compounds are not measured by the SNMOC
analytical method. Table 2-5 lists the compounds identified by this monitoring option,
and Section 2.3.3 describes salient features of the VOC sampling and analytical method,
including a noteworthy improvement made to this method prior to the start of the 1998
program.
Carbonyls. Stations also could opt to have samples analyzed for concentrations of
16 carbonyls, all of which are not currently identified by either the SNMOC or VOC
monitoring options.3 Table 2-6 lists the 16 compounds identified by this option, and
Section 2.3.4 presents relevant background information on the carbonyl sampling and
analytical method.
Table 2-1 indicates the compound groups that were selected for monitoring at the six
stations participating in the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. Since nearly 90 percent
of the air samples collected during the 1998 program were analyzed for either NMOC or
SNMOC, the data analyses throughout this report focus on interpreting trends and patterns in the
The SNMOC analytical method actually reports concentration values for only 78 different compounds
for each sample. Since the chromatographic analysis cannot differentiate isobutene from 1-butene or »2-xylene
from/>-xylene, a single concentration is reported for these pairs. Therefore, the 78 values measured by this
method characterize ambient levels of 80 compounds.
The VOC analytical method actually reports concentration values for only 46 different compounds for
each sample. Since the chromatographic analysis cannot differentiate m-xylene from/>-xylene, a single
concentration is reported for this pair. Therefore, the 46 values measured by this method characterize ambient
levels of 47 compounds.
The carbonyl analytical method actually reports concentration values for only 13 different compounds
for each sample. Since the chromatographic analysis cannot differentiate butyraldehyde from isobutyraldehyde, a
single concentration is reported for this pair; and, since the method cannot distinguish the three tolualdehyde
isomers, a single concentration is reported for this trio. Therefore, the 13 values measured by this method
characterize ambient levels of 16 compounds.
20
-3
-------
large volume of NMOC and SNMOC monitoring results. Consistent with previous
NMOC/SNMOC reports, this report places a lesser emphasis on evaluating the VOC and
carbonyl monitoring results.
The compounds selected for monitoring present one important limitation on the
conclusions that can be drawn from the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program: Though this
program measures ambient air concentrations of numerous compounds that contribute to ozone
formation, the program does not characterize ambient levels of all compounds that participate in
the photochemical reactions that form ozone. Thus, the data presented in this report provide an
extensive, but not a comprehensive, account of air quality in ozone nonattainment areas.
Sponsoring agencies are encouraged to evaluate data trends for other compounds (e.g., nitrogen
oxides) that participate in photochemical reactions that form "smog."
2.3 Sampling and Analytical Methods
The sampling and analytical methods used in a monitoring program ultimately determine
what compounds can be identified in air samples, and at what ranges of concentrations. As
noted previously, four different sampling and analytical methods were used during the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program to measure ambient air concentrations of total NMOC,
SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyls. Since the final reports for the 1996 and 1997 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Programs describe these sampling and analytical methods in detail (ERG 1997b,
1999), the following subsections only briefly highlight how air samples were collected and
analyzed. For quick reference, Table 2-2 summarizes general attributes (detection limits, units
of measurement, etc.) of the four sampling and analytical methods.
The following subsections also estimate how precisely the sampling and analytical
methods measured ambient air concentrations during the 1998 program. As is typical for air
monitoring programs, precision was determined by reviewing results of duplicate samples that
were analyzed in replicate. As previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have explained, comparison
of concentrations measured in replicate analyses characterizes analytical precision (how
2-4
-------
precisely the laboratory analyzes environmental samples), and comparison of concentrations
from duplicate samples characterizes sampling and analytical precision (how precisely field
sampling techniques and laboratory analytical techniques, combined, measure levels of
environmental contamination). This report uses the relative percent difference (RPD) and the
average concentration difference to quantify both types of precision. Previous
NMOC/SNMOC reports have defined these parameters and explained their significance, as
does the sidebar below, "Estimating Measurement Precision."
Estimating Measurement Precision
This report uses two parameters to quantify how precisely ambient air concentrations were
measured during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. First, as an absolute
indicator of precision, the average concentration difference simply quantifies how multiple
measurements obtained by the same procedures differ. Applied to this monitoring program,
average concentration differences were calculated for each compound group (1) for
concentrations measured from replicate analyses and (2) for concentrations measured from
duplicate samples. The calculated average concentration difference is an important
consideration when interpreting ambient air monitoring data for specific compounds. For
example, if a compound's average concentration difference exceeds or nearly equals the
compound's arithmetic mean ambient air concentration, then the arithmetic mean
concentration might be largely influenced by measurement uncertainty. Data interpretations
for such compounds should be made with caution.
As a relative indicator of precision, the relative percent difference (RPD) expresses average
concentration differences relative to the magnitude of the concentration observed. The RPD
is calculated using the following equation:
RPD = — - - x. 100
Where X, is the ambient air concentration of a given compound measured in one sample; X2
is the concentration of the same compound measured during replicate analysis or in a
duplicate sample; and X is the arithmetic mean ofX, aadX2.
By this equation, compounds with relatively low measurement variability will have lower
RPDs (and better precision), and compounds with relatively high measurement variability
will have higher RPDs (and poorer precision). Many sampling and analytical methods
suggest that monitoring programs should be able to achieve RPDs of 30 percent or better, if
the methods are applied correctly.
2-5
-------
2.3.1 Total NMOC
The 1998 program measured ambient air concentrations of total NMOC according to
EPA Compendium Method TO-12 (USEPA 1988)—the same sampling and analytical method
that was used in previous NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. Following this method,
3-hour integrated air samples were collected in passivated stainless steel canisters, the contents
of which were later analyzed using cryogenic traps and flame ionization detection (FID).
Concentrations of total NMOC are reported in units of parts per billion on a carbon basis
(ppbC) (see sidebar below, "The Importance of Units of Measurement") and the detection limit
for this method is approximately 5 ppbC. All total NMOC concentrations measured during the
1998 program were considerably higher than this detection limit.
The Importance of Units of Measurement
Units of measurement express results of scientific analyses in standard formats. The units
used in a particular study, however, depend largely on the conventions followed by other
researchers within a particular scientific field. In ambient air monitoring efforts, for
example, scientists often report air concentrations in different units of measurement, such as
parts per billion on a volume basis (ppbv) and parts per billion on a carbon basis (ppbC).
This report adopts the conventions EPA (USEPA 1988; 1989; 1997a; 1997b) and other air
monitoring researchers employ, expressing raw total NMOC and SNMOC monitoring data
in units of ppbC and expressing raw VOC and carbonyl monitoring data in units of ppbv.
For a given compound, concentrations can be converted between these units of measurement
according to the following equation:
Concentration (ppbC) = Concentration (ppbv) x Number of Carbons
As an example, benzene (C6H6) has six carbon atoms. Therefore, by definition, a benzene
concentration of 6.0 ppbC is equal to a benzene concentration of 1.0 ppbv. Because failure
to consider subtle differences in units of measurement can result in significant
misinterpretations of ambient air monitoring results, readers of this report should pay
particular attention to units of measurement, especially when comparing monitoring results
presented in this report to those of other studies. To avoid any confusion, every table and
figure in this report clearly indicates the corresponding units of measurement.
2-6
-------
During the 1998 program, results from 22 duplicate NMOC samples, all of which were
analyzed in replicate, indicated that the total NMOC sampling and analytical method consistently
generated highly precise results. More specifically, the program-average RPD for total NMOC
measurements was lower than 10 percent, both for analytical precision and for sampling and
analytical precision. In other words, total NMOC concentrations measured in duplicate samples
and replicate analyses consistently differed by 10 percent or less. Moreover, total NMOC
concentrations in duplicate samples and replicate analyses had an average concentration
difference lower than ±25 ppbC. Since program-average NMOC concentrations were
approximately 10 times higher than this average concentration difference (see Figure 4-1), the
variability introduced by the sampling and analytical method has little bearing on the general
trends in the total NMOC monitoring data. Sections 7 and 8 revisit this issue.
2.3.2 SNMOC
The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program used an EPA research protocol called
"Determination of C2 through C12 Ambient Air Hydrocarbons in 39 U.S. Cities from 1984
through 1986" (USEPA 1989) to measure ambient air concentrations of SNMOC. This protocol
requires air samples to be collected in passivated stainless steel canisters, which are later
analyzed using a capillary gas chromatography (GC) column coupled with the FID. With this
analytical approach, SNMOC air samples are analyzed for ambient air concentrations of
80 organic compounds and total NMOC. Table 2-3 lists these 80 compounds and their
corresponding detection limits. The sidebar on the following page, "Appreciating Detection
Limits," provides important background information on the meaning and derivation of detection
limits. All SNMOC concentrations were reported in units of ppbC, following standard
convention for this analytical method. As explained later in this report, concentrations of some
compounds were also converted to units of parts per billion on a volume basis (ppbv) to
perform certain data analyses.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, 39 SNMOC samples were
collected in duplicate and analyzed in replicate; results from these samples and analyses
indicate
2-7
-------
Appreciating Detection Limits
The detection limit of an analytical method must be considered carefully when ambient air
monitoring data are interpreted. By definition, the detection limit is the lowest level at which
laboratory equipment can reliably quantify concentrations of selected compounds to a
specific confidence level. If a compound's concentration in ambient air does not exceed the
method sensitivity (as gauged by the detection limit), the analytical method might not
differentiate the compound from other compounds in the sample or from the random "noise"
inherent in laboratory analyses. Therefore, when samples contain concentrations at levels
below their respective detection limits, multiple analyses of the same sample might lead to a
wide range of results, including highly variable concentrations or "nondetect" observations.
Because analytical methods do not quantify concentrations at levels below the detection limits
accurately or precisely, data analysts must exercise caution when interpreting monitoring data
that have many concentrations at levels near or below the corresponding detection limits.
For reference, the detection limits for the NMOC, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl analytical
methods were all determined according to EPA guidance specified in "Definition and
Procedure for the Determination of the Method Detection Limit" (FR 1984).
that the SNMOC sampling and analytical method generated highly precise results. According to
performance criteria established in the SNMOC method documentation, analytical precision for
compounds with concentrations greater than 2 ppbC should have an RPD less than 30 percent,
and analytical compounds with concentrations lower than 2 ppbC should have an RPD less than
95 percent (USEPA 1989). As Table 2-4 shows, the precision estimates for the SNMOC
measurements during the 1998 program met these performance criteria: The RPDs for 74 of the
80 SNMOC were lower than 30 percent; the six remaining compounds (w-dodecane, 1-
dodecene, 1-heptene, w-tridecane, 1-tridecene, and 1-undecene) had average concentrations
lower than 2 ppbC and had RPDs considerably lower than 95 percent.
Corroborating the findings of the RPDs, the average concentration differences observed
in duplicate SNMOC samples and replicate analyses were typically better than ±1 ppbC—a
level indicative of excellent measurement precision. Therefore, the SNMOC monitoring data
presented in this report are of a known and high quality.
2-8
-------
2.3.3 VOC
Following EPA's Compendium Method TO-14A (USEPA 1999a), ambient air
concentrations of 47 VOC were measured by collecting ambient air in passivated stainless steel
canisters and analyzing the sampled air using a capillary gas chromatography column with mass
selective detection and flame ionization detection (GC/MSD-FID). The analytical techniques
used during the 1998 program differed from those used in earlier programs in one important
regard: Nafion® dryers were removed from the analytical apparatus, thus allowing for the
measurement of nine compounds that previous air toxics programs could not detect. Table 2-5
lists the 47 VOC identified during the 1998 program and their corresponding detection limits.
Following standard convention for this method, all VOC concentrations were reported in units
ofppbv.
Because only one monitoring station (Newark) collected VOC samples during the 1998
program, too few duplicate sampling results and replicate analyses were available to assess
measurement precision of the VOC sampling and analytical method. Nonetheless, the VOC
results presented for the Newark monitoring station are believed to be highly precise, largely
because the central laboratory for the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program has a long record of
analyzing VOC samples to a high level of precision (ERG 1997a; 1999).
2.3.4 Carbonyls
Following the specifications of EPA's Compendium Method TO-11A (USEPA 1999b),
concentrations of 16 carbonyl compounds were measured by passing ambient air over silica gel
cartridges coated with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH), a compound known to react
reversibly with carbonyls (i.e., aldehydes and ketones). For chemical analysis, the sampling
cartridges are eluted with acetonitrile, which liberates the hydrazones (the DNPH-carbonyl
derivatives) from the sampling matrix. The acetonitrile solution is then analyzed for chemical
constituents using high-performance liquid chromatography (FtPLC) with ultraviolet detection.
The 16 carbonyl compounds identified by this method are listed in Table 2-6, with their
detection limits.
2-9
-------
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, four carbonyl samples were
collected in duplicate and analyzed in replicate, thus providing a limited basis for estimating
measurement precision. Table 2-7 presents the RPDs calculated both for sampling precision
and for sampling and analytical precision. Both sets of RPDs indicate that the carbonyl
sampling and analytical method precisely measured air concentrations of most compounds: All
compounds had analytical precision lower than 20 percent and sampling and analytical
precision of roughly 50 percent and lower. Measurement precision was particularly good for
acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde—the three carbonyls consistently present at the highest
concentrations in air samples. In short, the carbonyl monitoring data presented in this report,
like the NMOC, SNMOC, and VOC monitoring data, are believed to be of high quality.
2.4 Sampling Schedules
Each year, stations participating in the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program collect
ambient air samples according to site-specific schedules. The agencies that sponsor these
monitoring stations ultimately decide how frequently each type of samples is to be collected.
Tables 2-1 and 2-8 summarize the sampling schedules implemented at the six monitoring stations
that comprised the 1998 program. As Table 2-8 indicates, every station collected daily samples
that were analyzed for either NMOC or SNMOC, and five of the six stations periodically
collected samples that were analyzed for carbonyls or VOC. As part of the sampling schedule,
site operators collected duplicate samples on roughly 10 percent of the sampling days. These
duplicate samples were analyzed in replicate to characterize the precision of the sampling and
analytical methods.
Overall, the site-specific sampling schedules have two features in common, both of
which introduce important limitations to the data analyses; these limitations are emphasized
throughout this report:
On each sampling day, ambient air is continuously sampled for 3 hours, starting at
6:00 a.m., local time. This sampling duration has been used in the previous
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs, because many ozone transport models require
2-10
-------
ambient air concentrations measured between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. as an input.
However, this sampling duration should be kept in mind when interpreting the air
monitoring data: All concentrations presented in this report characterize local air
quality during only three morning hours. Since concentrations of many compounds are
known to vary considerably between the day and night, comparisons between the
NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data and other data sets with different sampling durations
(e.g., 24-hour average samples) should be made with caution.
Sampling during the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program is typically limited to the
summer months (June through September), since ambient air concentrations of ozone
peak during this time of year. Though the NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data thoroughly
characterize levels of air pollution during these summer months, the monitoring data are
not useful for evaluating seasonal changes in air quality. Moreover, because this
program does not consider levels of air pollution during the fall, winter, and spring, the
average concentrations of certain pollutants presented in this report might differ
considerably from their corresponding annual-average levels.
2-11
-------
Figure 2-1
Locations of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Stations
to
to
Note: The alphanumeric codes shown were used primarily to track samples from the monitoring stations to the analytical laboratory.
-------
Table 2-1
Background Information for the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Stations
1998
NMOC/
SNMOC
Site Code
CAMS 5
CAMS 13
DLTX
JUMX
LINY
NWNJ
AIRS Site Code
48-113-0045
48-439-1002
48-113-0069
80-006-0001
36-059-0005
34-013-0011
Location
Dallas, TX (1)
Fort Worth, TX
Dallas, TX (2)
Juarez, Mexico
Long Island, NY
Newark, NJ
Sampling Schedule
Starting
Date
June 23, 1998
June 22, 1998
June 22, 1998
August 25, 1998
June 4, 1998
June 12, 1998
Ending
Date
September 30, 1998
September 30, 1998
September 30, 1998
September 29, 1998
September 30, 1998
September 29, 1998
Monitoring Options Selected
NMOC
•
•
SNMOC
•
•
•
•
•
voc
•
Carbonyl
•
•
•
•
•
to
oo
Note: Due to construction activities, sampling at Juarez, Mexico, could not start in June, as was originally planned.
As Section 2.3.2 describes, the SNMOC monitoring option measures NMOC as well as the 80 compounds listed in Table 2-3.
-------
Table 2-2
Summary of Sampling and Analytical Methods
Parameter
Sampling
apparatus
Analytical
approach
Output of
analysis
Units of
measurement a
Detection limit a
NMOC
Stainless steel canisters
Cryogenic trap and flame
ionization detection
Concentration of the total
amount of nonm ethane
organic compounds in the
sample
ppbC
SppbC
SNMOC
Stainless steel canisters
Cryogenic trap at the
inlet of a capillary gas
chromatography column
with flame ionization
detection
Concentrations of
80 different organic
hydrocarbons b
ppbC
See Table 2-3
voc
Stainless steel canisters
Capillary gas
chromatography with
mass selective detection
and flame ionization
detection
Concentrations of
47 different volatile
organic compounds c
ppbv
See Table 2-5
Carbonyl
Silica gel cartridge
coated with DNPH
High-performance liquid
chromatography with
ultraviolet detection
Concentrations of
16 different carbonyl
compounds d
ppbv
See Table 2-6
to
a Refer to the sidebars in Section 2.3 for information on the significance of units of measurement and detection limits.
b The SNMOC analytical method actually reports only 78 different concentrations for each sample. The method cannot differentiate isobutene from
1-butene or m-xylene from/>-xylene. Therefore, a single concentration is reported for these pairs.
0 The VOC analytical method actually reports only 46 different concentrations for each sample. The method cannot differentiate m-xylene from/7-xylene
and therefore reports a single concentration for this pair.
d The carbonyl analytical method actually reports only 13 different concentrations for each sample. The method cannot differentiate butyraldehyde from
isobutyraldehyde and therefore reports a single concentration for this pair. The method also cannot distinguish the three tolualdehyde isomers and
therefore reports a single concentration for this trio.
-------
Table 2-3
SNMOC Detection Limits
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
?ra«s-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
«-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethylbenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
«-Dodecane
1-Dodecene
Ethane
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
7w-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
fraws-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/ 1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methy 1-1 -Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
Detection Limit
(ppbC)
0.33
0.23
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.23
0.16
0.16
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.23
0.23
0.51
0.51
0.28
0.28
0.33
0.23
0.28
0.33
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.51
0.51
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.28
0.16
0.16
Compound
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3 -Methylheptane
2-Methy Ihexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3 -Methylpentane
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
«-Nonane
1-Nonene
n -Octane
1-Octene
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
fraws-2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
«-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3 -Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5 -Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3 -Trimethylpentane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2, 3 ,4-Trimethylpentane
«-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xy\ene
o-Xylene
Detection Limit
(ppbC)
0.16
0.51
0.23
0.36
0.36
0.51
0.51
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.28
0.28
0.36
0.36
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.28
0.28
0.33
0.28
0.33
0.33
0.28
0.51
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.28
Reference: FR, 1984.
2-15
-------
Table 2-4
Precision Estimates for SNMOC Measurements
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
?ra«s-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
w-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethylbenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
w-Dodecane
1-Dodecene
Ethane
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
0
77
77
77
77
77
77
72
59
76
77
0
77
77
77
77
77
4
77
77
RPD
(%)
9%
9%
13%
7%
8%
11%
8%
9%
15%
12%
NA
20%
23%
10%
9%
11%
10%
21%
60%
9%
9%
NA
14%
10%
14%
13%
9%
44%
8%
13%
Sampling and Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
0
39
39
39
39
39
39
36
28
38
39
0
39
39
39
39
39
2
39
39
RPD
(%)
5%
6%
9%
5%
6%
9%
22%
7%
13%
13%
NA
13%
14%
7%
6%
8%
6%
42%
49%
4%
7%
NA
7%
7%
10%
7%
5%
64%
6%
13%
Note: The number of observations for analytical precision indicates the number of replicates in which the
compound was detected in both analyses; the number of observations for sampling and analytical
precision indicates the number of duplicates in which the compound was detected in the four analyses of
the duplicate samples. By definition, both types of precision cannot be evaluated for compounds with
zero observations, hence compounds with no observations show an RPD of "NA."
2-16
-------
Table 2-4 (Continued)
Precision Estimates for SNMOC Measurements
Compound
c/s-2-Hexene
fraws-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/ 1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methy 1-1 -Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3 -Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3 -Methylpentane
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
n -Octane
1-Octene
w-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
fraws-2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
71
75
77
77
75
77
77
77
77
71
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
53
77
75
77
73
77
77
77
77
74
77
RPD
(%)
17%
18%
6%
7%
6%
10%
14%
11%
12%
24%
10%
10%
10%
12%
11%
8%
8%
8%
14%
22%
9%
26%
9%
26%
7%
12%
9%
9%
21%
19%
Sampling and Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
36
38
39
39
38
39
39
39
39
36
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
26
39
38
39
36
39
39
39
39
37
39
RPD
(%)
15%
14%
4%
5%
8%
8%
8%
8%
11%
23%
5%
6%
6%
7%
8%
5%
6%
5%
11%
15%
7%
24%
5%
27%
4%
7%
6%
6%
23%
26%
Note: The number of observations for analytical precision indicates the number of replicates in which the
compound was detected in both analyses; the number of observations for sampling and analytical
precision indicates the number of duplicates in which the compound was detected in the four analyses of
the duplicate samples. By definition, both types of precision cannot be evaluated for compounds with
zero observations, hence compounds with no observations show an RPD of "NA."
2-17
-------
Table 2-4 (Continued)
Precision Estimates for SNMOC Measurements
Compound
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3 -Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5 -Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3 -Trimethylpentane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2, 3 ,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xy\ene
o-Xylene
Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
77
77
77
70
77
77
75
16
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
60
77
77
RPD
(%)
7%
12%
7%
27%
14%
8%
40%
48%
19%
10%
13%
12%
9%
9%
12%
31%
9%
9%
Sampling and Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
39
39
39
34
39
39
37
5
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
27
39
39
RPD
(%)
3%
7%
4%
21%
21%
5%
37%
27%
13%
8%
8%
8%
5%
5%
23%
37%
7%
7%
Note: The number of observations for analytical precision indicates the number of replicates in which
the compound was detected in both analyses; the number of observations for sampling and
analytical precision indicates the number of duplicates in which the compound was detected in
the four analyses of the duplicate samples. By definition, both types of precision cannot be
evaluated for compounds with zero observations, hence compounds with no observations show
an RPD of "NA."
2-18
-------
Table 2-5
VOC Detection Limits
Compound
Detection Limit
(ppbv)
Compound
Detection Limit
(ppbv)
Acetonitrile 0.21
Acetylene 0.07
Acrylonitrile 0.06
Benzene 0.06
Bromochloromethane 0.04
Bromodichloromethane 0.05
Bromoform 0.12
Bromomethane 0.04
1,3-Butadiene 0.05
Carbon Tetrachloride 0.09
Chlorobenzene 0.04
Chloroethane 0.06
Chloroform 0.04
Chloromethane 0.06
Chloroprene 0.03
Dibromochloromethane 0.04
/w-Dichlorobenzene 0.09
o-Dichlorobenzene 0.09
/?-Dichlorobenzene 0.10
1,1-Dichloroethane 0.03
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.08
fra«5-l,2-Dichloroethylene 0.05
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.09
cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene
trans-1,3 -Dichloropropene
Ethyl Acrylate
Ethylbenzene
Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether
Methylene Chloride
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Methyl Methacrylate
Methyl tert-Butyl Ether
n -Octane
Propylene
Styrene
tert-Amyl Methyl Ether
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
7M,/?-Xylene
o-Xylene
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.10
0.05
0.10
0.03
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.09
0.03
0.11
0.06
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.06
0.03
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.03
Reference: FR, 1984.
2-19
-------
Table 2-6
Carbonyl Detection Limits
Compound Detection Limit (ppbv)
Acetaldehyde 0.009
Acetone 0.002
Acrolein 0.008
Benzaldehyde 0.008
Butyr/Isobutyraldehyde 0.009
Crotonaldehyde 0.009
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde 0.007
Formaldehyde 0.004
Hexanaldehyde 0.011
Isovaleraldehyde 0.009
Propionaldehyde 0.008
Tolualdehydes 0.023
Valeraldehvde 0.011
Note: The carbonyl detection limit varies with the volume of ambient air drawn through the sampling
apparatus. The detection limits in this table are based on a sample volume of 1,000 liters of ambient
air.
Reference: FR, 1984.
2-20
-------
Table 2-7
Precision Estimates for Carbonyl Measurements
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyr aldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5 -Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
7
7
7
7
7
0
5
7
4
5
7
0
2
RPD
(%)
4%
15%
18%
12%
19%
NA
19%
5%
19%
16%
19%
NA
12%
Sampling and Analytical Precision
Number of
Observations
3
3
3
3
3
0
2
3
2
2
3
0
1
RPD
(%)
21%
23%
31%
10%
51%
NA
42%
24%
40%
21%
23%
NA
11%
Notes: The number of observations for analytical precision indicates the number of replicate analyses in which
the compound was detected; the number of observations for sampling and analytical precision indicates
the number of duplicate samples in which the compound was detected. By definition, analytical
precision and sampling and analytical precision cannot be evaluated for compounds with zero
observations; these compounds have an RPD of "NA."
2-21
-------
Table 2-8
Sampling Schedules Implemented During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Program
Monitoring
Option
NMOC
SNMOC
Carbonyl
voc
Monitoring
Location
Long Island, NY
Newark, NJ
Dallas (1), TX
Dallas (2), TX
Fort Worth, TX
Juarez, Mexico
Newark, NJ
Dallas (1), TX
Dallas (2), TX
Fort Worth, TX
Juarez, Mexico
Newark, NJ
Newark, NJ
Sampling Schedules
Both sites sampled NMOC every weekday of the monitoring
program, except holidays.
These sites sampled SNMOC every weekday of the
monitoring program, except holidays. All samples were
analyzed for both NMOC and the 80 target SNMOC.
This site sampled SNMOC on 10 days throughout the
monitoring program. All samples were analyzed for both
NMOC and the 80 target SNMOC.
These sites sampled carbonyls periodically over the course
of the program, according to site-specific schedules. The
number of sampling events for each station ranged from 4 tc
11.
This site sampled VOC on 10 days throughout the
monitoring program.
2-22
-------
3.0 Data Analysis Methodology
This section describes the methodology used in this report to summarize and interpret the
1998 NMOC/SNMOC ambient air monitoring data. This methodology includes various
graphical, numerical, and statistical techniques that help identify the most meaningful trends in the
large volume of NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data. So that readers can easily compare the 1998
monitoring results to monitoring results from previous years, some elements of the data analysis
methodology are identical to those used in earlier NMOC/SNMOC reports (e.g., data summary
parameters). To provide a different perspective on the monitoring data, however, some elements
of the methodology are included that have not been used previously (e.g., detailed analyses of
annual variations). In general, four categories of data analysis are used in this report:
Data summary parameters use basic descriptive statistical parameters to provide a
succinct overview of the monitoring data (see Section 3.1)
Comparison to selected meteorological parameters in order to identify and characterize
relationships between levels of air pollution and certain meteorological conditions (see
Section 3.2)
Analyses of annual variations comment on long-term trends in air quality (see
Section 3.3)
Other analyses are used, as necessary, to interpret notable data trends that do not fall
under the previous three categories (see Section 3.4)
The remainder of this section describes these four types of data analyses. Sections 5
through 8 then use these analyses to interpret the site-specific air quality trends identified during
the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
3.1 Data Summary Parameters
Since previous NMOC/SNMOC reports define the four parameters that have been used to
summarize monitoring data generated in this program, as well as the limitations of using these
parameters, the following discussion only briefly reviews how these parameters efficiently
characterize the results of extensive ambient air monitoring studies. More information on these
3-1
-------
parameters, and their limitations, can be found in earlier NMOC/SNMOC reports (ERG 1996;
1997b; 1999).
In general, the four data summary parameters—prevalence, concentration range, central
tendency, and variability—are used to provide a complete but succinct overview of the nearly
30,000 ambient air concentrations that were measured during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program. Sections 5 through 8 present these summary parameters in a series of
tables, one for each category of compounds measured at each monitoring station. Brief
definitions and descriptions of the four data summary parameters follow:
Prevalence of air monitoring data refers to the frequency with which compounds, or
groups of compounds, are detected; it is typically expressed as a percentage (e.g., a
compound detected in 15 of 20 samples has a prevalence of 75 percent). Compounds that
are never detected have a prevalence of 0 percent, and those that are always detected
have a prevalence of 100 percent. Because sampling and analytical methods cannot
reliably quantify concentrations of compounds at levels near their detection limits,
summary statistics for compounds with low prevalence values should be interpreted with
caution. It should be noted that compounds with a prevalence of zero might still be
present in ambient air, but at levels below the sensitivity of the corresponding sampling
and analytical methods.
The concentration range of ambient air monitoring data refers to the span of measured
concentrations, from lowest to highest. Because the NMOC/SNMOC program only
measures 3-hour average concentrations during the summer months, the lowest and
highest concentrations presented in this report should not be viewed as the minimum and
maximum concentrations observed during an entire year. Since ambient levels of total
NMOC, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyls might rise to higher levels during times of day or
times of year not considered in this program, the concentration range data presented in
this report might not be comparable to those from monitoring programs with different
sampling durations and schedules.
The central tendency of air monitoring data gives a sense of the long-term average
ambient air concentrations. This report uses medians, arithmetic means, and geometric
means to characterize the central tendencies of concentration distributions. Previous
NMOC/SNMOC reports have explained the differences between these measures of
central tendency. Readers should note that the central tendencies in this report are based
only on ambient air concentrations sampled during the morning hours of the summer of
1998. Because ambient air concentrations of certain compounds might be consistently
3-2
-------
higher or lower during the colder winter months, the central tendencies presented in this
report might not be comparable to those calculated from annual air monitoring efforts.
As noted above, the central tendency data for compounds with low prevalence should be
interpreted with caution, due to the bias introduced by many nondetect observations.
Variability in ambient air monitoring data indicates the extent to which concentrations of
certain compounds fluctuate with respect to the central tendency. This report
characterizes data variability using standard deviations and coefficients of variation. The
standard deviation is a commonly used statistical parameter that provides an absolute
indicator of variability, and the coefficient of variation (calculated by dividing the
standard deviation by the arithmetic mean) offers a relative indicator of variability. The
coefficient of variation is better suited for comparing variability across data distributions
for different sites and compounds.
All data summary parameters presented in this report were calculated from a database of
processed 1998 NMOC/SNMOC ambient air monitoring data. This database was generated by
manipulating the raw monitoring data in two steps. First, all nondetect observations were
assigned a concentration equal to one-half the corresponding detection limit; second, the results
of all duplicate sampling events and replicate laboratory analyses were averaged so that only one
concentration was considered for each compound for each sampling date. These data processing
steps are identical to those used to process the 1995, 1996, and 1997 NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring data.
3.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Parameters
The 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report examined how local meteorological conditions related
to ambient air concentrations of total NMOC. Though several potential data trends were
identified, the trends were not confirmed by tests for statistical significance, nor were they
validated against other data sets. To build on the analyses presented in the 1997 report, this
report also examines relationships between air quality and local meteorological conditions, with
an emphasis placed on determining whether trends are statistically significant and whether these
trends are consistent with those documented in the 1997 report.
-------
Though many meteorological parameters are suspected of influencing air quality, Sections
5 through 8 examine how a subset of these parameters—wind speed, wind direction, temperature,
relative humidity, and precipitation—seems to affect the total NMOC concentrations. Several
different techniques are used to characterize correlations between the meteorological parameters
and the air concentrations: Pearson correlation coefficients are calculated to characterize the
magnitude and direction of data correlations, graphs are presented to illustrate the influences of
meteorological parameters on the ambient air monitoring data, and results of two-sample t-tests
are documented to identify which trends are statistically significant.1 Finally, the trends are
compared to those listed in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report. As with the previous report,
meteorological data for each monitoring station were obtained from the nearest meteorological
station that submits daily summary reports to the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Data
from the following meteorological stations were considered in this report:
Meteorological data from the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport was considered to
be representative of conditions at the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX monitoring stations.
Meteorological data from the El Paso International Airport was considered to be
representative of conditions at the JUMX monitoring station.
Meteorological data from the John F. Kennedy International Airport was considered to be
representative of conditions at the LINY monitoring station.
Meteorological data from the Newark International Airport was considered to be
representative of conditions at the NWNJ monitoring station.
It is important to note that the sources for meteorological data considered in this report
are identical to those considered in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report.
Previous NMOC/SNMOC reports, and most basic texts on statistics, define Pearson correlation coefficients, and
how they characterize pairwise data correlations. Information on the two-sample t-test has not been presented in previous
NMOC/SNMOC reports, but is well documented in many statistics texts (e.g., Harnett 1982).
3-4
-------
Though extensive, the analyses of meteorological parameters in this report should not be
viewed as comprehensive. For example, sophisticated computer simulations, such as detailed
atmospheric dispersion modeling analyses, might provide greater insight into how local
meteorological conditions affect air quality. Conducting such simulations, however, is beyond
the scope of the current work. As another example, this report does not address all
meteorological parameters that are known to affect ozone formation and transport. Detailed
analyses of parameters such as mixing heights, solar radiation, and upper atmosphere wind
patterns are needed for a more complete understanding of the impact of meteorological
conditions on levels of air pollution. As a result, agencies that sponsor NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring stations are encouraged to conduct further research on the influence of local
meteorological conditions on both the ambient air monitoring data and ozone formation
processes.
3.3 Analyses of Annual Variations
When assessing trends in air pollution over the long term, data analysts typically try to
answer one basic question: Are levels of air pollution generally increasing or decreasing? To
help agencies answer this question, Sections 5 through 8 assess how annual average
concentrations of total NMOC and selected SNMOC have changed from one NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program to the next. Annual variations in ambient air concentrations of VOC and
carbonyls are not considered, due to the limited number of samples available for these compound
groups.
Analyses of annual variations in SNMOC concentrations are based only on monitoring
data collected during the current procurement, which spanned the 1995 to 1998 programs.
Though some stations might have collected SNMOC samples as part of other programs prior to
1995, data from these earlier programs are not considered in this report because important
features of the current monitoring program (e.g., detection limits, laboratory analytical
equipment, field sampling equipment) might differ from similar features of the previous
monitoring programs. Since the Long Island and Newark stations have participated in the
3-5
-------
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program for roughly 10 years, annual variations in total NMOC
concentrations are presented for the entire history of these stations.
To characterize annual variations in air quality, Sections 5 through 8 present figures that
illustrate how average concentrations of total NMOC and selected SNMOC have changed from
one summer to the next. The graphs depict 95-percent confidence intervals of the average
concentrations as an indicator of the uncertainty associated with each value. For greater insight
into the annual variations, statistical tests (two-sample t-tests) were performed to distinguish
statistically significant annual variations from anomalous ones. Combined, these analyses of
annual variations not only characterize the extent to which levels of air pollution have changed
from year to year, but they also indicate whether these changes are statistically significant.
Though the annual variations presented in Sections 5 through 8 might suggest notable
trends in air quality, these trends should be interpreted in proper context. For instance, many
different factors could cause statistically significant changes in air quality from one year to the
next: Environmental regulations might have caused decreased emissions from certain industrial
sources, traffic patterns and the composition of motor vehicle fuels might change in a given year,
and certain meteorological conditions that affect photochemical reactivity and atmospheric
transport might fluctuate considerably. One factor considered in this report is the impact of
EPA's recent requirement that, starting in 1995, all motor vehicles in certain parts of the country
(including the Dallas-Fort Worth and New York City metropolitan areas) use oxygenated fuels
or "reformulated fuels," which have a notably different chemical composition from "conventional
fuels." Though this report attempts to explain likely causes of annual variations in air quality,
participating agencies are encouraged to research the apparent causes of such variations in
greater detail.
3-6
-------
3.4 Other Analyses
To highlight other notable site-specific air quality trends, Sections 5 through 8 present
additional data analyses, as appropriate, that do not fall under the data analyses categories
discussed above. The following additional analyses are considered in this report:
Reactivity of air masses. The SNMOC monitoring data provide a wealth of information
on the composition of hydrocarbons found in ambient air. With studies showing that some
hydrocarbons are much more reactive in air than others (Carter 1994), the SNMOC data
can be used to characterize the relative ozone formation potential of air masses. Using
compound-specific "maximum incremental reactivities" reported in the literature (see
Table 3-1), the analyses in Sections 5 and 6 present reactivity-weighted concentrations.
These analyses indicate an important finding that is not readily apparent from the
SNMOC monitoring data: The compounds with the highest concentrations (on a ppbC
basis) are often different from the compounds that are most reactive in air. The
reactivity-weighted concentrations, therefore, provide additional insight into the ozone
formation potential of the complex mixture of hydrocarbons in ambient air. (Note: This
analysis of air mass reactivity is also described and summarized in the 1996
NMOC/SNMOC report; Sections 7 and 8 do not present analyses of chemical reactivity
because the Long Island and Newark monitoring stations did not collect SNMOC samples
daily.)
Fate of airborne aromatic hydrocarbons. The presence of three ambient air monitoring
stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area allowed for detailed analyses of how
the composition of an air mass varies within an air-shed. As Section 5 describes, the
breakdown of SNMOC concentrations at the CAMS 13 station was found to be notably
different from that at the CAMS5 and DLTX stations. To explain this spatial variation,
Section 5 uses results of studies reported in the scientific literature, particularly those on
the fate of aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air, to postulate mechanisms that might
account for the unique air quality trend observed among the Dallas-Fort Worth stations.
Concentrations of methyl tert-butyl ether. Ever since motor vehicles in many parts of
the country started using reformulated fuels, which contain as much as 15 percent methyl
tert-butyl ether (MTBE), many environmental agencies have assessed the impact of this
fuel usage on the environment. One aspect of the many environmental impacts of use of
reformulated fuels is the increased ambient air concentrations of MTBE in regions where
such fuel use is required. Analyses in Section 8 identify several subtle, yet meaningful,
trends in the air monitoring data for MTBE at the Newark monitoring station—the only
monitoring station in the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program that analyzed air
samples for this compound.
3-7
-------
Table 3-1
Maximum Incremental Reactivities (MIRs) for SNMOC
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
trans-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
w-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethylbenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylbutane
2, 3 -Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
w-Dodecane
1-Dodecene
Ethane
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
fraws-2-Hexene
MIR
(mole O3/mole compound)
0.14
0.11
NA
0.31
2.92
2.92
0.37
0.70
2.19
0.17
NA
NA
NA
0.25
0.32
0.39
0.45
NA
NA
0.08
NA
0.75
2.16
NA
NA
NA
0.24
NA
0.29
NA
1.96
1.96
Compound
Isobutane
Isobutene/ 1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methy 1-1 -Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3 -Methy 1-1 -Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methy Ihexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
«-Nonane
1-Nonene
n -Octane
1-Octene
w-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
?ra«s-2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
MIR
(mole O3/mole
compound)
0.37
2.60
0.41
2.58
0.60
NA
1.87
NA
0.53
0.82
0.29
0.29
0.32
0.42
0.45
NA
NA
1.29
NA
NA
0.18
NA
0.31
1.81
2.57
2.57
NA
NA
0.15
0.58
2.75
NA
Notes: MIRs were copied from Sonoma 1996.
Compounds with an MIR of "NA" do not have a maximum incremental reactivity listed in the reference.
3-S
-------
Table 3-1 (Continued)
Maximum Incremental Reactivities (MIRs) for SNMOC
Compound
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3 -Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1.3.5 -Trimethvlbenzene
MIR
(mole O3/mole compound)
NA
0.74
NA
NA
2.60
2.45
2.81
Compound
2,2,3 -Trimethylpentane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2, 3 ,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xvlene
MIR
(mole O3/mole
compound)
NA
0.28
0.48
0.12
NA
2.05
NA
Notes: MIRs were copied from Sonoma 1996.
Compounds with an MIR of "NA" do not have a maximum incremental reactivity listed in the reference.
3-9
-------
4.0 General Results of the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Program
This section briefly summarizes how the total NMOC concentrations, on average, varied
from station to station between the 1995 and 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. This
brief overview of spatial variations gives a sense of the relative levels of air pollution at the six
monitoring stations—a topic not considered in the site-specific analyses presented in Sections 5
through 8. The spatial variations preview several key findings that are discussed in much greater
detail later in the report. Overall, the data presented in this section allow agencies that sponsor
monitoring stations to compare air quality within their jurisdictions to air quality in other parts of
the country. As discussed below, however, it is very important that these comparisons be made
in proper context.
4.1 Total NMOC Concentrations During the 1998 Program
Figure 4-1 illustrates how total NMOC concentrations, on average, varied among the six
monitoring stations that participated in the 1998 program. The following notable spatial
variations are readily apparent from inspection of the figure:
Relatively higher concentrations of NMOC atJUMX. During the 1998 program, the
average concentration of total NMOC at JUMX (2.06 ppmC) was more than four times
higher than the average concentration at the other monitoring stations—a concentration
difference that was found to be statistically significant. As Section 6 describes, the
average concentration at JUMX is largely influenced by the detection of several "outlier"
concentrations. Nonetheless, even when these outliers are excluded from the computation
of average concentrations, the average total NMOC levels at JUMX are still higher than
those at the other five stations, though only marginally so. Though Figure 4-1 clearly
illustrates a statistically significant spatial variation, readers should remember that this
monitoring program measures levels of air pollution at only discrete locations within
large metropolitan areas. As a result, even though the total NMOC concentrations at the
JUMX monitoring station were considerably higher than those at the other monitoring
stations, it does not necessarily follow that the air throughout the El Paso-Juarez area is
more polluted than the air throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth and Newark-New York City
metropolitan areas. Ambient air monitoring at many other locations in these metropolitan
areas and for many other pollutants must be conducted and reviewed to support such a
conclusion.
4-1
-------
Moderate levels of total NMOC at CAMS 13 andNWNJ. On average, concentrations of
total NMOC at CAMS 13 and NWNJ during the 1998 program were roughly twice as high
as the levels observed at CAMS5, DLTX, and LINY. The difference in concentration
between CAMS 13 and the three other stations (CAMS5, DLTX, and LINY) was found to
be statistically significant, but the difference in concentration between NWNJ and the
average concentrations at two of the other three stations was not. As Section 8 describes,
total NMOC concentrations at Newark were highly variable during the 1998 program.
This variability likely explains why statistically significant differences were not
observed between the total NMOC concentration at Newark and those at the other
stations. As emphasized above, readers should interpret the findings for CAMS 13 and
NWNJ with caution: The spatial variations shown in Figure 4-1 compare levels of air
pollution observed in only three metropolitan areas, and only for discrete locations
within these metropolitan areas.
Relatively low levels of total NMOC at CAMS5, DLTX, and LINY. Average levels of
total NMOC at the three remaining monitoring stations—CAMS5, DLTX, and
LINY—were comparable in magnitude and considerably lower than the average levels at
the three stations discussed previously. More specifically, the average concentrations of
total NMOC at CAMS 5, DLTX, and LINY were no more than 15 percent different from
each other; none of these differences were found to be statistically significant.
The analyses in Sections 5 through 8 thoroughly examine notable site-specific data trends
that are not readily apparent from examining spatial variations. For additional perspective on the
spatial variations, however, the following discussion compares the spatial variations observed
during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program to those observed in the three previous
programs.
4.2 Total NMOC Concentrations During the 1995-1997 Programs
Figure 4-2 indicates how the spatial variations in total NMOC concentrations changed
from the 1995 to the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. The figure is included to
comment on how spatial variations observed during the current program (see Figure 4-1)
compare to those observed previously. An overview of the past spatial variations follows:
• Trends that have remained unchanged over the years. The graphs in Figure 4-2
highlight certain data trends that, to a certain extent, did not change over the previous
three NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. For instance, in the 1995, 1996, and 1997
4-2
-------
programs, total NMOC concentrations at JUMX and NWNJ were relatively high,
particularly when compared to levels observed at DLTX and LINY. Further, total
NMOC concentrations at DLTX and LINY, on average, have been comparable during the
summers of 1995, 1996, and 1997. Both of these trends are consistent with those
observed during the 1998 program, which Section 4.1 described.
Trends that have notably changed from one year to the next. Though the relative levels
of total NMOC at DLTX, JUMX, LINY, and NWNJ have been somewhat consistent over
the past 4 years, the relative levels observed at CAMS5 and CAMS 13 have exhibited
unique trends. More specifically, the average ambient air concentration of total NMOC
at CAMS5 ranked among the highest during the 1996 program, but average levels at this
station have ranked among the lowest in the years since. On the other hand, the relative
amounts of total NMOC at CAMS 13 have exhibited the opposite trend, changing from
ranking among the lowest to ranking among the highest. Section 5.1.3 examines why
average levels of total NMOC observed at the three monitoring stations in the
Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area have exhibited notably different annual variations.
Overall, this historical perspective on spatial variations indicates that no universal trend
can explain how levels of total NMOC have changed at the six monitoring stations since the 1995
program. This observation is not surprising, however, because local influences on air quality
(e.g., industrial emissions sources, motor vehicle traffic, fluctuating weather conditions)
ultimately determine how levels of air pollution change at a given location from one year to the
next. Sections 5 through 8 examine these local influences by presenting detailed site-specific
analyses of annual variations.
-------
Figure 4-1
Average Concentrations of Total NMOC for the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program
• — > 2 50
o
E
Q.
a.
5 2 00
O *-•""
1
c
0 1.50
o
o
O
g 1.00
z
"re
0
O)
SS
a)
*£ n nn
0.25
0.57
0.27
2.06
n 41
0.23
CAMS5
CAMS13
DLTX JUMX
Monitoring Station
LINY
NWNJ
Note: As Section 6 describes, the average concentration of total NMOC at JUMX is biased high, largely due to two outlier concentrations.
Refer to Section 4.1 for interpretations of this figure, including several important caveats regarding the displayed data trends.
-------
Figure 4-2
Average Concentrations of Total NMOC Observed During
the 1995-1997 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs
1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program
,. ~- 0 50 T
O O
0 E
S Q. 0.40
z o-
eg c n ^n
i! o
£ ~
« 2 0.20
0) C
a | 0.10
^r O
< Q 0 00
°-32 0.31
1
0.43
0.38
0.28
CAMS5 CAMS13 DLTX JUMX LINY NWNJ
Monitoring Station
1996 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program
o f~\ 0 60 T
2 1. 0 50
-^ Q.
Average Total I
oncentration (
D O O O O
D li kj CO 4!.
D O O O O
0.50
0 44 n 4f>
0 34
n ?y*
0.36
CAMS5 CAMS13 DLTX JUMX LINY NWNJ
Monitoring Station
o o °-80
0 E
g Q.
Z Q. 0 60
C3 =
*j o
Average T
Concentrat
o o c
b ro j
o o c
1997 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program
0.64
0.56
0.75
0.23
0.43
0.26
CAMS5 CAMS13 DLTX JUMX LINY NWNJ
Monitoring Station
Notes: The CAMS5 station did not participate in the 1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
The three graphs in this figure are shown on different scales.
4-5
-------
5.0 Monitoring Results for Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas (CAMS5, CAMS13, DLTX)
This section summarizes and interprets the total NMOC, SNMOC, and carbonyl
monitoring data collected at two locations in Dallas, Texas (CAMS5 and DLTX), and at one
location in Fort Worth, Texas (CAMS 13), during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
The ambient air monitoring data from these three locations offer an extensive profile of the air
quality in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area.
Figures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 show the locations of the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX
monitoring stations, respectively. The different numbers and types of emissions sources near
these locations account, in part, for the different levels of air pollution measured at these stations.
The CAMS5 monitoring station is located at a school in a suburban area, approximately 8 miles
north of downtown Dallas. The Dallas North Tollway and Interstate 635 both pass within 1 mile
of the CAMS5 station. The DLTX monitoring station, on the other hand, is located much closer
to downtown Dallas, just 3 miles northwest of the city center. The station is in an area of mixed
industrial and commercial uses, and several heavily traveled roadways, including Interstate 35-E
and State Highway 183, pass within 1 mile of the DLTX station. Located in the city of Fort
Worth, the CAMS 13 station is roughly 25 miles west of the CAMS5 and DLTX stations. Land
use surrounding CAMS 13 is primarily residential, though open fields, an airport, and several
busy surface streets are located in the station's immediate proximity. At all three stations,
emissions from a great variety of sources likely influence the local air quality.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, SNMOC samples were collected
at CAMS5 on 74 days, and valid sampling results were obtained on 68 of those days; SNMOC
samples were collected at CAMS 13 on 70 days, and valid results were obtained on 69 of them;
and SNMOC samples were collected at DLTX on 63 days, and valid results were obtained on 62
of them. Overall, the completeness of the SNMOC sampling, defined as the percentage of
attempted sampling events that were valid, was 92 percent at CAMS5, 99 percent at CAMS13,
and 98 percent at DLTX. Between the three monitoring stations, 30 carbonyl sampling events
were scheduled during the 1998 program, and 29 of these events generated valid results. Thus,
5-1
-------
the completeness of the carbonyl sampling (at all three stations combined) was 97 percent. The
high completeness figures for all three monitoring stations suggest that samples were collected
and handled efficiently at the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX stations throughout the program.
The remainder of this section puts the large volume of ambient air monitoring data
collected in the Dallas-Fort Worth area into perspective. Section 5.1 summarizes the total
NMOC data collected at the three stations, compares these data to selected meteorological
conditions, and discusses annual variations in total NMOC levels. Section 5.2 then reviews the
SNMOC data, comments on the composition of SNMOC in ambient air, and assesses the
reactivity of the air masses at the three stations. Finally, Section 5.3 briefly discusses trends and
patterns among the limited carbonyl monitoring data collected during the 1998 program. For
quick reference, Section 5.4 provides an overview of the key air quality trends identified for the
Dallas-Fort Worth area during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
5.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data
As Section 2.3.2 explained, the SNMOC sampling and analytical method measures both
total NMOC concentrations and concentrations of 80 individual hydrocarbons. The following
discussion focuses on the total NMOC measurements made by this method in the Dallas-Fort
Worth area. More specifically, the discussion provides a concise summary of the total NMOC
data (Section 5.1.1), characterizes associations between total NMOC levels and meteorological
conditions (Section 5.1.2), and describes how total NMOC concentrations have changed in
Dallas and Fort Worth from year to year (Section 5.1.3).
When reading these sections, readers should note that total NMOC concentrations include
concentrations of a wide range of organic compounds, including, but not limited to, alkanes,
olefms, aromatics, oxygenates, and halogenated hydrocarbons. Although total NMOC levels
characterize ambient air concentrations of various compounds that affect ozone formation
processes, total NMOC does not include many air pollutants common to urban environments,
such as inorganic acids and particulate matter. In other words, the total NMOC concentrations
5-2
-------
presented below provide a measure of many different air pollutants typically found in ambient
air, but do not provide a measure of every air pollutant found in ambient air.
5.1.1 Data Summary
Using the four data summary parameters defined in Section 3.1, Table 5-1 provides a
thorough overview of the total NMOC concentrations measured at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX
during the 1998 program. An overview of the data summary follows:
Prevalence. Total NMOC was detected in every sample collected at CAMS5, CAMS13,
and DLTX, and every total NMOC concentration was at least an order of magnitude
greater than the estimated method detection limit of 0.005 ppmC (or 5 ppbC). Therefore,
the prevalence of total NMOC at these stations was 100 percent. The summary statistics
presented below are believed to be highly representative of total NMOC levels in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area, since none of the statistics are biased by nondetect observations.
Concentration range. According to Table 5-1, the concentration ranges of total NMOC
at CAMS 13 and DLTX were much broader than that at CAMS5. In fact, the highest total
NMOC concentration measured at CAMS5 (0.645 ppmC) is roughly half the highest
levels measured at CAMS13 (1.165 ppmC) and DLTX (1.267 ppmC). The reason for
this spatial variation in concentration ranges is not known. However, examining the
quartiles of the concentration distributions offers a different perspective on the spatial
variations. More specifically, the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile concentrations at
CAMS 13 are all considerably higher than those at both CAMS5 and DLTX. This trend
suggests that the entire concentration distribution at CAMS 13 is centered on higher total
NMOC levels than the distributions at the other two stations.
To illustrate this trend, Figure 5-4 presents histograms of the total NMOC concentrations
measured at the three stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The figure clearly shows
that the concentration distribution at CAMS 13 is indeed centered on higher total NMOC
levels than the other two distributions. Further, the figure indicates that concentrations of
total NMOC at CAMS 5 and DLTX predominantly fell into very narrow ranges of
concentrations, with relatively few outliers. The distribution at CAMS13, on the other
hand, was far more dispersed. The central tendency and variability summary parameters,
discussed below, reflect these differences in the concentration distributions.
When reviewing the concentration ranges, readers should remember that this monitoring
program measures ambient air concentrations only during the summertime morning hours.
Levels of total NMOC during other times of the day, and during other times of year, might
have risen to higher or lower levels than the summary statistics indicate.
3O
-------
Central tendency. As Table 5-1 shows, the three different measures of central tendency
concentration of total NMOC at CAMS13 (i.e., the median, arithmetic mean, and
geometric mean) were all roughly twice as high as those for CAMS5 and DLTX; these
concentration differences were statistically significant. The marginal difference in total
NMOC levels at CAMS5 and DLTX, however, was not statistically significant. The
analyses of annual variations (Section 5.1.3) and SNMOC monitoring data (Section 5.2)
put the concentration differences in the Dallas-Fort Worth area into perspective.
At all three stations, concentrations of total NMOC during August and September were,
on average, higher than those in June and July. These monthly variations in central
tendency levels were most pronounced at CAMS13, where the average concentrations of
total NMOC during August and September were nearly 70 percent greater than those
during June and July, but this concentration difference was not statistically significant.
Therefore, although concentrations of total NMOC during the morning hours changed from
one month to the next at selected locations in Dallas and Fort Worth, the trend is possibly
anomalous and should be confirmed by additional monitoring.
Variability. The standard deviations of the total NMOC concentrations measured in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area reflect the shapes of the concentration distributions shown in
Figure 5-4: The variability was least for CAMS5 (the station with the narrowest spread
in its concentration distribution) and highest for CAMS 13 (the station with the widest
spread in its concentration distribution). The greater variability at CAMS 13 suggests that
the factors that contribute to total NMOC levels at this station change considerably from
day to day. The lower variability at CAMS5 and DLTX, however, suggests that the
factors that affect total NMOC levels most do not vary greatly from one morning to the
next. A possible explanation for this trend is that morning rush-hour traffic, which likely
does not change dramatically from one weekday to the next, has a strong impact on air
quality at CAMS5 and DLTX, and that other factors—possibly long-range transport of
emissions or emissions from a local source—have a strong impact on air quality at
CAMS13. These hypotheses are revisited throughout this section.
5.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions
To identify noteworthy air quality trends for the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, the
following discussion characterizes associations between total NMOC concentrations at CAMS5,
CAMS13, and DLTX and selected meteorological conditions. More specifically, the discussion
considers 3-hour average observations of humidity, precipitation, temperature, wind direction,
and wind speed, all of which were measured between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. at the Dallas-Fort
Worth International Airport. Since the CAMS5, DLTX, and CAMS 13 monitoring stations are all
5-4
-------
located within approximately 20 miles of this airport, the meteorological data are believed to be
reasonably representative of conditions at the three monitoring stations. In the following
analysis, data trends that are statistically significant are clearly distinguished from those that are
not.
To enable readers to compare data trends identified during the current program to those
from earlier programs, this section follows a framework almost identical to that presented in
Section 5.2.3.1 of the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report.
A review of the comparisons of total NMOC levels in Dallas and Fort Worth to local
meteorological conditions follows:
Humidity. As Figure 5-5 illustrates, no trend is readily apparent between total NMOC
concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX and concurrent observations of relative
humidity at the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. Moreover, most of the
concentration differences depicted in the figure are not statistically significant. As further
support of the absence of data trends, the Pearson correlation coefficient between the
total NMOC concentrations and relative humidity was -0.09 at CAMS5, 0.03 at
CAMS13, and 0.00 at DLTX. These low correlation coefficients indicate that relative
humidity was essentially uncorrelated with the air quality measurements in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area during the 1998 program.
It is interesting to note that the data collected during the 1997 program suggested that total
NMOC levels at the three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth tended to
decrease with increasing humidity (ERG 1999). The contradictory findings from the
1997 and 1998 programs suggests that humidity might only be weakly associated, if not
completely unassociated, with total NMOC levels in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The
inconsistent trends also underscore an inherent difficulty with assessing impacts of local
meteorological conditions on air quality: Since so many different factors influence levels
of air pollution, the effect of a single factor (e.g., humidity) might be masked in years
when other factors (e.g., temperature) have unusually high or low levels. Conducting
multivariate statistical analyses on the data set might help researchers understand how
different combinations of meteorological conditions affect ambient air quality. Such
analyses, however, are not included in the scope of this project.
Precipitation. Measurable rain was recorded at the Dallas-Fort Worth International
Airport during only two mornings when valid SNMOC samples were collected at the
5-5
-------
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX monitoring stations. As a result of the limited sample
size, no statistically significant trends were observed between total NMOC concentration
on rainy days and total NMOC concentrations on days with no measurable precipitation.
Though the science of atmospheric dispersion generally predicts that levels of most kinds
of air pollution are lower on or after rainy days (USEPA 1995), this trend could not be
verified by the SNMOC monitoring data collected in the summer of 1998 in Dallas and
Fort Worth.
Temperature. One of the most pronounced features of the meteorological conditions in
the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program was the record heat. Temperatures during approximately two-thirds of the
sampling events were greater than 84 degrees, and temperatures exceeded 100 degrees at
the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on 29 consecutive days during the program.
According to the Dallas Morning News (September 9, 1998), the summer of 1998 was
the second warmest summer on record for the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth. As a
result, the monitoring data for the 1998 program offer insight into the extent to which
elevated temperatures affect ambient air concentrations of total NMOC.
As one indication of how temperature relates to air quality, Figure 5-5 indicates how
total NMOC concentrations, on average, varied with temperature. Clearly, for the
categories of temperature ranges selected, the temperature during a sampling event
seemed to have little bearing on the magnitude of the total NMOC concentration.
Corroborating this finding is the fact that Pearson correlation coefficients between total
NMOC levels at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX and temperature were all less than 0.1.
In other words, the total NMOC levels and temperature were essentially uncorrelated,
which is the same conclusion that was reached for these sampling locations in both the
1996 and 1997 reports.
As Section 5.1.3 notes, ambient air concentrations of total NMOC during the record heat
of the 1998 program were not unusually higher or lower than those observed during
previous years—an observation that further supports the finding that temperature is
weakly associated with, if not completely unassociated with, ambient air concentrations
of total NMOC during the morning hours in Dallas and Fort Worth.
Wind Speed. As Figure 5-5 illustrates, ambient air concentrations of total NMOC at
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX on windy days tended to be lower than those on days with
calm or light winds. Moreover, the concentration differences for most wind speed
categories shown in the figure were statistically significant. The Pearson correlation
coefficients between wind speed and total NMOC concentration are generally consistent
with the data trends indicated in Figure 5-5: The correlation coefficients for CAMS5,
CAMS13, and DLTX were -0.52, -0.46, and -0.47, respectively. These negative
correlation coefficients indicate that total NMOC levels at the three monitoring stations
tended to be lower when wind speeds were higher, and vice versa. This same data trend
5-6
-------
was observed at the three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth during the 1997
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program and is generally consistent with air dispersion
modeling algorithms, which predict that higher wind speeds enhance dispersion of
pollutants in the atmosphere (USEPA 1995).
Wind Direction. The scatter plots in Figure 5-6 show how total NMOC concentrations at
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX varied with wind direction. The plots do not include
results from the six valid samples that were collected when winds were either variable
or calm. Though Figure 5-6 clearly indicates that southerly winds occurred most
frequently during the morning hours at the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, the
scatter plots suggest that total NMOC concentrations during the 1998 program were not
considerably elevated when winds blew from any particular direction. More simply, the
magnitude of total NMOC concentrations at the three monitoring stations during the
morning hours appeared to be largely independent of the wind direction. The 1997 report
reached the same conclusion.
In review, ambient air concentrations of total NMOC that were measured during the
morning hours at three locations in Dallas and Fort Worth were very weakly correlated, if not
completely uncorrelated, with several meteorological parameters (humidity, temperature, wind
direction), but were negatively correlated with wind speed. This finding suggests that wind
speed has a much greater influence on levels of total NMOC during the morning hours in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area than other meteorological parameters. However, the absence of
correlations for certain meteorological parameters suggests either that the parameters have no
influence on levels of air pollution in Dallas and Fort Worth or that the parameters' influence on
levels of air pollution is masked by the influences of other parameters (such as wind speed). To
better understand the combined influences of different parameters, researchers are encouraged to
conduct multivariate statistical analyses on the NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data. Such analyses,
however, are not included in the scope of this report.
5.1.3 Annual Variations
The CAMS 13 and DLTX monitoring stations have participated in the NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program since 1995, and the CAMS5 station has participated in the program since
1996, thus providing several years of data for evaluating annual variations in total NMOC levels
in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area. However, since these stations did not participate in
5-7
-------
this program in years prior to when reformulated fuels were introduced to the Dallas-Fort Worth
area (i.e., prior to 1995), the monitoring data from 1995 to 1998 are not sufficient for assessing
the air quality impacts of this environmental initiative.
To put long-term air quality trends for this area into perspective, the following discussion
reviews how average levels of total NMOC and peak levels of total NMOC have changed at
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX from year to year. It is important to remember that the annual
variations presented in this section only characterize changes in total NMOC concentrations
during the summertime morning hours. Annual variations based on concentrations measured
during other times of day and other times of year might differ considerably from the annual
variations discussed below.
An overview of the long-term trends in total NMOC concentrations in Dallas and Fort
Worth follows:
Changes in average concentrations of total NMOC. Figure 5-7 shows how the average
concentrations of total NMOC have changed at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX since the
summer of 1995. Several important observations can be made from the data presented in
the figure. For example, the annual variations depicted in Figure 5-7 clearly differ among
the three monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area. As a result, one
cannot determine, based on the data collected in this monitoring program, whether total
NMOC levels throughout this urban area have generally increased, decreased, or
stayed the same. Further, though temperatures during the 1998 program were consistently
higher than those during earlier programs, average concentrations of total NMOC at all
three monitoring stations during the 1998 program were not unusually higher or lower
than those from prior programs. The absence of considerable changes in total NMOC
levels during the record heat of 1998 confirms a finding presented in the previous
section: Concentrations of total NMOC during the morning hours at CAMS5, CAMS13,
and DLTX appeared to be largely independent of temperature.
The data shown in Figure 5-7 allow for the interpretation of site-specific trends. For
instance, according to the figure, the average concentration of total NMOC at CAMS5
decreased by more than a factor of two from the summer of 1996 to the summer of 1997
(a statistically significant decrease) and then increased slightly between the summers of
1997 and 1998. Average levels of total NMOC at DLTX also decreased from 1996 to
1997, but only by 23 percent (a statistically significant decrease). The annual variations
5-S
-------
at CAMS 13, on the other hand, increased by nearly a factor of two from 1996 to 1997 (a
statistically significant increase). The reasons for these conflicting trends are not readily
apparent, and researchers are encouraged to examine local emissions inventories, if they
are available, to understand why annual variations in total NMOC levels vary across the
three monitoring stations.
Changes in peak concentrations of total NMOC. As another indicator of annual
variations in air quality, Figure 5-8 illustrates how the frequency of peak levels of total
NMOC (defined here as concentrations greater than 1.0 ppmC) changed at CAMS5,
CAMS13, and DLTX since the 1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. As the figure
shows, concentrations of total NMOC at the two stations in Dallas (CAMS5 and DLTX)
exceeded 1.0 ppmC in fewer than 2 percent of the samples collected in the 1995, 1996,
1997, and 1998 programs; the opposite trend, however, was observed at CAMS 13. Not
only were elevated concentrations at CAMS 13 more frequent than those at the other
stations, but the frequency of elevated concentrations during the summers of 1997 and
1998 were more than twice as high as those during 1995 and 1996. In short, total NMOC
concentrations greater than 1.0 ppmC appear to be more common at CAMS 13 than at
CAMS5 and DLTX, and the frequency of elevated concentrations at CAMS 13 has
increased in recent years.
Overall, the analyses of annual variations do not indicate consistent trends for the entire
Dallas-Fort Worth area: In some parts of these cities (e.g., CAMS13), average concentrations of
total NMOC during the morning hours increased in recent years; in other parts of these cities
(e.g., CAMS5 and DLTX), concentrations have decreased. Though some of the changes in total
NMOC levels from year to year were considerable, ambient air monitoring data from several
more years are needed to determine whether distinct long-term trends in air quality are apparent
for this region. Moreover, detailed information on site-specific emissions is also needed to put
the annual variations into perspective.
5.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, SNMOC samples were collected
on weekday mornings at the three monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. These
samples were analyzed for concentrations of 80 organic compounds (all hydrocarbons) as well
as for the concentration of total NMOC. Following the data analysis methodology presented in
Section 3, the following discussion reviews the large volume of SNMOC monitoring data
5-9
-------
collected at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX. More specifically, the discussion presents a brief
overview of the SNMOC monitoring data (Section 5.2.1), comments on the composition of air
pollutants in the SNMOC samples (Section 5.2.2), analyzes annual variations in ambient air
concentrations of selected SNMOC (Section 5.2.3), and assesses the reactivity of the air mass in
Dallas and Fort Worth (Section 5.2.4).
5.2.1 Data Summary
Using the data summary parameters defined in Section 3.1, Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4
summarize the SNMOC monitoring data collected at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX,
respectively. An overview of the data summary parameters follows:
Prevalence. As the data summary tables show, 76 of the 80 hydrocarbons identified by
the SNMOC sampling and analytical method were detected in more than 50 percent of the
samples collected at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX during the 1998 program. The
summary statistics for these compounds, many of which had a prevalence of 100 percent,
are believed to be highly representative of air quality during the summertime morning
hours, since few nondetect observations were recorded. The fact that 76 compounds
were detected in most samples indicates that ambient air in Dallas and Fort Worth
contains a wide range of pollutants.
Four compounds (1-decene, 2-ethyl-l-butene, 1-heptene, and 1-tridecene), on the other
hand, were detected in fewer than 50 percent of the sampling events at the three
monitoring stations. Summary statistics for these compounds should be interpreted with
caution, since they are likely to be biased by the frequent nondetect observations. As
explained in Section 2, nondetects were replaced in the SNMOC air monitoring database
with an estimated concentration of one-half the detection limit.
Concentration range. Not surprisingly, ambient air concentrations of the 80 SNMOC
varied greatly among the samples collected at the three monitoring stations in Dallas and
Fort Worth. As Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4 indicate, the majority of the compounds were
never measured at concentrations exceeding 25 ppbC in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. At
the CAMS5 monitoring station, ten compounds had at least one ambient air concentration
greater than 25 ppbC, and the highest concentrations were observed for isopentane
(69.60 ppbC), w-tridecane (61.56 ppbC), and toluene (44.78 ppbC). At CAMS13, 13
compounds had at least one concentration greater than 25 ppbC, with the highest
concentrations observed for isopentane (160.84 ppbC), 2,3-dimethylbutane (97.60
ppbC), and w-butane (85.89 ppbC). Finally, at DLTX, nine compounds had at least one
concentration greater than 25 ppbC and the highest levels were observed for toluene
5-10
-------
(940.16 ppbC), cyclohexane (84.57 ppbC), and isopentane (82.67 ppbC). Since the
highest concentrations might occur following, or during, a one-time release of certain
compounds from a nearby emissions source, the compounds with the highest
concentrations often differ from those with consistently elevated concentrations. The
following bullet item emphasizes this distinction.
As noted throughout this report, the concentration range data in the summary tables should
be interpreted in proper context: The data characterize concentration ranges for only
weekday mornings during the summer. Ambient air concentrations for many SNMOC
may have risen to higher levels or fallen to lower levels during other times of day and
other times of the year.
Central tendency. Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4 present three different measures of central
tendency concentrations (the median, arithmetic mean, and geometric mean) for the
80 hydrocarbons identified by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method. Due to the
high prevalence for most SNMOC, the three measures of central tendency are expected to
accurately represent actual central tendency levels for most compounds. The following
observations are apparent from the central tendency data listed in the data summary
tables:
(1) Most of the 80 compounds identified by the SNMOC sampling and analytical
method had geometric mean concentrations lower than 5 ppbC. More
specifically, 70 of the 80 compounds at CAMS5, 60 of the 80 compounds at
CAMS 13, and 71 of the 80 compounds at DLTX had geometric mean
concentrations lower than 5 ppbC.
(2) For insight into trends among the central tendency levels, Table 5-5 lists the
compounds with the ten highest geometric mean concentrations at CAMS5,
CAMS 13, and DLTX. As the table shows, the following compounds have
geometric mean concentrations that rank among the ten highest at all three
monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area: w-butane, 2,3-dimethylbutane,
isopentane, 2-methylpentane, w-pentane, propane, toluene, and w,/?-xylene. Thus,
a small subset of the 80 SNMOC was consistently measured at elevated levels at
the three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth. Moreover, for each of the
three stations, the sum of the concentrations of the compounds listed in Table 5-5
accounts for roughly half of the total concentration of compounds identified by the
SNMOC sampling and analytical method. In other words, even though the
ambient air in Dallas and Fort Worth contains a wide range of hydrocarbons, a
small number of these compounds comprise a large portion of the airborne
SNMOC.
(3) Despite the similarities between the compounds with the highest concentrations at
the three stations, Table 5-5 clearly demonstrates a distinct difference in the
5-11
-------
magnitude of ambient air concentrations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area: The
highest geometric mean concentrations observed at CAMS 13 for most compounds
listed in Table 5-5 are roughly two or three times higher than those observed at
CAMS5 and DLTX. The analyses in Section 5.2.2 examine these concentration
differences in greater detail.
(4) Comparison of the central tendency data in Table 5-5 to the concentration range
data in Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4 shows that, in some cases, the compounds with
the highest geometric mean concentrations differ from those with the highest
concentrations. For example, though the peak concentration of cyclohexane at
DLTX and of w-tridecane at CAMS5 ranked among the highest concentrations
observed at these stations, neither compound's geometric mean concentration
ranked among the top ten central tendency concentrations shown in Table 5-5.
For these compounds, therefore, the highest concentrations appear to be outliers,
as supported by the variability data in the following bullet item.
Overall, the central tendency data provide useful insight into the relative quantities of
individual SNMOC. Section 5.2.2 comments further on this topic by characterizing how
the composition of SNMOC air samples differed among the three monitoring stations in
Dallas and Fort Worth.
Variability. According to Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4, most SNMOC at CAMS5, CAMS13,
and DLTX have coefficients of variation lower than 1.0, suggesting that most compounds'
ambient air concentrations have comparable variability in the Dallas-Fort Worth area
during the morning hours. The compounds with the most variable ambient air monitoring
data (i.e., the compounds with coefficients of variation greater than 1.0) generally fall
into two categories. First, highly variable air monitoring data were observed for
compounds with extreme data outliers, such as w-tridecane at CAMS5 and cyclohexane at
all three stations. Second, because calculations of coefficients of variations from
concentrations measured in units of ppbC inherently give greater weight to compounds
with more carbon atoms, highly variable air monitoring data also were observed for
compounds with 10 or more carbons, such as w-dodecane at CAMS5 and DLTX, n-
undecane at DLTX and CAMS 13, and 1-dodecene at CAMS 13.
5.2.2 Composition of Air Samples
The relative quantities of pollutants in ambient air are useful for identifying the
predominant sources of air pollution in a given area and for evaluating the extent to which air
pollution varies from one year to the next. To reveal notable trends among the complex mixture
of air pollutants at the three monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, the
following discussion considers three different measures of composition: the relative quantities
5-12
-------
of "unknown" and "identified" compounds; the relative quantities of alkanes, olefms, and
aromatic compounds;1 and the relative quantities of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
isomers (collectively known as the BTEX compounds).
5.2.2.1 "Identified" vs. "Unknown" Compounds
As Section 2.3.2 explained, the SNMOC sampling and analytical method measures
ambient air concentrations of total NMOC as well as concentrations of 80 hydrocarbons (i.e., the
"identified" compounds). In any given sample, the sum of the concentrations of the identified
compounds is lower than the corresponding concentration of total NMOC. The concentrations of
the various compounds that the SNMOC sampling and analytical method cannot identify (i.e., the
"unknown" compounds) account for the difference between the identified compounds and total
NMOC. The unknown compounds include, but are not limited to, oxygenated hydrocarbons,
halogenated hydrocarbons, and other substituted hydrocarbons.
According to the data in Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4, the identified compounds, on average,
accounted for 80 percent of the total NMOC at CAMS5, 84 percent of the total NMOC at
CAMS 13, and 79 percent of the total NMOC at DLTX. These composition figures are nearly
identical to those documented in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report. Several observations can be
made based on the breakdown of identified and unknown compounds in Dallas and Fort Worth:
At the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX monitoring stations, the 80 hydrocarbons identified
by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method account for more than three-fourths of the
airborne organic compounds. As a result, pollution control initiatives focused on
reducing emissions of the 80 identified compounds are expected to have a greater impact
on reducing ambient air concentrations of total NMOC than initiatives focused on
reducing emissions of other compounds.
Two alkynes, acetylene and propyne, were identified by the SNMOC analytical method. These compounds were
considered in the olefin category for the composition calculations. Some compounds (e.g., styrene) include both olefinic and
aromatic functional groups. Such compounds were considered to be aromatics for the analyses of chemical composition.
5-13
-------
The relative amounts of identified and unknown compounds do not differ dramatically
across the three monitoring stations in the Dallas and Fort Worth area. The consistent
proportions of these two classes of compounds suggest that widespread reductions in
emissions of the 80 identified compounds would be likely to lead to a considerable
reduction in levels of total NMOC throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and not just in
any particular location.
Since the relative quantities of identified and unknown compounds at the three monitoring
stations changed little in previous summers, the relative magnitude of emissions of
identified and unknown compounds also likely did not change considerably during this
time.
Though the previous observations offer insight into air quality trends for the cities of
Dallas and Fort Worth, the relative amounts of "identified" and "unknown" compounds provide a
very limited basis for characterizing the composition of air pollution. A more detailed review of
the composition of the SNMOC samples follows.
5.2.2.2 Alkanes, Olefins, and Aromatic Compounds
The relative amounts of alkanes, olefms, and aromatic compounds in ambient air are
useful for identifying the types of emissions sources suspected of having the greatest impacts on
air quality. As an example of such analyses, the following discussion presents relevant
composition trends for CAMS5, CAMS 13, and DLTX, and interprets the significance of these
trends.
Figure 5-9 depicts the relative amounts of alkanes, olefms, and aromatic compounds that
were measured at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX during the morning hours of the 1998 program.
To avoid biasing the composition calculations by the number of carbon atoms in each compound,
the data in Figure 5-9 are based on ambient air concentrations of SNMOC in units of ppbv. The
composition data in Figure 5-9 highlight two subtle trends among the air monitoring data for the
Dallas-Fort Worth area: The relative quantities of alkanes were highest at CAMS 13, followed
next by those at CAMS5, and last by those at DLTX; and the relative quantities of olefms were
highest at DLTX, followed next by those at CAMS5, and last by those at CAMS 13. The same
5-14
-------
trends in chemical composition were documented in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report. Closer
examination of the SNMOC monitoring data for the three stations offers insight into the factors
that possibly account for the composition trends depicted in Figure 5-9, as documented below:
Compounds that account for the spatial variations in chemical composition. To
understand why the composition of air masses differed at the three monitoring stations in
Dallas and Fort Worth, the relative quantities of every alkane and olefm were calculated
for the SNMOC monitoring data. Figures 5-10 and 5-11 depict the results of these
calculations, by illustrating how the composition of the most abundant olefms and
alkanes, respectively, varied across the CAMS5, CAMS 13, and DLTX monitoring
stations. Two consistent trends are apparent from the figures.
First, as Figure 5-10 shows, ambient air at DLTX contained the greatest proportion of
each of the most abundant olefms (acetylene, ethylene, isobutene, 1-butene, and
propylene), followed by the ambient air at CAMS5, and followed last by the ambient air
at CAMS 13. Conversely, as Figure 5-11 shows, with two exceptions, ambient air at
CAMS 13 contained the greatest proportion of each of the most abundant alkanes
(w-butane, 2,3-dimethylbutane, w-hexane, isopentane, 2-methylpentane, 3-methylpentane,
and w-pentane), followed by the ambient air at CAMS5, and followed last by the ambient
air at DLTX. For two alkanes (ethane and propane), however, the relative amounts were
greatest at DLTX, followed by CAMS5, and followed last by CAMS13. These figures
indicate that no single compound appears to account for the general trends depicted in
Figure 5-9. Rather, the relative amounts of the most abundant olefms were consistently
highest at DLTX and lowest at CAMS 13, and the relative amounts of the most abundant
alkanes were consistently highest at CAMS 13 and lowest at DLTX. The significance of
this finding is highlighted in the next bullet item.
Comparison of the chemical composition to emissions source profiles. When
interpreting air quality trends, researchers often compare the composition of ambient air
at a given location to emissions source profiles. Since many different types of emissions
sources are commonly found in urban areas, the composition of ambient air is not
expected to match the emissions profile of any single source. However, similarities
between the composition of air samples and the composition of emissions can indicate the
types of sources that appear to have the greatest influence on air quality at a given
location.
To interpret the composition of air samples indicated by Figures 5-10 and 5-11, the
composition data were compared to emissions source profiles that were recently
documented in the scientific literature (Scheff and Wadden 1993). Table 5-6 summarizes
these profiles, by indicating the relative amounts of selected alkanes and olefms reported
as being emitted by motor vehicles, gasoline vapor, and petroleum refineries. Three key
5-15
-------
features of these source profiles help explain the composition trends in the Dallas-Fort
Worth area.
First, according to the source profile data in Table 5-6, mobile source emissions contain
a greater proportion of the most abundant olefins than the emissions from either gasoline
vapor or petroleum refineries. This source profile offers a possible explanation for the
data trends depicted in Figure 5-10: The relatively greater proportion of olefins in the air
at DLTX (when compared to the air at CAMS 13) suggests, though certainly does not
prove, that mobile source emissions might have a greater impact on the air quality at
DLTX than on the air quality at CAMS 13.
Second, according to the source profiles, emissions from gasoline vapor as well as
emissions from petroleum refineries contain a greater proportion of several alkanes,
namely w-butane, w-hexane, isopentane, 2-methylpentane, 3-methylpentane, and w-pentane,
when compared to emissions from mobile sources. These source profile data help
explain the composition trends depicted in Figure 5-11: The relatively greater proportion
of the aforementioned alkanes in the air at CAMS 13 (when compared to the air at DLTX)
suggests, though again does not prove, that emissions from gasoline vapor or from
petroleum refineries might have a greater impact on the air quality at CAMS 13 than on the
air quality at DLTX. Data trends outlined in the next paragraph, however, rule out the
possibility that emissions from petroleum refineries account for the composition trends
observed at CAMS 13.
Third, according to the source profiles, emissions from motor vehicles generally contain
a greater proportion of ethane and propane than emissions from gasoline vapor, and
emissions from petroleum refineries generally contain a far greater proportion of propane
than emissions from motor vehicles. The source profile data for ethane and propane
support some of the hypotheses raised in the previous paragraphs. More specifically,
Figure 5-11 clearly shows that the air at DLTX contained a greater proportion of ethane
and propane than the air at CAMS13, thus further supporting the hypothesis that mobile
source emissions have a greater influence on the air at DLTX than on the air at CAMS 13.
Moreover, since the relative amounts of propane at most stations are comparable to those
for other alkanes, the composition data for all stations are not consistent with the source
profile for petroleum refineries. Therefore, the relatively greater quantities of alkanes
measured at CAMS 13 appear to be associated with a greater influence from gasoline
vapor emissions than from petroleum refinery emissions.
Overall, comparisons between the composition data and emissions source profile data
offer insight into why the relative quantities of alkanes, olefins, and aromatic compounds vary
with location in Dallas and Fort Worth. In short, the data considered in this section provide
compelling evidence that mobile source emissions have a greater influence on air quality at
5-16
-------
DLTX than at CAMS 13 and that gasoline vapor emissions have a greater influence on air quality
at CAMS 13 than at DLTX. A detailed review of emissions inventory, including the number and
locations of gasoline stations, is needed to confirm this hypothesis.
Despite the many consistencies between the composition data and the emissions source
profiles, readers should note two limitations in the above analyses. First, this report considers
the findings of just one emissions source study, which characterized the composition of emissions
from only a subset of the types of emissions sources commonly found in urban environments. A
more detailed review of emissions source profiles might provide other explanations for the
composition trends depicted in Figures 5-10 and 5-11. Second, this section offered only
qualitative comparisons between the composition data and source profiles. For a more rigorous
comparison of the data, researchers are encouraged to perform "factor analyses" or use other
statistical tools to quantify the extent to which certain source profiles are reflected in the ambient
air monitoring data. Such statistical analyses, however, are not included in the scope of this
report.
5.2.2.3 BTEX Concentration Profiles
To identify the emissions sources that have the strongest effect on local air quality, many
researchers have compared the relative quantities of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and the
xylene isomers (BTEX) compounds in ambient air to the relative quantities of these compounds
emitted by different sources. In fact, the previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have shown a striking
similarity between the relative quantities of BTEX compounds in ambient air at most monitoring
locations and mobile source emissions profiles of BTEX compounds. Consistent with this
finding from previous reports, Figure 5-12 shows that the BTEX concentration profiles at the
three monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area were again quite similar. Not shown in
Figure 5-12 is the fact that the concentration profiles observed during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program were nearly identical to a mobile source emissions profile recently reported
in the scientific literature (Conner et al. 1995).
5-17
-------
The similarity in the BTEX concentration profiles at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX
strongly suggests that the aromatic compounds originate, to a great extent, from an emissions
source common to the three distinct locations, rather than from site-specific emissions sources.
Moreover, the similarity between the concentration profiles and the mobile source emissions
profiles provides compelling evidence that mobile source emissions account for a considerable
portion of the airborne aromatic compounds at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX. This same
finding was presented in the 1996 and 1997 NMOC/SNMOC reports.
5.2.3 Annual Variations
Since the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX monitoring stations have sampled SNMOC for
at least 3 years, a large volume of monitoring data is available for evaluating long-term trends in
air quality in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. This section presents and interprets trends for the most
abundant SNMOC at each of the three stations. Researchers interested in characterizing annual
variations for other SNMOC should refer to the raw ambient air monitoring that have been
submitted to AIRS.
Figures 5-13, 5-14, and 5-15 illustrate the annual variations for the most abundant
SNMOC (on a ppbC basis) at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX, respectively. An overview of
these annual variations follows:
Annual Variations at CAMS5. The annual variations for most of the compounds
considered in Figure 5-13 exhibit similar trends as the annual variations in total NMOC
at CAMS5 (see Figure 5-7). More specifically, with some exceptions, concentrations of
the most abundant SNMOC exhibited a statistically significant decrease between the 1996
and 1997 programs, and a marginal increase occurred between the 1997 and 1998
programs. For many compounds, the increase between the 1997 and 1998 programs was
not statistically significant. The similar annual variations for the many different SNMOC
suggests that changes in a particular source—possibly mobile source emissions—might
account for most of the annual variations depicted in Figure 5-13.
As exceptions to the general trend mentioned above, ambient air concentrations for
acetylene, ethane, ethylene, and propane remained virtually unchanged during the
summers of 1996, 1997, and 1998. The reason for the relatively constant ambient levels
5-18
-------
for these compounds is not known. As another exception, the average concentration of
2,3-dimethylbutane increased by more than 700 percent between the 1997 and 1998
programs (a statistically significant increase), while the concentrations of most other
compounds exhibited only marginal increases over this time frame. Although the
considerably higher concentrations of 2,3-dimethylbutane during the 1998 program
parallel the considerably higher temperatures observed in the Dallas-Fort Worth area
during the summer of 1998, additional monitoring data must be reviewed and collected to
determine whether temperature exhibits a particularly strong influence on ambient air
concentrations of this one compound.
Annual Variations at CAMS13. As Figure 5-14 shows, the annual variations in average
levels of the most abundant SNMOC at CAMS 13 were generally similar to the annual
variations for this station's total NMOC data. These annual variations, in general terms,
exhibit the following features: Average concentrations for the 1995 and 1996 programs
were similar and considerably lower than the average levels during the 1997 and 1998
programs. To a certain extent, the annual variations for w-butane, benzene, w-hexane,
isopentane, 2-methylpentane, 3-methylpentane, w-pentane, toluene, and m,/>-xylene all
exhibit these general features of the total NMOC trends. The consistent data trends for
these compounds suggest that their ambient air concentrations are collectively influenced
by the same group of sources. This hypothesis can be confirmed by comparing the air
quality trends depicted in Figure 5-14 to annual variations in emissions inventories for
the area surrounding CAMS 13.
Despite the consistent annual variations for most compounds shown in Figure 5-14, some
compounds exhibited unique annual variations at CAMS13. For example, concentrations
of acetylene, ethane, and propane changed little at this station during the summers of
1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998. The reason for the relatively constant levels of these
compounds, during times when concentrations of other hydrocarbons changed
considerably, is not known; however, it is interesting to note that this same trend was
observed at the CAMS5 station (see previous bullet item). As another example of a
unique trend, of the compounds shown in Figure 5-14, only 2,3-dimethylbutane exhibited
a statistically significant increase in average concentrations between the 1997 and 1998
programs. In fact, concentrations of the compound increased by roughly 200 percent
between these summers. Though the increase for 2,3-dimethylbutane might be linked to
the record heat observed during the 1998 program, analysis of additional monitoring data
is needed to verify this theory.
Annual Variations at DLTX. According to Figure 5-7, the annual variations in total
NMOC concentrations at DLTX were much weaker than those observed at CAMS5 and
CAMS 13. Consistent with the trend observed for total NMOC levels, Figure 5-15
indicates that concentrations of the most abundant SNMOC at DLTX generally changed
little between the summers of 1995 and 1998, and many of the concentration differences
shown in Figure 5-15 were not statistically significant.
5-19
-------
As exceptions to the trend described above, the average concentrations of two
compounds (2,3-dimethylbutane and toluene) at DLTX during the summer of 1998 were
considerably higher than those observed during the three previous summers. First, the
average concentration of 2,3-dimethylbutane during the 1998 program was roughly 400
percent higher than that observed during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs. Not only
was this concentration difference statistically significant, but it parallels data trends
observed at the two other monitoring stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Further
research is needed to confirm whether the notably elevated concentrations of 2,3-
dimethylbutane at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX during the summer of 1998 were linked
to the record heat.
As the second unique data trend at DLTX, the average concentration of toluene during the
1998 program (29.63 ppbC) was considerably higher than the average concentrations
during the earlier programs. However, this concentration difference is not statistically
significant and appears to be largely influenced by a single outlier concentration of
toluene during the 1998 program (i.e., a concentration of 940.16 ppbC on
September 30, 1998). Excluding this outlier from the data analysis, the average
concentration of toluene at DLTX during the 1998 program is only 14.70 ppbC—a level
that is comparable to the average concentrations during the 1995, 1996, and
1997 programs.
Although the annual variations in SNMOC differ among the three monitoring stations in
the Dallas-Fort Worth area, some consistent trends were observed. First, the long-term trends in
concentrations of the most abundant SNMOC typically mirror the long-term trends in total
NMOC concentrations. Second, the concentrations of acetylene, ethane, and propane exhibited
relatively weak annual variations at all stations over the last 4 years. Third, concentrations of
2,3-dimethylbutane at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX during the 1998 program were
considerably higher than levels observed during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs. Though the
elevated levels of 2,3-dimethylbutane occurred during the summer with the warmest
temperatures, additional research is needed to determine whether or not this correspondence is
coincidental.
When reviewing the annual variations depicted in Figures 5-13 to 5-15, readers should
note a key limitation posed by reviewing only 4 years of monitoring data: Though the data are
5-20
-------
sufficient for characterizing how levels of air pollution vary from year to year, it is impossible to
determine whether these variations are merely naturally occurring fluctuations in air quality or
part of continuing trends over the long term. Review of a longer record of ambient air monitoring
data is needed to make this distinction.
5.2.4 Reactivity of the Air Mass
Though identifying the compounds with the highest ambient air concentrations is useful
for characterizing the composition of air pollution, such evaluations do not always identify the
compounds having the greatest potential to form ozone. In some cases, highly reactive
compounds with relatively low concentrations exhibit a greater ozone formation potential than
less reactive compounds with relatively high concentrations. To put the reactivity of the air mass
into perspective, this section presents an "ozone index" for the most abundant SNMOC. As
Section 3.4 defined, the ozone indices in this report are the product of a compound's maximum
incremental reactivity (MIR) (see Section 3.4) and its geometric mean ambient air concentration.
In other words, the ozone index represents a reactivity-weighted concentration.
To illustrate the ozone formation potential of selected compounds, Figures 5-16, 5-17,
and 5-18 show ozone indices for the 20 SNMOC with the highest geometric mean concentrations
at CAMS5, CAMS 13, and DLTX, respectively. According to these three figures, the compounds
with the greatest potential for forming ozone (i.e., the compounds with the highest ozone index)
are not always the same as the compounds with the highest ambient air concentration. More
specifically, ethylbenzene, isopentane, toluene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and m,p-xy\ene had the
highest ozone indices at the three monitoring locations in Dallas and Fort Worth, even though
some of these compounds did not rank among the ten with the highest ambient air concentrations.
Since this analysis highlights the importance of interpreting the SNMOC monitoring data by
different metrics, researchers are encouraged to perform more detailed analyses on the reactivity
of the air in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, possibly through use of photochemical modeling.
5-21
-------
5.3 Carbonyl Monitoring Data
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the monitoring stations in Dallas
and Fort Worth collected carbonyl samples roughly once a week, and only during the months of
July, August, and September. This weekly sampling provides insight into ambient air
concentrations of 16 carbonyls, all of which the SNMOC sampling and analytical method does
not identify. The ambient air concentrations of carbonyls are of particular interest because this
group of compounds participates in the complex series of photochemical reactions that produce
ozone.
Because the CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX collected a limited number of carbonyl
samples (i.e., 11 or fewer), not enough data are available for identifying statistically significant
trends and patterns among the data. As a result, this section only presents descriptive summary
statistics for the carbonyl monitoring. Using the data summary parameters that were defined in
Section 3.1, Tables 5-8, 5-9, and 5-10 summarize the carbonyl monitoring data collected at
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX, respectively, during the summer of 1998. An overview of these
summary parameters follows:
Prevalence. According to the data summary tables, eight carbonyls were detected in
more than half of the samples collected at all three stations. In other words, these
compounds (acetaldehyde, acetone, benzaldehyde, butyraldehyde, formaldehyde,
hexanaldehyde, isobutyraldehyde, and propionaldehdye) were consistently found in the
ambient air at all three stations during the morning hours of weekdays. These
compounds' summary statistics are believed to be highly representative of carbonyl
concentrations during the morning hours in Dallas and Fort Worth, since few of the
samples were nondetects. In addition to the eight carbonyls mentioned above, acrolein
also had high prevalence figures, but only at the monitoring stations in Dallas.
For the remaining carbonyls, summary statistics should be interpreted with caution, since
they might be biased by the many nondetect observations. As explained earlier in this
report, nondetects were replaced in the air monitoring database with a concentration of
one-half the detection limit.
Concentration range. At all three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth, the three
carbonyls with the highest concentrations were acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde;
ambient air concentrations of the other carbonyls rarely exceeded 1.0 ppbv. Though this
5-22
-------
same data trend was observed during the 1996 and 1997 programs, readers should note
two limitations when interpreting the concentration range data in Tables 5-8, 5-9, and
5-10. First, because ambient air concentrations of many carbonyl compounds reach their
highest levels during the early afternoon hours (Brimblecombe, 1995), and not during the
scheduled sampling times for the NMOC/SNMOC program (i.e., between 6:00 a.m. and
9:00 a.m.), concentrations of the 16 carbonyls during the 1998 program might have
actually reached higher levels than the concentration range data indicate. Second, the
concentration range data in Tables 5-8 to 5-10 should be compared to annual air
monitoring efforts with caution, since the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program does not
consider air quality during the spring, fall, or winter.
Central tendency. Consistent with data trends from the 1996 and 1997 programs, the
central tendency parameters in Tables 5-8 to 5-10 indicate a clear break in the carbonyl
monitoring data: At all three stations, the compound with the highest geometric mean
concentration was formaldehyde, followed by acetone, then by acetaldehyde; and all
three compounds had geometric mean concentrations greater than 1.0 ppbv. The
remaining carbonyls, on the other hand, had geometric mean concentrations less than 0.5
ppbv. In fact, at all three stations, acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde accounted
for more than 90 percent of the total concentration of carbonyls detected in the air
samples.
To put the geometric mean concentrations of carbonyls into perspective, the carbonyl
monitoring data were converted to units of ppbC and compared to the concentrations of
total NMOC at the three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth. According to this
analysis, the 16 carbonyls identified by the sampling and analytical method accounted for,
on average, 11 percent of total NMOC at CAMS5 and 8 percent of total NMOC at DLTX,
but for only 3 percent of total NMOC at CAMS 13. Thus, ambient air at CAMS5 and
DLTX contains a considerably greater proportion of carbonyls than the ambient at
CAMS13. Since mobile sources emit many of the carbonyls considered in this program
(Grosjean 1991), the relatively greater proportion of carbonyls in the air at CAMS5 and
DLTX suggests that mobile source emissions have a greater influence on air quality at
these stations when compared to CAMS 13—a hypothesis that was raised in
Section 5.2.2.2.
Not only did the relative quantities of the 16 carbonyls combined vary across the three
monitoring stations, but the relative quantities of individual carbonyls also differed at
CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX. For instance, of the 80 SNMOC and 16 carbonyls
monitored during the 1998 program at CAMS5, formaldehyde had the highest geometric
mean concentration (on a ppbv basis), and acetone had the fourth highest. A similar trend
was observed at DLTX: Formaldehyde had the fourth highest geometric mean
concentration, and acetone had the fifth highest. At CAMS13, however, ambient levels of
the most abundant carbonyls ranked much lower than at the other stations in the area:
Formaldehyde had the ninth highest geometric mean concentration, and acetone had the
twelfth highest. These rankings of individual compounds are generally consistent with the
5-23
-------
trends highlighted in the previous paragraph; namely, ambient air concentrations of
carbonyls accounted for a greater portion of air pollution at CAMS5 and DLTX than at
CAMS 13.
Variability. According to the data summary tables, no consistent trends on data
variability are readily apparent. Some carbonyl compounds had highly variable
monitoring data at one of the stations in Dallas and Fort Worth, but moderately variable
data at the other two stations. In many cases, the compounds with the most variable data
(e.g., crotonaldehyde at CAMS5, acrolein at CAMS13, and valeraldehyde at DLTX) had
a prevalence less than 50 percent. The variability data for these compounds should be
interpreted with caution, since they are likely to be biased by the many nondetect
observations of these compounds.
Though the carbonyl monitoring data collected at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX are
limited, they highlight several important air quality trends. First, at all three stations, only three
compounds (acetaldehdye, acetone, and formaldehyde) account for most of the airborne
carbonyls considered in this program. Second, the concentrations of these three carbonyls were
consistently higher than the concentrations of most of the 80 SNMOC. Third, carbonyls
comprised a larger portion of total NMOC levels at CAMS5 and DLTX than at CAMS 13—a
trend that is consistent with the hypothesis that mobile source emissions have a greater effect on
the ambient air at CAMS5 and DLTX than on the ambient at CAMS 13.
5.4 Chapter Summary
The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program extensively characterized air quality
during summertime morning hours at three locations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and revealed
several notable spatial and temporal variations in levels of air pollution. As a measure of the
overall levels of airborne organics, total NMOC concentrations at CAMS 13 (in Fort Worth)
were, on average, roughly twice as high as the levels at CAMS5 and DLTX (both in Dallas). At
all three stations, ambient air concentrations of total NMOC were very weakly correlated with, if
not completely uncorrelated with, humidity, precipitation, temperature, and wind direction. On
the other hand, total NMOC concentrations on windier days were consistently lower than those
on days with calm or light winds; this trend was statistically significant. Since the summer of
5-24
-------
1995, average concentrations of total NMOC increased in some areas (CAMS 13), but decreased
in others (CAMS5 and DLTX). No regional trends were apparent in the annual variations in air
quality, suggesting that local factors might account for the changes in total NMOC levels from
year to year.
The SNMOC measurements clearly indicated that air pollution in both Dallas and Fort
Worth generally contains more than 70 different hydrocarbons, though a small subset of these
compounds accounts for a large portion of the total airborne organic compounds. Close
examination of the SNMOC data revealed that the relative quantities of alkanes were greatest at
CAMS 13 and least at DLTX, while the relative quantities of olefins exhibited the opposite trend.
The composition of the air samples collected at these stations suggested that mobile source
emissions have a greater influence on air quality at DLTX than at CAMS 13 and that gasoline
vapor emissions have a greater influence on air quality at CAMS 13 than at DLTX, though both
types of sources undoubtedly contribute to air pollution at both locations. The analyses of BTEX
concentration profiles confirmed that mobile source emissions account for a considerable portion
of air pollution at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX. Nonetheless, researchers are encouraged to
compare the SNMOC monitoring data for these stations to site-specific emissions inventories to
test the hypotheses raised in this report.
Annual variations in most SNMOC at the three monitoring stations paralleled the annual
variations in total NMOC concentrations, with two notable exceptions. First, average levels of
acetylene, ethane, and propane exhibited relatively weak annual variations at all three stations,
but the reason for the relatively unchanging concentrations of these compounds is not known.
Second, at all three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort Worth, the average concentration of
2,3-dimethylbutane during the 1998 program was considerably higher than the average levels
during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs. Though this statistically significant concentration
difference might be linked to the record heat observed during the 1998 program, further research
is encouraged to identify the factors that accounted for this unique annual variation.
5-25
-------
The carbonyl monitoring data collected at CAMS5, CAMS 13, and DLTX offer a more
complete account of air quality in Dallas and Fort Worth. At all three stations, acetaldehyde,
acetone, and formaldehyde accounted for more than 90 percent of the airborne carbonyls
identified by the sampling and analytical method—a trend that has been observed at these stations
over the three previous summers. Further, carbonyls accounted for a greater portion of total
NMOC at CAMS5 and DLTX than at CAMS 13. Since mobile source emissions are known to
contain elevated levels of several carbonyls, the trend in composition of carbonyls further
supports the hypothesis that mobile source emissions have a greater impact on air quality at
CAMS5 and DLTX than on air quality at CAMS13. Once again, review of site-specific
emissions inventories is needed to test this hypothesis.
As emphasized throughout this section, this report provides an extensive and meaningful
review of the ambient air monitoring data collected in 1998 at Dallas and Forth Worth, but the
analyses in this section are not comprehensive. As a result, researchers are encouraged to further
study the total NMOC, SNMOC, and carbonyl monitoring data from CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX to identify and characterize subtle trends not considered in this report. Examples of such
additional studies include performing multivariate statistical analyses, modeling photochemical
reactivity of the air mass, and comparing the data from this report to concurrent observations of
nitrogen oxides and ozone.
5-26
-------
Figure 5-1
Dallas, Texas (CAMS5), Monitoring Station
,T * i
• ..I-** • . ... ..V**^1 • ''"" "•Si '"ff* m m ''•''• \j- '^?f:=Jl^~ V^ * _| ^
^ ^ — .. — — _L ^_ >^_—^«*. - . *^ • — • —**i-. «* - • - - . -
" •"•••*'*i." » 'if'"
1 T I ' •
It-' I
TpS-ra '
a | !i -
-*•/ f- :;'..-
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series. Map scale: 1:24,000.
5-27
-------
Figure 5-2
Fort Worth, Texas (CAMS13), Monitoring Station
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series. Map scale: 1:24,000.
5-28
-------
Figure 5-3
Dallas, Texas (DLTX), Monitoring Station
TRINITY RIVES GRtENBLLT PARK
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series. Map scale: 1:24,000.
5-29
-------
Figure 5-4
Distributions of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort Worth
Distribution for CAMS5
40
c 34
O) 30
° ra 19
13 20
> T3
"- 0)
g -in 10
0 n °
7
' 1 0 0 0 0
<=0.1 >0.1 >0.2 >0.3 >0.4 >0.5 >0.6 >0.7 >0.8 >0.9 >1.0
and and and and and and and and and
<=0.2 <=0.3 <=0.4 <=0.5 <=0.6 <=0.7 <=0.8 <=0.9 <=1.0
Concentration Range (ppmC)
Distribution for CAMS13
_ 20
c £u
— o
2 ¥ 15 13
•^ Cf. **
™1 0 -7 -7
> ^
tu *= 5
n H o
0 0
10 11
7 6
<=0.1 >0.1 >0.2 >0.3 >0.4 >0.5 >0.6 >0.7 >0.8 >0.9 >1.0
and and and and and and and and and
<=0.2 <=0.3 <=0.4 <=0.5 <=0.6 <=0.7 <=0.8 <=0.9 <=1.0
Concentration Range (ppmC)
Distribution for DLTX
30
— a) 24 ~~
(/) Q) *-*-
o 20
"- Q) 10 7
0) •§
•Q LJ '
O n
<=0.1 >0.1 >0.2 >0.3 >0.4 >0.5 >0.6 >0.7 >0.8 >0.9 >1.0
and and and and and and and and and
<=0.2 <=0.3 <=0.4 <=0.5 <=0.6 <=0.7 <=0.8 <=0.9 <=1.0
Concentration Range (ppmC)
Note: The scale for the "Observations in Listed Range" is different in each graph, but the scale for the "Concentration Range"
is the same for the three graphs.
5-30
-------
Figure 5-5 (Page 1 of 3)
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX to Selected Meteorological Parameters
CAMS5: NMOC Concentration vs. Humidity
— 300
*- o °UU
O n
rr 9^n J
c Q. ^ou
2 .£ O 150
5 ® -^ 100
< 0 ^
§ TO 50
° 2 o
<60
>=60 and <70
Relative Hum idity (%)
>=70
CAMS13: NMOC Concentration vs. Humidity
— 700
M- O
O .Q 600
c Q-
0,0°- 500
TO TO 0 400
<- £ O
0) c s 30°
> o ^
< 0 Z 200
o 2 100
00
l_ o
<60
>=60 and <70
Relative Hum idity (%)
>=70
DLTX: NMOC Concentration vs. Humidity
— 350
M- O
0)0°- 250
g" « 0 200
0> "c g 150
< O Z 100
O JS 50
O 0
i— 0
<60
>=60 and <70
Relative Hum idity (%)
>=70
Note: Every graph has a different scale for average concentrations of total NMOC.
5-31
-------
Figure 5-5 (Page 2 of 3)
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX to Selected Meteorological Parameters
CAMS5: NMOC Concentration vs. Temperature
t o
>- J= O
0)
5
< O
o JS
0
300
250
100
50
<85 >=85 and <90 >=90
Temperature Range (degrees Fahrenheit)
CAMS13: NMOC Concentration vs. Temperature
of
bC
Ol O)
O O
O O
age
ation
C (pp
W 4*-
O O
O O
e
NJ
O
O
Concen
otal NM
-».
O
O
<85 >=85and<90 >=90
Temperature Range (degrees Fahrenheit)
DLTX: NMOC Concentration vs. Temperature
•- i: O
y = s
> 0 2
0 JS
°
100
50
<85 >=85 and <90 >=90
Temperature Range (degrees Fahrenheit)
Note: Some of the graphs have a different scale for average concentrations of total NMOC.
5-32
-------
Figure 5-5 (Page 3 of 3)
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5, CAMS13, and
DLTX to Selected Meteorological Parameters
CAMS5: NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Speed
— 500
o 2
c Q- 400
0) .0 £;
O> ** »* 300
RJ TO 0 JU" -
m "^ °
^ = S 200
> (1) ^
< o z
C — 100
" £ 0
|_ U
<=5
>5 and <=10 >10
Wind Speed (mph)
CAMS13: NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Speed
— 800
"o &
5 n 600
a> O 5;
0) *- o
TO TO ^
™ i- n 400
•r *j (J ^uu
1 si
< 0 ± 200
0 ™
° ° o
<=5
>5 and <=10 >10
Wind Speed (mph)
DLTX: NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Speed
— 500
I- O
O &
c Q- 400
d> 0 Q;
2> t; o soo
TO TO
SJ ^ S 200
< 0 Z
C — 100
o 2
0 £ o
|_ U
<=5
>5 and <=10 >10
Wind Speed (mph)
Note: Some of the graphs have a different scale for average concentrations of total NMOC.
5-33
-------
Figure 5-6
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at CAMS5,
CAMS13, and DLTX to Wind Direction
Total NMOC
Concentration
(ppbC)
CAMS5: NMOC Concentration vs
600
500 *
» T
400 I
300 A •
200 * * ' * * A
I * I t
100 * I ' I 4
n
Wind Direction
* *
i
* I • *
lu ' '
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Wind Direction (degrees)
CAMS13: NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Direction
i *nn
Total NMOC
Concentration
(ppbC)
200
900
600 T *
,M **;:*' *•!•
*
** * ' **
i I A * I
I *
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Wind Direction (degrees)
Total NMOC
Concentration
(ppbC)
DLTX: NMOC Concentration vs.
500
200 *
900
I
600
300 * A A
n • .t T * *'t$1
Wind Direction
r ' ' ' *
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Wind Direction (degrees)
Notes: Every plot has a different scale for average concentrations of total NMOC.
Wind direction in the graphs is the directions/Toff! which wind blows.
Total NMOC data are not shown for the six mornings when winds were calm or variable.
5-34
-------
Figure 5-7
Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort Worth
a) o
^ TO
"- -S
3 c
> 0)
< o
c
O
o
o
E
c a.
O
O
0.50
0.40
.30
0.20
— 0.10
2
0.00
Annual Variations for CAMS5
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
M- O
0 E
0.80
0.60
0)00-
O) *•
to oJ cj
2 £ X 0.40
o ^
o ^~
c —
O TO
O "Q
D.20
D.OO
Annual Variations for CAMS13
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
0.40
2
0 O o.OO
Annual Variations for DLTX
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Note: Every plot has a different scale for average concentrations of total NMOC.
The "error bars" in the graph indicate the 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
The CAMS5 station did not participate in the 1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
5-35
-------
Figure 5-8
Annual Variations in the Frequency of Peak Concentrations of
Total NMOC in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area
i"> 30 0% -
° T3 •»«•««
>, ° a 25 0%
° Q 2 S £ 200%
a c: 2 x S- 150%
g ± -g HI a. l=)-u/0
J O. h- in O 10 0%
o_ E c a> T~
(0 G) > 50%
(/)-=
«> _l o 0%
, . 30 0%
,A ^ T3 *"•"«
" ° » 25 0% -
° ol S o 200% ,
S ? -2 x 9- 15 o%
o ~ o HJ a
J Q. I— < S- 150%
0 ~ ^ HI °-
J Q. I— 50%
(/)£(!)
Annual Variations for CAMS5
7-->'° 0.0% 0.0%
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Annual Variations for CAMS13
25.3%
I
2.5% 2 5% 1
| |
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Annual Variations for DLTX
1 10' 1 fi0/n
'•2/0 0.0% 0.0% 1-G/0
' 1 1 ^ 1
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Notes: The three figures are shown on the same scale.
The CAMS5 station did not participate in the 1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program.
5-36
-------
Figure 5-9
Relative Amounts of Alkanes, Olefins, and Aromatic Compounds (on a ppbv basis)
at the Dallas-Fort Worth Monitoring Stations
80%
CAMS5
CAMS13
Monitoring Station
DLTX
-------
Figure 5-10
Composition Data for the Most Abundant Olefins at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX
oo
Acetylene
Ethylene Isobutene and 1-butene
Compound
Propylene
Note: As Section 5.2.2.2 explains, acetylene is an alkyne, but is included among the olefins for the composition calculations.
-------
Figure 5-11
Composition Data for the Most Abundant Alkanes at CAMS5, CAMS13, and DLTX
VO
16%
n-Butane
2,3-Dimethyl
butane
Ethane n-Hexane Isopentane
Compound
2-Methyl
pentane
3-Methyl
pentane
n-Pentane Propane
-------
Figure 5-12
BTEX Concentration Ratios Calculated from the SNMOC Monitoring Data
0.0
D Benzene/Ethylbenzene
• Toluene/Ethylbenzene
D m,p-Xylene/Ethylbenzene
D o-Xylene/Ethylbenzene
CAMS5
CAMS13
Monitoring Station
DLTX
-------
Figure 5-13 (Page 1 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS5
o> 2
< c
o
o
Acetylene and Ethane
1996
1997
Year
1998
Benzene
1996
1997
Year
1998
n-Butane
1996
1997
Year
1998
Notes: Acetylene and ethane are presented in the same graph because the sampling and analytical method used during the 1996
program could not differentiate these compounds.
Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-41
-------
Figure 5-13 (Page 2 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS5
2,3-Dimethylbutane
15 00
O 12 00
<» 'f — .
O) TO Q 9 go
2 •£ -Q
o) o °- 6 oo
> o 5;
O 3 00
O
0 00
-p
T
^t
r~ — -^__ ^^^
--^
1996
1997
Year
1998
—.
ro 2 o
CO +••
^
a.
a.
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Ethylene
1996
1997
Year
1998
n -Hexane
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-42
-------
Figure 5-13 (Page 3 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS5
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
Isopentane
50 00
40 00
30 00
20 00
10 00
0 00
T
*\
^
1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
2-Methylpentane
t
r^^^
^^
^^\^
\_ 1
1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
n-Pentane
25 00
20 00
15 00
10 00
5 00
0 00
|^_
^^-\_
^^^^^^« f
• =
1996 1997 1998
Year
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-43
-------
Figure 5-13 (Page 4 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS5
Propane
1996
1997
Year
1998
30.00
= 25.00
® *: —. 20.00
O) 2 0
CO +•• r>
Toluene
15.00
iT7,p-Xylene
1996
1997
Year
1998
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-44
-------
Figure 5-14 (Page 1 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS13
Acetylene and Ethane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
30.
n-Butane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Benzene
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Notes: Acetylene and ethane are presented in the same graph because the sampling and analytical method used during the 1996
program could not differentiate these compounds.
Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-45
-------
Figure 5-14 (Page 2 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS13
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
2,3-Dimethylbutane
50 00
40 00
30 00
20 00
10 00
n nn
^^t
T ^^
^c
^__^-^—^ J
L
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
n-Hexane
30 00
20 00
10 00
n nn
S
/^
• f —
"--^
^^*
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Isopentane
1
r
^^
^^ ^
i i^^^
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-46
-------
Figure 5-14 (Page 3 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS13
60
2-Methylpentane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
D> « o 2°'°°
TO -S _Q
0) m °-
> o 5; 10.00
< c
O 5'°°
0.00
3-Methylpentane
1995
1998
60.00
c 50.00
O
0) *- __ 40 00
« 5 °
2 ^ -Q 30.00
2 « £
> U £ 20.00
< c
2 10.00
0.00
n -Pentane
1995
1996 1997
Year
1998
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-47
-------
Figure 5-14 (Page 4 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at CAMS13
30
Propane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Average
Concentration
O
.0
0.
0.
Toluene
40 00
30.00
20 00
10 00
n nn
y x
^^\
I _I^^""""""~^
1 1
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Average
entration
>pbC)
o .";
c
0
o
iT7,p-Xylene
25 00
20 00
15 00
10.00
5 00
0 00
T
1 T
— "" T T
J- J-
r.
^
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-48
-------
Figure 5-15 (Page 1 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at DLTX
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Acetylene and Ethane
t-^_ ^^—^
^— f-~~~~~" ^^~~~~~f
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
Benzene
6 00
5.00
4 00
3 00
2 00
1 00
0 00
j T
t I { f
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
n -Butane
T
X • — • — f x •
j_
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Notes: Acetylene and ethane are presented in the same graph because the sampling and analytical method used during the 1996
program could not differentiate these compounds.
Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-49
-------
Figure 5-15 (Page 2 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at DLTX
on
0)
u>
TO
0)
>
<
12.00
10.00
_ 8.00
O
n
Q.
3 4.00
2.00
0.00
6.00
2,3-Dimethylbutane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
on
0)
U>
TO
^
0)
>
<
12.00
10.00
—. 8.00
O
n
Q.
3 4.00
2.00
0.00
6.00
Ethylene
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Average
Concentration
(ppbC)
n-Hexane
6 00
5.00
4 00
3 00
2 00
1 00
n nn
t t— — _1
1 I 1—
I
t
-L
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-50
-------
O) TO
TO *=
0) a!
> O
< c
O
O
o
.0
Q.
Q.
Figure 5-15 (Page 3 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at DLTX
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Isopentane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
12 00
C in nn
0
o> t; s oo
ro 2 o
2 •£ -Q 6 00
« S s-
> O °- 4 00
< c
° 2 00
o
0 00
2-Methylpentane
-p
§,,
"~- — ^____^
t I
1995 1996 1997
Year
1998
10.00
n -Pentane
1998
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-51
-------
Figure 5-15 (Page 4 of 4)
Annual Variations for the Most Abundant SNMOC at DLTX
25.00
Propane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
60.00
c 50.00
O
o> *; _ 40.00
ro 2 o
01 ** " 30.00
Toluene
1995
1998
0> 2
2 c
5 8
< c
O
o
iT7,p-Xylene
1998
Notes: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
5-52
-------
Figure 5-16
Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations at CAMS5
25.0
O
£1
Q.
O
I Geometric Mean Concentration
-*—Ozone Index
18
16
14 cs
10
c
12 o
Compound
Notes: Only those compounds with MIR values listed in Table 3-1 were considered.
Table 5-7 lists the abbreviations used for the compounds.
-------
Figure 5-17
Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations at CAMS13
60.0
I Geometric Mean Concentration
•Ozone Index
35
30
25
10
Compound
Notes: Only those compounds with MIR values listed in Table 3-1 were considered.
Table 5-7 lists the abbreviations used for the compounds.
-------
Figure 5-18
Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with Highest Geometric Mean Concentration at DLTX
25.0
Geometric Mean Concentration
Ozone Index
18
16
14 es
10
c
12 .2
Compound
Notes: Only those compounds with MIR values listed in Table 3-1 were considered.
Table 5-7 lists the abbreviations used for the compounds.
-------
Table 5-1
Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC in Dallas and Fort Worth
Category
Prevalence
Concentration
Range
Central
Tendency
Variability
Parameter
Number of valid sampling days
Number of nondetects
Frequency of detection
Lowest concentration (ppmC)
25th percentile concentration (ppmC)
50th percentile concentration (ppmC)
75th percentile concentration (ppmC)
Highest concentration (ppmC)
Median concentration (ppmC)
Arithmetic mean concentration
(ppmC)
Geometric mean concentration
(ppmC)
Standard deviation (ppmC)
Coefficient of variation
Monitoring Station
CAMS 5
68
0
100%
0.115
0.159
0.200
0.286
0.645
0.200
0.247
0.222
0.125
0.51
CAMS 13
69
0
100%
0.114
0.312
0.455
0.637
1.165
0.455
0.509
0.446
0.255
0.50
DLTX
62
0
100%
0.089
0.144
0.222
0.293
1.267
0.222
0.266
0.227
0.191
0.72
5-56
-------
Table 5-2
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 68 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
fraws-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
«-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethy Ibenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
«-Dodecane
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
99%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
93%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.80
1.77
ND
2.71
0.09
0.06
0.33
0.20
0.32
0.26
ND
0.07
0.11
0.23
3.03
0.31
0.34
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
18.45
11.66
1.32
30.74
2.17
2.23
25.20
3.57
3.71
3.65
ND
1.98
1.80
3.08
44.66
3.02
2.67
7.17
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
2.30
4.14
0.27
6.19
0.58
0.45
1.32
0.76
0.89
0.82
0.14
0.50
0.44
0.94
6.60
1.12
0.93
0.37
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
3.05
4.76
0.33
8.01
0.68
0.61
2.91
1.05
1.08
0.98
0.14
0.51
0.47
1.09
11.29
1.26
1.12
0.61
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
2.48
4.19
0.28
6.64
0.54
0.46
1.64
0.83
0.93
0.86
0.14
0.43
0.40
0.92
8.45
1.14
0.97
0.41
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.57
2.54
0.23
5.85
0.46
0.47
4.66
0.79
0.65
0.57
0.00
0.29
0.27
0.65
10.18
0.57
0.61
0.93
Coefficient of
Variation
0.84
0.53
0.68
0.73
0.67
0.77
1.60
0.76
0.60
0.58
0.00
0.56
0.58
0.59
0.90
0.45
0.55
1.53
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 68 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
1-Dodecene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
?ra«s-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
23
0
0
68
0
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
66%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
40%
100%
100%
94%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
2.63
1.08
ND
1.23
1.09
0.42
0.53
1.01
ND
1.86
0.12
ND
0.07
0.83
1.39
9.84
0.58
Highest
(ppbC)
1.38
33.98
8.77
ND
13.06
8.45
3.42
5.32
7.79
0.94
18.78
1.03
0.97
1.59
9.53
6.77
69.60
7.15
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.14
8.82
2.22
0.12
3.40
1.98
0.94
1.22
1.85
0.26
4.06
0.24
0.14
0.22
2.94
2.39
21.25
1.60
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.24
9.90
2.85
0.12
4.04
2.61
1.16
1.55
2.42
0.25
5.85
0.32
0.23
0.38
3.12
2.69
25.28
1.67
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.19
8.29
2.47
0.12
3.49
2.28
1.03
1.36
2.05
0.23
4.69
0.27
0.17
0.28
2.65
2.54
22.67
1.46
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.23
6.18
1.68
0.00
2.32
1.52
0.60
0.86
1.60
0.12
4.60
0.21
0.21
0.36
1.87
1.00
13.14
0.99
Coefficient of
Variation
0.95
0.62
0.59
0.00
0.58
0.58
0.52
0.56
0.66
0.46
0.79
0.66
0.94
0.94
0.60
0.37
0.52
0.59
oo
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 68 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
w-Octane
1-Octene
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
0
8
0
6
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
91%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
60%
100%
88%
100%
91%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.05
0.13
0.20
ND
0.57
0.97
0.34
0.28
0.76
1.02
2.93
1.35
0.07
ND
0.30
ND
0.50
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
1.55
4.84
8.31
1.70
4.03
7.20
2.90
2.59
7.24
7.34
23.16
14.95
1.45
0.40
3.57
0.43
4.34
0.86
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.47
0.68
0.95
0.27
1.19
1.91
0.78
0.76
2.09
2.04
5.21
3.05
0.26
0.12
0.83
0.14
1.09
0.10
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.45
1.15
1.88
0.47
1.38
2.63
0.97
0.92
2.64
2.67
7.11
4.37
0.40
0.12
0.95
0.16
1.33
0.12
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.36
0.84
1.25
0.30
1.26
2.21
0.85
0.80
2.35
2.31
5.84
3.48
0.30
0.10
0.85
0.15
1.17
0.10
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.24
1.10
2.03
0.44
0.69
1.76
0.56
0.51
1.42
1.62
5.24
3.44
0.35
0.08
0.52
0.08
0.74
0.10
Coefficient of
Variation
0.53
0.95
1.08
0.93
0.50
0.67
0.57
0.56
0.54
0.61
0.74
0.79
0.89
0.68
0.55
0.46
0.55
0.85
VO
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 68 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
trans -2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethy Ibenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
3
46
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
97%
100%
100%
100%
100%
88%
100%
100%
96%
32%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
2.18
0.07
0.12
0.27
ND
0.29
2.46
0.29
0.89
ND
0.65
5.51
ND
ND
0.25
1.39
0.36
0.13
Highest
(ppbC)
24.01
3.68
3.47
6.46
2.29
2.54
38.32
3.11
6.12
0.64
3.19
44.78
61.56
0.17
3.02
12.67
4.76
2.80
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
5.63
0.70
0.70
1.03
0.32
0.82
8.25
0.79
1.53
0.14
1.21
11.76
0.13
0.14
0.70
2.75
1.06
0.68
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
7.75
0.98
0.99
1.69
0.42
0.96
9.18
0.92
1.90
0.16
1.39
15.06
1.09
0.12
0.89
3.76
1.40
0.91
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
6.30
0.74
0.74
1.25
0.32
0.84
7.76
0.82
1.70
0.13
1.30
12.86
0.14
0.11
0.75
3.26
1.20
0.76
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
5.60
0.79
0.80
1.53
0.38
0.52
5.86
0.48
1.02
0.10
0.55
9.20
7.45
0.04
0.56
2.27
0.85
0.58
Coefficient of
Variation
0.72
0.81
0.81
0.91
0.91
0.54
0.64
0.52
0.54
0.63
0.40
0.61
6.85
0.35
0.63
0.60
0.61
0.64
a\
o
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 68 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
69%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.41
0.58
0.19
ND
3.38
1.38
115.25
74.38
Highest
(ppbC)
10.66
4.22
3.46
0.25
30.43
10.42
645.14
539.96
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
2.62
1.08
0.85
0.10
6.91
2.53
200.37
161.84
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
3.55
1.40
0.97
0.11
9.38
3.32
246.52
201.40
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
3.04
1.22
0.83
0.10
7.96
2.86
222.04
177.86
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.18
0.82
0.58
0.05
6.00
2.00
124.86
110.23
Coefficient of
Variation
0.62
0.59
0.60
0.43
0.64
0.60
0.51
0.55
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-3
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 69 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
fraws-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
«-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethy Ibenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
«-Dodecane
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
69
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
99%
100%
100%
99%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
94%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.89
2.01
ND
2.59
0.16
ND
0.37
0.29
0.33
0.21
ND
0.07
0.06
0.29
3.23
0.10
0.31
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
15.24
23.43
2.32
85.89
5.42
5.42
52.49
7.40
4.97
4.69
ND
1.59
1.62
10.00
97.60
5.59
5.93
5.00
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
3.63
7.97
0.36
19.29
1.43
1.29
2.47
2.98
1.62
1.06
0.14
0.59
0.57
2.49
32.64
2.31
2.28
0.49
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
4.52
8.84
0.53
22.13
1.81
1.67
4.60
3.26
1.78
1.39
0.14
0.65
0.61
2.83
36.18
2.39
2.41
0.78
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
3.57
7.61
0.39
17.66
1.49
1.31
2.57
2.68
1.54
1.15
0.14
0.56
0.54
2.36
29.07
2.06
2.07
0.52
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
3.21
4.69
0.46
14.93
1.11
1.12
7.93
1.77
0.97
0.93
0.00
0.30
0.30
1.71
21.64
1.17
1.22
0.93
Coefficient of
Variation
0.71
0.53
0.86
0.67
0.61
0.67
1.73
0.54
0.54
0.67
0.00
0.46
0.48
0.61
0.60
0.49
0.51
1.19
to
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 69 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
1-Dodecene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
?ra«s-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
19
0
0
69
0
0
0
0
0
60
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
72%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
13%
100%
100%
99%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
2.47
1.02
ND
1.50
1.05
0.39
0.49
0.93
ND
1.98
0.13
ND
0.07
1.04
1.27
11.53
0.38
Highest
(ppbC)
4.34
76.21
12.33
ND
19.51
11.14
4.38
5.73
12.99
1.13
41.99
2.01
1.87
3.45
20.71
20.42
160.84
2.99
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.16
11.30
4.09
0.12
4.20
3.90
1.70
2.06
4.60
0.26
13.84
0.64
0.69
1.19
4.55
2.76
52.10
0.96
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.26
13.93
4.87
0.12
5.44
4.47
1.86
2.51
5.00
0.29
15.27
0.73
0.72
1.28
5.71
3.83
61.12
1.08
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.18
10.23
4.16
0.12
4.32
3.86
1.62
2.20
4.22
0.28
12.62
0.61
0.56
0.99
4.51
3.13
52.06
1.00
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.51
12.63
2.72
0.00
4.12
2.47
0.96
1.27
2.73
0.15
8.59
0.41
0.42
0.76
4.21
3.08
33.94
0.46
Coefficient of
Variation
1.96
0.91
0.56
0.00
0.76
0.55
0.51
0.51
0.55
0.51
0.56
0.57
0.58
0.60
0.74
0.80
0.56
0.43
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 69 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3 -Methyl- 1-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
w-Octane
1-Octene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
4
0
4
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
96%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
94%
100%
94%
100%
94%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.04
0.28
0.34
ND
0.54
1.01
0.28
0.24
1.42
1.09
2.90
1.42
0.09
ND
0.29
ND
0.44
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
1.37
10.28
17.48
4.05
7.38
17.09
4.21
3.91
13.99
15.51
52.49
34.60
3.27
0.86
3.56
0.71
5.29
0.36
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.56
3.17
6.08
0.84
2.37
6.66
1.49
1.47
5.01
5.50
19.40
12.32
1.17
0.32
1.28
0.20
1.92
0.13
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.60
3.81
6.93
1.15
2.41
6.99
1.69
1.65
5.59
5.99
20.94
13.04
1.29
0.35
1.49
0.24
2.13
0.14
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.51
2.99
5.36
0.83
2.10
5.84
1.47
1.41
4.84
5.07
17.48
10.75
1.03
0.28
1.30
0.21
1.87
0.13
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.27
2.48
4.25
0.91
1.26
3.77
0.88
0.87
2.91
3.29
11.49
7.27
0.73
0.20
0.77
0.14
1.06
0.06
Coefficient of
Variation
0.45
0.65
0.61
0.79
0.52
0.54
0.52
0.53
0.52
0.55
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.58
0.52
0.59
0.50
0.45
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 69 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
trans -2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethy Ibenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
6
44
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
97%
100%
100%
100%
100%
88%
100%
100%
91%
36%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
2.89
0.24
0.19
0.42
ND
0.29
2.27
0.28
0.74
ND
0.62
6.12
ND
ND
0.27
1.41
0.44
0.24
Highest
(ppbC)
72.32
8.35
7.13
13.89
2.34
2.76
74.41
3.39
10.33
0.95
4.50
75.99
4.86
5.30
3.86
16.14
5.79
5.02
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
20.94
2.20
2.64
5.06
0.40
0.87
11.74
1.23
2.27
0.19
1.30
25.90
0.14
0.14
1.27
5.33
1.88
1.66
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
25.23
2.73
3.03
5.76
0.58
0.96
14.83
1.46
2.94
0.27
1.50
28.23
0.26
0.21
1.49
6.28
2.31
1.86
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
20.12
2.22
2.46
4.63
0.43
0.85
11.06
1.29
2.36
0.21
1.39
23.94
0.15
0.12
1.27
5.41
1.98
1.55
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
15.90
1.73
1.69
3.31
0.50
0.49
12.47
0.72
2.19
0.20
0.67
15.66
0.59
0.63
0.83
3.45
1.28
1.08
Coefficient of
Variation
0.63
0.64
0.56
0.57
0.86
0.51
0.84
0.49
0.74
0.77
0.45
0.55
2.30
3.03
0.56
0.55
0.55
0.58
a\
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 69 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.40
0.50
0.15
ND
3.29
1.27
113.97
89.77
Highest
(ppbC)
18.47
7.33
24.37
1.74
41.63
13.85
1,164.63
1,010.04
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
6.53
2.37
0.87
0.13
14.79
4.81
454.51
390.07
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
7.66
2.75
1.47
0.18
16.53
5.69
509.22
434.69
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
6.53
2.33
0.97
0.13
14.00
4.87
446.05
375.62
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
4.23
1.57
2.90
0.25
9.37
3.15
255.09
225.29
Coefficient of
Variation
0.55
0.57
1.97
1.44
0.57
0.55
0.50
0.52
Oi
Oi
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-4
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 62 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
fraws-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
«-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethy Ibenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
«-Dodecane
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
90%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.96
1.44
0.13
1.92
0.12
0.09
0.25
0.16
0.16
0.21
ND
0.05
0.06
0.17
0.74
0.17
0.18
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
21.87
14.75
2.04
29.48
2.05
1.76
84.57
2.39
3.00
5.33
ND
1.35
1.09
2.71
34.90
4.23
2.83
9.49
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
3.92
3.96
0.39
5.75
0.56
0.44
1.17
0.68
0.89
1.06
0.14
0.48
0.41
0.92
6.01
1.16
0.86
0.42
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
5.50
4.46
0.50
7.26
0.62
0.54
4.27
0.83
1.14
1.45
0.14
0.50
0.42
1.03
8.03
1.29
0.97
0.84
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
4.06
3.94
0.41
5.93
0.54
0.46
1.51
0.71
0.93
1.13
0.14
0.42
0.36
0.91
6.14
1.17
0.86
0.46
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
4.71
2.57
0.38
5.38
0.37
0.34
13.36
0.53
0.73
1.09
0.00
0.27
0.22
0.54
7.14
0.63
0.52
1.53
Coefficient of
Variation
0.86
0.58
0.77
0.74
0.59
0.63
3.13
0.64
0.64
0.75
0.00
0.54
0.53
0.53
0.89
0.49
0.54
1.84
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-4 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 62 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
1-Dodecene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
n -Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
?ra«s-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
22
0
0
62
0
0
0
0
0
53
0
1
12
4
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
65%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
15%
100%
98%
81%
94%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
2.58
0.63
ND
0.45
0.90
0.22
0.39
0.60
ND
1.06
ND
ND
ND
0.95
1.24
7.51
0.39
Highest
(ppbC)
2.31
42.52
10.08
ND
20.51
9.38
3.64
4.80
9.91
0.70
15.40
0.78
0.60
1.08
10.52
15.72
82.67
3.17
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.14
8.30
2.49
0.12
4.62
2.10
0.99
1.27
2.03
0.26
3.49
0.19
0.12
0.16
2.90
2.69
22.25
1.23
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.21
9.92
3.12
0.12
5.67
2.49
1.14
1.46
2.55
0.25
4.52
0.23
0.15
0.24
3.46
3.27
24.65
1.25
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.15
8.01
2.56
0.12
4.66
2.14
1.00
1.28
2.14
0.24
3.69
0.19
0.12
0.18
2.88
2.83
21.67
1.14
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.30
7.45
2.09
0.00
4.07
1.72
0.70
0.90
1.72
0.08
3.18
0.17
0.14
0.24
2.22
2.35
14.45
0.52
Coefficient of
Variation
1.41
0.75
0.67
0.00
0.72
0.69
0.61
0.61
0.68
0.34
0.70
0.71
0.89
0.98
0.64
0.72
0.59
0.42
-------
Table 5-4 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 62 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl- 1-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
w-Octane
1-Octene
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
3
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
28
0
7
0
13
Frequency
of
Detections
95%
100%
100%
89%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
98%
55%
100%
89%
100%
79%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
0.22
0.28
ND
0.45
0.55
0.17
0.15
0.87
0.71
1.52
0.77
ND
ND
0.23
ND
0.34
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
1.07
4.16
6.57
2.67
5.99
7.53
3.20
3.19
10.65
11.17
17.44
11.69
0.99
0.31
3.23
0.69
4.45
0.28
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.47
0.62
0.85
0.18
1.50
1.94
0.89
0.77
2.17
2.29
4.66
2.80
0.19
0.12
0.88
0.15
1.15
0.11
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.47
0.87
1.32
0.43
1.75
2.22
1.01
0.94
2.61
2.70
5.82
3.57
0.27
0.11
1.09
0.19
1.36
0.12
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.40
0.68
0.96
0.25
1.51
1.88
0.89
0.81
2.29
2.31
4.85
2.95
0.22
0.09
0.94
0.16
1.20
0.11
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.22
0.81
1.43
0.55
1.04
1.46
0.57
0.57
1.60
1.78
3.98
2.57
0.22
0.06
0.65
0.12
0.81
0.05
Coefficient of
Variation
0.47
0.92
1.08
1.27
0.60
0.66
0.57
0.61
0.61
0.66
0.68
0.72
0.83
0.57
0.60
0.64
0.60
0.45
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-4 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 62 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
trans -2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethy Ibenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
12
0
0
11
45
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
98%
100%
100%
100%
81%
100%
100%
82%
27%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.90
0.14
0.11
0.30
ND
ND
3.26
0.20
0.82
ND
0.30
3.49
ND
ND
0.16
0.89
0.23
0.26
Highest
(ppbC)
23.60
2.51
4.89
5.64
3.37
2.94
49.47
2.73
9.43
0.83
4.94
940.16
2.67
0.14
3.61
13.68
5.46
3.10
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
5.60
0.58
0.60
0.87
0.41
0.72
10.55
0.77
2.29
0.17
1.23
12.28
0.14
0.14
0.77
3.14
1.31
0.71
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
6.92
0.74
0.80
1.26
0.58
0.84
13.04
0.87
2.77
0.25
1.60
29.63
0.22
0.12
0.95
3.66
1.47
0.88
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
5.71
0.63
0.63
1.01
0.41
0.71
10.48
0.77
2.37
0.21
1.36
13.04
0.16
0.11
0.79
3.11
1.24
0.74
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
4.90
0.53
0.74
1.10
0.62
0.50
9.75
0.50
1.81
0.17
1.02
117.99
0.34
0.03
0.69
2.64
1.04
0.61
Coefficient of
Variation
0.71
0.71
0.93
0.87
1.08
0.59
0.75
0.57
0.65
0.67
0.64
3.98
1.54
0.28
0.73
0.72
0.71
0.69
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-4 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 62 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
2
23
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
97%
63%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.01
0.44
ND
ND
1.95
0.77
89.20
71.82
Highest
(ppbC)
11.72
4.58
17.14
0.69
33.71
11.84
1,267.42
1,394.53
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
2.82
1.12
0.91
0.14
7.71
2.79
221.66
181.21
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
3.38
1.31
1.53
0.13
10.09
3.46
266.14
218.09
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
2.86
1.14
0.95
0.11
7.97
2.85
226.71
179.43
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.32
0.85
2.33
0.11
7.38
2.36
191.18
191.20
Coefficient of
Variation
0.69
0.65
1.53
0.83
0.73
0.68
0.72
0.88
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-5
SNMOC with the Highest Geometric Mean Concentrations
CAMS5
Compound
Isopentane
Toluene
2,3 -Dimethylbutane
Ethane
m,p-Xy\ene
Propane
w-Butane
w-Pentane
2-Methylpentane
w-Hexane
Geometric Mean
Concentration
(ppbC)
22.67
12.86
8.45
8.29
7.96
7.76
6.64
6.30
5.84
4.69
CAMS 13
Compound
Isopentane
2,3 -Dimethylbutane
Toluene
w-Pentane
w-Butane
2-Methylpentane
m,p-Xy\Qne
w-Hexane
Propane
3 -Methylpentane
Geometric Mean
Concentration
(ppbC)
52.06
29.07
23.94
20.12
17.66
17.48
14.00
12.62
11.06
10.75
DLTX
Compound
Isopentane
Toluene
Propane
Ethane
m,p-Xy\Qne
2,3 -Dimethylbutane
w-Butane
w-Pentane
2-Methylpentane
Ethylene
Geometric Mean
Concentration
(ppbC)
21.67
13.04
10.48
8.01
7.97
6.14
5.93
5.71
4.85
4.66
fj\
to
-------
Table 5-6
Emissions Source Profiles for Selected SNMOC
Compound
Relative Amount of Compound Emitted (%), by Source Type
Mobile Source
Emissions
Emissions from
Gasoline Vapor
Emissions from
Petroleum Refineries
Source profiles for the alkanes shown in Figure 5-11
w-Butane
2,3 -Dimethylbutane
Ethane
w-Hexane
Isopentane
2-Methylpentane
3 -Methylpentane
w-Pentane
Propane
9.0
NA
3.1
1.4
7.2
2.9
1.9
3.2
6.7
30.2
NA
0.0
2.0
31.4
4.9
2.5
13.2
0.39
17.6
NA
4.8
3.6
16.8
7.2
4.3
7.3
21.3
Source profiles for the olefins shown in Figure 5-10
Acetylene
Ethylene
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Propylene
7.8
18.2
NA
3.2
0.0
0.0
NA
0.0
0.1
0.7
NA
0.80
Notes: Source profile data were copied from Scheff and Wadden 1993.
NA = Source profile data were not listed for this compound in Scheff and Wadden 1993.
As Section 5.2.2.2 explains, acetylene is an alkyne, but is included among the olefins for the composition calculations.
The source profiles reported in Scheff and Wadden 1993 were normalized to a list of 23 organic compounds.
Therefore, the data in this table are useful for understanding the relative quantities of only selected compounds
in emissions from specific groups of sources. Since emissions sources emit many compounds in addition to
the 23 considered in Scheff and Wadden 1993, the percentages listed in this table do not characterize each
compound's actual percent of emissions from these sources. As an example, according to this table, ethane
accounts for 3.1 percent of the emissions of 23 organic compounds from motor vehicles, but ethane accounts
for a much smaller proportion of the emissions of all organic compounds from motor vehicles.
5-73
-------
Table 5-7
Abbreviations Used in Figures 5-16, 5-17, and 5-18
Abbreviation
124tmb
Ibute
224tmp
23dmb
2m2be
2mhxa
2mpna
3mhxa
acetyl
benz
ebenz
etha
ethyl
isbta
ispna
m/pxy
mcpna
nbuta
nhexa
npnta
propa
prpyl
t2pne
tolu
Compound
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Isobutene/1 -Butene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methyl-2-Butene
2-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylhexane
Acetylene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Ethane
Ethylene
Isobutane
Isopentane
m,p-Xy\ene
Methylcyclopentane
w-Butane
w-Hexane
w-Pentane
Propane
Propylene
trans-2-Pentene
Toluene
5-74
-------
Table 5-8
Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (CAMS5)
(Based on 9 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyr aldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5 -Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
1
0
1
4
0
7
7
0
1
5
2
6
5
Frequency
of
Detections
89%
100%
89%
56%
100%
22%
22%
100%
89%
44%
78%
33%
44%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
ND
1.24
ND
ND
0.07
ND
ND
2.95
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
13.94
13.93
0.22
0.45
2.73
0.33
0.33
14.95
0.46
0.24
3.13
0.39
0.43
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
1.76
4.13
0.13
0.12
0.55
0.00
0.00
4.78
0.12
0.00
0.25
0.01
0.01
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
3.07
5.11
0.12
0.15
0.75
0.05
0.06
6.01
0.16
0.06
0.51
0.10
0.07
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
1.18
4.03
0.08
0.04
0.47
0.01
0.01
5.24
0.10
0.02
0.13
0.03
0.02
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
4.17
3.88
0.07
0.18
0.81
0.11
0.12
3.79
0.13
0.09
0.99
0.14
0.14
Coefficient of
Variation
1.36
0.76
0.57
1.17
1.08
2.05
2.01
0.63
0.84
1.37
1.92
1.40
1.84
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-9
Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Fort Worth, TX (CAMS13)
(Based on 11 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyr aldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5 -Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
6
4
1
11
6
0
4
7
1
11
7
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
45%
64%
91%
0%
45%
100%
64%
36%
91%
0%
36%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
0.72
0.56
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.46
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
2.55
6.35
0.34
0.28
2.03
ND
0.30
4.73
0.23
0.14
0.36
ND
0.11
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
1.16
2.77
0.00
0.10
0.44
0.00
0.00
2.68
0.09
0.00
0.18
0.01
0.01
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
1.41
2.81
0.07
0.11
0.50
0.00
0.10
3.02
0.09
0.03
0.18
0.01
0.03
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
1.29
1.95
0.02
0.04
0.28
0.00
0.02
2.79
0.04
0.01
0.13
0.01
0.01
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.64
2.15
0.11
0.10
0.53
0.00
0.12
1.22
0.08
0.04
0.10
0.00
0.04
Coefficient of
Variation
0.45
0.77
1.51
0.94
1.06
0.00
1.24
0.40
0.88
1.47
0.55
0.00
1.28
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 5-10
Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Dallas, TX (DLTX)
(Based on 9 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyr aldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5 -Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
1
1
1
8
6
0
0
4
1
7
8
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
89%
89%
89%
11%
33%
100%
100%
56%
89%
22%
11%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
0.65
2.40
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.95
0.05
ND
ND
ND
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
2.45
3.55
0.29
0.20
1.38
0.08
0.19
5.93
0.25
0.15
0.29
0.15
0.13
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
1.42
3.15
0.12
0.11
0.39
0.00
0.00
3.29
0.13
0.08
0.16
0.01
0.01
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
1.39
3.11
0.14
0.11
0.46
0.01
0.04
3.55
0.13
0.06
0.16
0.04
0.02
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
1.31
3.08
0.09
0.08
0.26
0.01
0.01
3.37
0.12
0.03
0.11
0.02
0.01
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.52
0.39
0.09
0.05
0.39
0.02
0.07
1.24
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.06
0.04
Coefficient of
Variation
0.37
0.13
0.67
0.47
0.86
1.92
1.51
0.35
0.46
0.94
0.52
1.44
2.13
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
6.0 Monitoring Results for Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
This section summarizes and interprets the total NMOC, SNMOC, and carbonyl
monitoring data collected at the Juarez, Mexico (JUMX), monitoring station during the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program; total NMOC and SNMOC monitoring data from previous
years are also included for the purpose of investigating annual variations.
Figure 6-1 shows the location of the JUMX monitoring station and illustrates land use in
its vicinity. Since the monitoring station is approximately 1 mile from the Rio Grande (the river
that separates Juarez, Mexico, from El Paso, Texas), emissions from motor vehicles and
industrial facilities within both El Paso and Juarez are likely to impact levels of air pollution at
JUMX. Though the monitoring station is on the grounds of a university (Institute Technologico
Monterrey), the surrounding land is used for a wide range of commercial, industrial, and
agricultural purposes. More specifically, several small industrial facilities are located to the
north, west, and southwest of the station; open space and farmland are located to the east and
southeast; and a nearby area that was previously open space is being developed into a
residential neighborhood.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the JUMX station collected
ambient air samples on weekday mornings in August and September, 1998. Overall, SNMOC
samples were collected on 21 days and carbonyl samples on 4 days; every attempted sampling
event was valid. Thus, the completeness for both the SNMOC and carbonyl sampling, defined
as the percentage of attempted samples that are valid, was 100 percent.
The remainder of this section comments on notable trends in the monitoring data
collected at JUMX. Section 6.1 provides detailed analyses of the total NMOC monitoring data,
including comparisons to selected meteorological conditions and evaluations of long-term
trends. Section 6.2 puts the SNMOC monitoring data into perspective by commenting on the
composition of air samples, annual variations in air quality, and ozone formation potential.
Section 6.3 briefly summarizes the four carbonyl sampling events at JUMX, and Section 6.4
6-1
-------
provides an overview of air quality trends observed at JUMX since the 1995 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program.
6.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data
As Section 2.3.2 noted, the SNMOC sampling and analytical method measures
concentrations of total NMOC, in addition to measuring concentrations of 80 organic
compounds. This section summarizes the total NMOC measurements that were made at JUMX
using the SNMOC sampling and analytical method. More specifically, the following discussion
puts the total NMOC monitoring data from JUMX into context by presenting data summary
parameters (Section 6.1.1), associations between total NMOC levels and selected
meteorological parameters (Section 6.1.2), and a review of annual variations in total NMOC
levels (Section 6.1.3).
When reading these sections, it is important to remember that total NMOC consists of a
wide range of organic compounds (e.g., alkanes, olefms, aromatics, oxygenates, and halogenated
hydrocarbons), thus providing a measure of the total air concentration for many different "ozone
precursors." However, total NMOC should not be considered a measure of total levels of air
pollution, since many common air pollutants (e.g., inorganic acids, particulate matter, and
heavier organic compounds) are not a subset of total NMOC.
6.1.1 Data Summary
Using the four data summary parameters that were defined in Section 3.1, Table 6-1
presents a thorough, yet concise, overview of the total NMOC measurements at JUMX during the
summer of 1998. Key findings from the data summary follow:
Prevalence. Total NMOC was measured in every sample collected at JUMX during the
1998 program, and each measured concentration was at least an order of magnitude
greater than the estimated method detection limit of 0.005 ppmC (or 5 ppbC). Thus, the
prevalence of total NMOC at JUMX was 100 percent. With no nondetect observations
in the total NMOC data set, the summary statistics presented in Table 6-1 are believed to
be highly representative of air quality trends at JUMX.
6-2
-------
Concentration range. According to Table 6-1, total NMOC concentrations at JUMX
ranged from 0.173 ppmC to 20.317 ppmC during the 1998 program—a range that was
notably broader than the range observed at every other monitoring station. In fact, the
highest concentration observed at JUMX (20.317 ppmC) is the highest level of total
NMOC that has been measured at any station that participated in the 1995, 1996, 1997,
and 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. On the date the highest concentration
occurred (September 18, 1998), a duplicate sample was collected and was later
analyzed in replicate. The four concentrations measured from these analyses (19.2
ppmC, 23.2 ppmC, 19.0 ppmC, and 19.8 ppmC) were in excellent agreement, thus ruling
out the possibility that the highest concentration at JUMX might have resulted from a
sampling or analytical bias.
Not only was the magnitude of the highest concentration at JUMX considerably higher
than that observed at the other monitoring stations, but the frequency with which elevated
concentrations occurred at JUMX was also considerably higher than that observed at the
other stations. More specifically, total NMOC concentrations exceeded 1.0 ppmC at
JUMX during five sampling events, but they exceeded this level no more than twice at
any of the other stations. The significance of this trend is more apparent when expressed
as frequencies: Total NMOC concentrations exceeded 1.0 ppmC at JUMX in 24 percent
of the sampling events, but exceeded this level at the other stations in no more than
3 percent of the sampling events. Thus, elevated concentrations of total NMOC were
much more common at JUMX than at the other stations that participated in the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. Section 6.2.2 provides information on the
composition of air samples at JUMX on days when total NMOC concentrations
exceeded 1.0 ppmC.
For greater insight into the concentration range at JUMX, Figure 6-2 presents a histogram
of the total NMOC monitoring data for this station during the 1998 program. The figure
indicates that roughly one third of the samples had concentrations in the range
0.1-0.4 ppmC, roughly one third in the range 0.5-0.7 ppmC, and roughly one third
greater than 0.9 ppmC. This distribution suggests that ambient air concentrations of total
NMOC at JUMX during the morning hours on summer days tended to span a wide range
of concentrations, as opposed to being limited to a fairly narrow range, as was observed
at the other monitoring stations (see Sections 5.1.1, 7.1, and 8.1.1).
Central tendency. During the 1998 program, the geometric mean concentration of total
NMOC at JUMX was 0.84 ppmC. Not only was this the highest geometric mean
concentration observed among the six stations that participated in the 1998 program, but
this was the highest geometric mean concentration observed at JUMX since the station
first participated in the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program in 1995.
Not surprisingly, the geometric mean concentration at JUMX was influenced by the
outlier measurement of 20.317 ppmC, as well as by the four other measurements where
-------
total NMOC concentrations exceeded 1.0 ppmC. However, even when the five highest
measurements are excluded from the central tendency calculation, the geometric mean
concentration of total NMOC at JUMX still exceeds the geometric mean levels observed
during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs. Therefore, levels of total NMOC in Juarez
during the summer of 1998, on average, appear to have been higher than they were in
1995, 1996, and 1997. Section 6.1.3 revisits this issue.
Variability. According to Table 6-1, the standard deviation of the total NMOC levels
measured at JUMX was 4.414 ppmC, and the coefficient of variation was 2.14. This
data variability is considerably greater than the variability that was observed at JUMX
in previous monitoring programs. For comparison, the coefficients of variation for total
NMOC measurements at JUMX during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs were all
lower than 1.0. The greater variability during the current program largely results from
the many elevated concentrations measured at JUMX during the summer of 1998.
6.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions
To provide greater insight into the trends and patterns among the total NMOC
concentrations at Juarez, this section compares the measured levels of total NMOC to selected
meteorological conditions. The following analyses consider 3-hour average observations of
relative humidity, precipitation, temperature, wind direction, and wind speed, all of which were
measured between 5:00 and 8:00 a.m. at the El Paso International Airport. Since this airport is
located within 5 miles of the monitoring station, the meteorological data are believed to be
reasonably representative of conditions at the JUMX site. The outlier concentration of
20.317 ppmC was not included in the comparisons to meteorological conditions, because this
unusually high concentration, which was believed to represent an episodic event, tended to bias
the calculations.
To enable readers to compare data trends from the 1998 program to those from earlier
programs, the following analyses of associations between local meteorological conditions and
total NMOC concentrations are presented in a format almost identical to that used for JUMX in
Section 5.2.3.2 of the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report.
6-4
-------
An overview of the comparisons of meteorological conditions to total NMOC levels at
JUMX follows:
Humidity. According to Figure 6-3, concentrations of total NMOC at JUMX, on average,
tended to be higher on mornings with lower relative humidity; the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC
report indicated a similar observation for total NMOC measurements at JUMX. It
should be noted, however, that the difference in concentrations for the two categories
shown in Figure 6-3 is marginal (less than 25 percent) and not statistically significant.
Moreover, no statistically significant trends were observed upon grouping the total
NMOC levels into different ranges of relative humidity observations. Therefore, the
data collected during the 1998 program are not sufficient for determining the association
between relative humidity and levels of total NMOC at JUMX. Analysis of future
monitoring data is needed to characterize data trends between these parameters.
Precipitation. Since no measurable rain was recorded at the El Paso International
Airport on any of the 21 days that SNMOC samples were collected at JUMX, the
monitoring data collected during the 1998 program are not sufficient for evaluating
associations between total NMOC concentrations at JUMX and precipitation.
Temperature. Consistent with findings presented in the 1996 and 1997 reports,
Figure 6-3 shows that total NMOC concentrations measured on relatively warm
mornings at JUMX were, on average, considerably higher than those measured on cooler
mornings. In fact, the average concentration of total NMOC on the 13 mornings when the
temperature exceeded 75 degrees Fahrenheit was more than twice the average
concentration measured on the remaining 7 mornings. However, this concentration
difference, as well as the concentration differences for other ranges of temperatures, was
not statistically significant. Therefore, although the monitoring data certainly imply that
levels of total NMOC at JUMX are higher on warmer mornings, not enough samples
were collected to be certain of this association. Further research is needed to determine
the nature and extent of correlations between temperature and total NMOC
concentrations at JUMX.
Wind Speed. According to Figure 6-3, total NMOC concentrations at JUMX on windy
mornings were, on average, notably lower than those on mornings with light or calm
winds—a trend that was also observed at JUMX during the 1997 program. During the
1998 program, total NMOC concentrations on mornings with wind speeds less than or
equal to 5 miles per hour were more than four times higher than those on windier
mornings; this concentration difference was statistically significant. This general trend
of decreasing levels of air pollution on windier days was observed at all six monitoring
stations that participated in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. A likely
explanation for this trend is the fact that air pollutants disperse more efficiently as wind
speeds increase (USEPA 1995).
6-5
-------
Wind Direction. The scatter plot in Figure 6-4 shows how concentrations of total
NMOC at JUMX varied with wind direction during the 1998 program. Readers should
note that results from two valid sample dates are not displayed in the figure because
winds were either calm or variable while these samples were collected. Moreover, the
outlier concentration of 20.317 ppmC is not shown in the figure, since this data point
appears to reflect unique or "episodic" air quality conditions. Overall, Figure 6-4
clearly shows that, during the morning hours, the wind at El Paso International Airport
most often blew from the north to northeast. However, the figure does not indicate any
noteworthy clustering of elevated concentrations about a particular wind direction. A
similar finding was observed from the data collected at JUMX during the 1997 program:
Wind at El Paso International Airport almost always blew from wind directions
0 degrees to 180 degrees, but total NMOC concentrations did not appear to be notably
higher when winds blew from any specific direction. In short, the total NMOC
monitoring data from the 1997 and 1998 programs suggest that ambient air
concentrations of total NMOC at JUMX are not significantly correlated with the wind
direction observed at the El Paso International Airport. This absence of correlations
might result, to a certain extent, from surface wind patterns at the El Paso International
Airport that differ from those at JUMX.
Though the previous discussion describes apparent associations between total NMOC
concentrations at JUMX and selected meteorological conditions, readers should note that the
analyses presented in this section are only a small subset of the numerous types of graphical,
numerical, and statistical analyses that could be performed on this data set. For greater insight
into subtle trends among the total NMOC monitoring data and meteorological data, researchers
are encouraged to examine these data sets further using more sophisticated analyses, such as
multivariate statistical analyses. Such analyses are not included in the scope of this report.
6.1.3 Annual Variations
The JUMX monitoring station has participated in the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program every year since 1995, thus providing 4 years of monitoring data that characterize
levels of air pollution during the summertime morning hours. To put annual variations in air
quality into perspective, this section describes how average levels of total NMOC and peak
levels of total NMOC have changed at JUMX from year to year. Though the monitoring
6-6
-------
schedules at JUMX varied slightly between the 1995 and 1998 programs1, these differing
schedules are not expected to bias the analysis of annual variations.
An overview of the key findings regarding annual variations in air quality at JUMX
follows:
Changes in average concentrations of total NMOC. Figure 6-5 illustrates how average
levels of total NMOC at JUMX have changed from the summer of 1995 through the
summer of 1998. According to the figure, the average concentrations of total NMOC at
JUMX increased between the 1995 and 1997 programs, but the increases between 1995
and 1996 and between 1996 and 1997 were marginal and not statistically significant. On
the other hand, the total NMOC levels during the 1998 program were, on average, more
than three times higher than the levels observed during the 1995-1997 programs. This
considerable increase, which was statistically significant, largely resulted from an
outlier concentration measured during the 1998 program (20.317 ppmC). However,
even when the outlier concentration is omitted from the analysis, the average
concentration of total NMOC during the 1998 program is still more than twice as high as
the average concentrations measured during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs; this
concentration difference is also statistically significant. Overall, the annual variations
indicate that concentrations of total NMOC at JUMX, on average, were virtually
unchanged between the summers of 1995, 1996, and 1997, but increased considerably in
the summer of 1998.
Changes in peak concentrations of total NMOC. As another indicator of annual
variations in air quality, Figure 6-6 indicates how often total NMOC concentrations at
JUMX exceeded 1.0 ppmC during the 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 programs. The figure
clearly illustrates that the frequency of elevated concentrations of total NMOC
(arbitrarily defined here as exceeding 1.0 ppmC) has increased dramatically at JUMX
over the last four summers. More specifically, during the 1995 and 1996 programs,
concentrations of total NMOC were higher than 1.0 ppmC in roughly 1 out of every 20
samples; during the 1997 and 1998 programs, however, concentrations of total NMOC
were higher than 1.0 ppmC in roughly 1 out of every 5 samples. The reason for this
considerable increase in the frequency of elevated concentrations is not known, but
Section 6.2.2 provides evidence that the increase is probably a result of episodic
releases from emissions sources other than motor vehicles.
More specifically, air samples were collected at JUMX from July 13 to September 28 during the 1995 program, from
June 6 to September 26 during the 1996 program, from July 15 to September 30 during the 1997 program, and from August 25
to September 29 during the 1998 program.
6-7
-------
Overall, the trends shown in Figure 6-5 and 6-6 indicate that not only have average
levels of total NMOC at JUMX increased in recent years, but the frequency of elevated
concentrations of total NMOC has also increased at JUMX over the same time frame. Though
the reasons for the increasing concentrations are not known and warrant further investigation, the
analyses in the remainder of this section provide additional insight into the factors that seem to
contribute to the elevated concentrations of total NMOC measured at JUMX.
6.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data
During the 1998 program, valid SNMOC samples were collected at JUMX on 21 days.
Laboratory analysis of these samples measured ambient air concentrations of 80 different
organic compounds (all hydrocarbons) as well as the concentration of total NMOC. The
remainder of this section uses the data analysis methodology that was described in Section 3 to
put the SNMOC monitoring data from JUMX into perspective: Section 6.2.1 presents a concise
overview of the data; Section 6.2.2 characterizes the composition of the SNMOC samples;
Section 6.2.3 reviews the annual variations in ambient air concentrations for selected SNMOC;
and Section 6.2.4 qualitatively assesses the reactivity of the air mass at JUMX.
6.2.1 Data Summary
Using the four data summary parameters that were defined in Section 3.1, Table 6-2
summarizes the SNMOC measurements made at JUMX during the summer of 1998. A review of
this data summary follows:
Prevalence. According to Table 6-2, 76 of the 80 hydrocarbons identified by the
SNMOC sampling and analytical method were detected in more than half of the samples
collected at JUMX during the 1998 program. In other words, the prevalence for these
76 compounds was higher than 50 percent. Summary statistics for these 76 compounds
are believed to be highly representative of actual air quality trends during the morning
hours of the summer months, since the majority of samples had quantified concentrations
instead of nondetect observations. For the remaining four compounds (1-decene,
2-ethyl-l-butene, 1-heptene, and 1-tridecene), however, the summary statistics might not
be representative of actual air quality trends due to potential biases introduced by the
frequent nondetect observations, which were replaced in the air monitoring database
6-8
-------
with an estimated concentration of one-half the detection limit. The summary statistics
for these four compounds should be interpreted with caution. Overall, the prevalence
data confirm that a wide range of organic compounds is consistently found at detectable
levels in the ambient air at JUMX.
Concentration range. Table 6-2 indicates that the concentration ranges for SNMOC
vary considerably from compound to compound. The highest SNMOC concentrations
were measured for propane (242.48 ppbC), toluene (188.03 ppbC), 2,3,4-
trimethylpentane (113.85 ppbC), cyclohexane (110.41 ppbC), and isopentane (51.10
ppbC). The highest concentrations measured for the 75 other SNMOC were all lower
than 50 ppbC.
Though the concentration range data in Table 6-2 are useful for identifying the
compounds that tend to have the highest concentrations at JUMX, readers should note that
the ranges listed in Table 6-2 only represent ambient air concentrations measured
between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. during the summer. During other times of the day, and
during other times of year, ambient levels of many SNMOC might have reached higher
levels and lower levels than the concentration range data in Table 6-2 indicate.
Central tendency. Like the concentration ranges, the central tendency concentrations in
Table 6-2 varied greatly from one SNMOC to the next. Only five compounds had
geometric mean concentrations greater than 10 ppbC: toluene (41.63 ppbC), propane
(31.51 ppbC), isopentane (21.11 ppbC), 2,3,4-trimethylpentane (18.22 ppbC), and
ethane (11.10 ppbC). Combined, the geometric mean concentrations of these five
compounds account for 42 percent of the geometric mean concentration of the total
identified SNMOC. Therefore, though the ambient air samples collected at JUMX
consistently contained more than 70 organic compounds, a small subset of these
compounds accounted for a large portion of the total NMOC concentrations.
As noted above, readers should remember that the central tendency data for JUMX
characterize air quality during only the morning hours of summer months. Comparisons
of these central tendency data to data based on samples collected during other times of
day and other times of year should be made with caution.
Variability. According to Table 6-2, coefficients of variation for most SNMOC
measured at JUMX were comparable and lower than 1.0. The compounds with the most
variable air monitoring data, as gauged by the coefficient of variation, were 3-methyl-1-
butene (2.78), cyclohexane (2.41), w-dodecane (1.91), and w-tridecane (1.51). The
greater variability for w-dodecane and w-tridecane likely results from the fact that these
compounds contain more than 10 carbon atoms, and the calculation of coefficients of
variation from concentrations measured in units of ppbC inherently gives greater weight
to compounds with more carbon atoms. The greater variability for 3-methyl-1-butene
and cyclohexane appears to be linked to outlier concentrations.
6-9
-------
6.2.2 Composition of Air Samples
As previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have explained, the composition of air pollution at
a given location can provide insight into the probable origins of certain contaminants. As
examples of such analyses, this section examines the relative quantities of "identified" and
"unknown" SNMOC in the air sampled at JUMX as well as the relative quantities of alkanes,
olefins, and aromatic compounds in this air to reveal subtle, yet meaningful, trends among the
monitoring data.
6.2.2.1 "Identified" vs. "Unknown" Compounds
As noted earlier, the SNMOC sampling and analytical method measures the ambient air
concentration of total NMOC and concentrations of 80 hydrocarbons (i.e., the "identified"
compounds). In any given sample, the difference between the total NMOC concentration and the
sum of the 80 concentrations of hydrocarbons is the ambient air concentrations of the many
different organic compounds that the SNMOC method does not identify (i.e., the "unknown"
compounds). These unknown compounds include, but are not limited to, hydrocarbons with
functional groups containing halogens, oxygen, and nitrogen. The relative amounts of identified
compounds and unknown compounds are a useful indicator of the composition of ambient air.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the sum of the concentrations of
the identified compounds at JUMX accounted for, on average, only 16 percent of the total
NMOC concentrations—the lowest composition of identified compounds that has been observed
at any monitoring station that participated in the 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 programs. As
Figure 6-7 shows, the composition of ambient air at JUMX on days with elevated total NMOC
concentrations differed considerably from the composition on days with lower total NMOC
levels. In fact, on days when total NMOC concentrations at JUMX exceeded 1.0 ppmC,
identified compounds accounted for only 11 percent of the total NMOC levels. Therefore, the
higher frequency of elevated air concentrations of total NMOC at JUMX during the 1998
program (see Figure 6-6) appears to be linked to compounds that the SNMOC sampling and
analytical method does not identify, rather than to the 80 hydrocarbons listed in Table 6-2.
6-10
-------
Since motor vehicles emit many of the compounds identified by the SNMOC analytical method,
the presence of a large portion of unknown compounds on days with elevated total NMOC
concentrations suggests that emissions sources other than motor vehicles probably contributed to
the highest total NMOC concentrations measured at JUMX. Section 6.3 comments further on the
unknown compounds at JUMX.
6.2.2.2 Alkanes, Olefins, and Aromatic Compounds
The relative amounts of alkanes, olefms, and aromatic compounds in ambient air have
been used to characterize the reactivity and sources of pollution within airsheds. As Table 3-1
shows, alkanes are generally less reactive in ambient air than olefms, and aromatic compounds
exhibit a relatively wide range of reactivities. Based on this information, air samples with
relatively high concentrations of reactive compounds (such as olefms) are likely to characterize
"newer" air masses (i.e., air masses near the predominant emissions sources), and air samples
with relatively low concentrations of reactive compounds are likely to characterize "older" air
masses (e.g., those influenced by long-range transport).
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, alkanes, olefms, and aromatics
accounted for 63 percent, 17 percent, and 20 percent, respectively, of the total concentration of
identified compounds at JUMX. This composition is virtually identical to that presented in the
1997 report for JUMX: 63 percent alkanes, 24 percent olefms, and 13 percent aromatics.
Though the relative amounts of alkanes were virtually unchanged between the 1997 and 1998
programs, the relative amounts of olefms decreased and the relative amounts of aromatics
increased. The changing amounts of olefms and aromatics appears to be largely due to
decreasing levels of ethylene and increasing levels of toluene—a trend that is illustrated in the
following section. The factors that caused the composition of the air mass at JUMX to change
slightly between the summer of 1997 and the summer of 1998, however, are not known.
Note: The composition data presented for JUMX in the 1996 NMOC/SNMOC report
(40percent alkanes, 26percent olefins, and 34percent aromatics) are considerably
6-11
-------
different from the composition data presented above. This difference results almost
entirely from differences in computational approaches: the composition presented in
the 1996 report is based on concentration data in units ofppbC, and the compositions
presented in the 1997 report and in this report are based on concentrations in units of
ppbv.
6.2.3 Annual Variations
The JUMX monitoring station has collected SNMOC samples in four consecutive
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs, thus allowing an analysis of long-term trends in air
quality. For an overview of these trends, Figure 6-8 depicts annual variations for the 14
SNMOC that had the highest concentrations. Though annual average concentrations for the
compounds shown in Figure 6-8 clearly changed, to a certain extent, from year to year, none of
the compounds exhibited steady upward or downward trends over the past 4 years of monitoring
at JUMX.
The average concentration during the 1998 program for every compound shown in
Figure 6-8 (except for isopentane, toluene, and 2,3,4-trimethylpentane) was lower than that
measured in the previous year. In fact, for some compounds (benzene, ethylene, isobutane,
w-pentane, and m,/?-xylene), the average concentration during the 1998 program was the lowest
that has been observed at JUMX over the last four summers. However, the exact reasons for
observing these lower levels during the summer of 1998 are not known.
For the three compounds—isopentane, toluene, and 2,3,4-trimethylpentane—that had
higher concentrations at JUMX during the summer of 1998 compared to those from earlier years,
statistical analyses show that, with one exception, the concentration differences between the
1998 and earlier programs are all statistically significant.2 Thus, the increasing air
concentrations for these compounds do not appear to be anomalous. In the case of isopentane,
The difference between the average concentration of toluene during the 1998 program (46.46 ppbC) and during the
1996 program (41.55 ppbC) was not found to be statistically significant.
6-12
-------
the magnitude of the increase from the 1997 to 1998 program is 40 percent, which is moderate
when compared to the magnitude of the increases over the same time frame for toluene (118
percent) and for 2,3,4-trimethylpentane (1,040 percent). A review of local emissions
inventories, if available, is needed to determine the reasons why concentrations increased for
these hydrocarbons but decreased for the others. Moreover, additional monitoring at this
location might help determine whether the increasing concentrations for these compounds are
part of a continuing trend or whether they are merely fluctuations that typically occur over multi-
year cycles.
6.2.4 Reactivity of the Air Mass
This section assesses the chemical reactivity of the individual SNMOC measured in the
air mass at JUMX. Because photochemical reactions involving hydrocarbons contribute to
ozone formation, the relative reactivities of SNMOC are an important consideration for ozone
control strategies. As one method for evaluating each compound's reactivity, or ozone
formation potential, this report uses an "ozone index," or a reactivity-weighted concentration,
defined as the product of a compound's maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) (see Section 3.4)
and its geometric mean ambient air concentration.
Figure 6-9 presents the ozone indices for the 20 SNMOC with highest geometric mean
concentrations at JUMX, excluding compounds for which MIRs are not readily available. The
figure, which lists compounds in order of decreasing concentration, clearly illustrates that
compounds with the highest potential for forming ozone at JUMX (e.g., toluene, m,p-xy\ene, and
ethylene) are not necessarily the compounds with the highest geometric mean concentration.
This analysis of chemical reactivity suggests that pollution control strategies aimed at reducing
emissions of the compounds with the highest concentration (e.g., toluene, propane, and
isopentane) might not be as effective at reducing local ozone concentrations as strategies aimed
at reducing emissions of compounds with the highest ozone indices. However, since this
analysis is based on one researcher's assessment of chemical reactivity (Carter, 1994),
environmental agencies are encouraged to perform additional analyses of chemical reactivity,
6-13
-------
possibly through the use of photochemical modeling, to confirm the findings reported in this
section.
6.3 Carbonyl Monitoring Data
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the JUMX station collected
carbonyl samples on four days, all in the month of September. Though these four sampling
events clearly do not provide an extensive account of ambient air concentrations at JUMX
throughout the summer of 1998, they are useful for providing insight into airborne levels of
16 organic compounds that the SNMOC sampling and analytical method cannot identify. Since
three of the carbonyl samples were collected on days with elevated total NMOC concentrations
(levels greater than 1.0 ppmC), the carbonyl monitoring data are particularly useful for
characterizing the unusually high levels of air pollution measured at JUMX on certain days of the
1998 program. The following discussion first summarizes the 1998 carbonyl monitoring data
for JUMX, then comments specifically on carbonyl levels on sampling days with elevated total
NMOC concentrations.
Using the four data summary parameters that were defined in Section 3.1, Table 6-4
presents a thorough, yet concise, overview of the four carbonyl sampling results from JUMX
during the summer of 1998. Key findings follow:
Prevalence. As Table 6-4 shows, 12 of the 16 compounds identified by the carbonyl
sampling and analytical method were detected in at least 75 percent of the samples
collected in Juarez during the 1998 program. Summary statistics for these 12 compounds
are expected to accurately represent the actual carbonyl levels on the 4 sampling days,
since few data points (or no data points) were replaced with concentrations of one-half
the detection limit. Only crotonaldehyde and tolualdehydes were detected less
frequently. These compounds' summary statistics are essentially meaningless, since both
crotonaldehyde and the tolualdehyde isomers were never detected at JUMX during the
1998 program.
Concentration range. Of the 16 compounds identified by the carbonyl sampling and
analytical method, acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde had the broadest ranges of
measured concentrations. These compounds also had the highest concentrations of the
6-14
-------
16 carbonyls; the other carbonyls never had concentrations greater than 1.0 ppbv at
JUMX. Though these general trends were observed at the other NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring stations that collected carbonyl samples, readers are encouraged to interpret
the carbonyl concentration range data in proper context. For example, with studies
reporting that ambient levels of many carbonyls peak during the early afternoon hours
(Brimblecombe 1996) and not during the sampling times for this program (between
6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.), the concentration ranges shown in Table 6-4 are likely not to
be representative of the ranges observed for other times of day. In addition, since
carbonyl sampling was conducted infrequently at JUMX during the 1998 program,
ambient levels of carbonyls at JUMX almost certainly rose to higher levels and fell to
lower levels during the summer of 1998 than the concentration range data indicate.
Central tendency. Table 6-4 indicates that most carbonyls had central tendency
concentrations lower than 0.5 ppbv. As exceptions, the geometric mean concentrations
for acetaldehyde (1.46 ppbv), acetone (2.93 ppbv), and formaldehyde (2.51 ppbv) all
were greater than this level. Moreover, the geometric mean concentrations of these three
compounds, combined, accounted for nearly 85 percent of the total concentration of all
16 carbonyls at JUMX—a trend that has been observed in other extensive ambient air
monitoring programs in urban centers (ERG 1999).
Variability. As Table 6-2 indicates, the coefficients of variation for the 16 carbonyls
measured at JUMX were less than 0.7 and were generally comparable in magnitude.
The relatively low coefficients of variation suggest that carbonyls are consistently found
in the Juarez ambient air during the morning hours, regardless of changing wind
directions. However, results from more extensive sampling efforts must be evaluated to
confirm this hypothesis.
As noted earlier, three of the four carbonyl sampling events occurred on days when total
NMOC concentrations at JUMX exceeded 1.0 ppmC. Careful examination of the monitoring
data reveals, however, that the 16 compounds identified by the carbonyl sampling and analytical
method accounted for only a very small portion of the elevated total NMOC levels at JUMX.
For example, for the sampling event on September 9, 1998, the ambient air concentration of total
NMOC was 4.857 ppmC, of which 4.355 ppmC were "unknown" compounds. On the same
date, carbonyl sampling results indicated that the ambient air concentration of the 16 carbonyls
combined was 27.98 ppbC—an amount that is less than 1 percent of the concentration of the
unknown compounds. The sampling events on September 22, 1998, and on September 29, 1998,
had similar results. Overall, the coincidental carbonyl and SNMOC sampling clearly indicate
6-15
-------
that the unusually high levels of total NMOC measured at JUMX during the summer of 1998
were not the result of elevated concentrations of the 16 carbonyls considered in this program.
6.4 Chapter Summary
The 1998 NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data collected at JUMX thoroughly characterize
levels of air pollution in one Juarez location during the summertime morning hours. The
monitoring data indicate that levels of total NMOC at JUMX were, on average, considerably
higher than those observed in previous years, as was the frequency with which total NMOC
concentrations exceeded 1.0 ppmC. The SNMOC and carbonyl sampling results strongly
suggest that motor vehicle emissions were not the primary cause of the elevated levels of total
NMOC at JUMX. The factors contributing to these elevated concentrations might be identified
through a review of local emissions inventories, if available, or through ongoing sampling
efforts that consider a wider range of compounds.
The daily SNMOC measurements allowed for a detailed analysis of associations
between selected meteorological parameters and levels of air pollution. This analysis found no
statistically significant trends between total NMOC concentrations at JUMX and concurrent
observations of humidity, temperature, and wind direction at the El Paso International Airport.
Wind speed, on the other hand, had a statistically significant association with total NMOC
levels: Concentrations of total NMOC were considerably lower on windier days, and higher
when winds were calm or light. This trend was also observed at JUMX during the 1997
program.
The SNMOC measurements provided insight into the chemical composition of ambient
air at JUMX. These measurements found that "unknown" compounds (i.e., compounds that the
SNMOC sampling and analytical method does not identify) accounted for nearly 90 percent of
the airborne organic compounds on days when total NMOC concentrations exceeded 1.0 ppmC.
The measurements also found that, excluding the days with elevated total NMOC levels, the
composition of alkanes, olefins, and aromatics in the ambient air at JUMX were not notably
different from the composition observed during the 1997 program. Analysis of the chemical
6-16
-------
reactivity of the air mass at JUMX confirmed a finding of the 1996 NMOC/SNMOC report: The
compounds with the greatest potential for forming ozone are not always the compounds with the
highest ambient air concentration.
As noted several times in this report, the analyses of ambient air monitoring data
presented in this section are only a small subset of the many different numerical and statistical
analyses that could be performed. Therefore, though this section provides an extensive and
meaningful review of levels of air pollution at JUMX, researchers are encouraged to supplement
this review with additional analyses on the large volume of air monitoring data collected at this
station.
6-17
-------
Figure 6-1
Juarez, Mexico (JUMX), Monitoring Station
VALLE DE SENECA %
LAS PALMAS
PARQLI INDUSTRIAL BERMUDEZ \
BERMUPEZ INDUSTRIAL PARK
Bosoms DEI
LUTES BALDI
Vacant Lots
JUMX
I LOTESBALDIOS
Vacant Lots
Source: SGD 1996.
6-18
-------
Figure 6-2
Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at JUMX
Oi
vo
6
0)
c 5
re
•c
0)
S 4
_c
jrvations
Co
Number of Obs<
->• I\J
0
5 5
2 2
1
0
<=0.1
0
4
2
0 0
>0.1 and >0.2and >0.3and >0.4and >0.5and >0.6and >0.7and >0.8and >0.9and >1.0
<=0.2 <=0.3 <=0.4 <=0.5 <=0.6 <=0.7 <=0.8 <=0.9 <=1.0
Concentration Range (ppmC)
-------
Figure 6-3
Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at JUMX to Selected Meteorological Parameters
1 5
M- O
0 c , ,
c 5. 1'2
g1 ? o °-9
|!|o.s
< O z
O TO ".3
o "5
I— 00
2 0
M- O
0 E
c O. 1 5
0) 0 0.
O) *- "~"
TO TO 0
0) C 2
< 8 1
c — 0.5
5|
I— 00
2 5
„_ (j
0 E 20
c Q.
0) 0 0.
n> *^ — ^15
TO TO 0
1 = 1 10
< 8 1
c — n _
O TO 0.5
o "5
I— 00
NMOC Concentration v
<=55
Relative Humidit
NMOC Concentration vs.
<=75
Temperature Range
NMOC Concentration vs.
<=5
Wind Spe
s. Humidity
>55
/ (percent range)
Temperature
>75
[degrees Fahrenheit)
Wind Speed
>5
ed (mph)
6-20
-------
Figure 6-4
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at JUMX to Wind Direction
to
-. 5
O
Q.
O
1
+J
0)
O
c
O
O
O
O
re
60
120 180
240
300
360
Wind Direction (degrees)
Notes: Wind direction is the direction from which wind blows. Observations with calm or variable winds are not included in this figure. As Section 6.1.2 notes, the outlier
concentration of 20.317 ppmC was not included in this analysis. For reference, the wind direction on the morning of this outlier concentration was 90 degrees.
-------
Figure 6-5
Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at JUMX
to
to
0.0
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Note: The "error bars" in the graph indicate the 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations. All valid sampling results (including suspected data outliers)
are considered in this figure.
-------
Figure 6-6
Annual Variations in the Frequency of Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC at JUMX
25 0% T
O
O
S i \ 20 0%
E E
5 Q.
c T~
0) "C
^ \ *\ n%
o
0)
Q.
n n%
20.0%
.7%
1995
6.5%
23.8%
1996 1997 1998
Year
to
-------
Figure 6-7
Contribution of "Identified" and "Unknown" Compounds to
Total NMOC Concentrations at JUMX
Breakdown of Total NMOC on Days when
Concentrations Exceeded 1.0 ppmC
"Unknown"
Com pounds
89%
"Identified"
Com pounds
11%
Breakdown of Total NMOC on Days when
Concentrations Were Less Than 1.0 ppmC
"Unknown"
Com pounds
43%
"Identified"
Com pounds
57%
6-24
-------
Figure 6-8 (Page 1 of 4)
Annual Variations in Concentrations of Selected SNMOC at JUMX
35.
Acetylene and Ethane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
_ 10-°
o
.Q
Q. 8.0
a) "I"
O) = 6.0
TO .2
0) TO , -
> i 4.0
< C
Q)
O 2.0
c
O
o
0.0
Benzene
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
n-Butane
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Note: Acetylene and ethane are presented in the same graph because the sampling and analytical method used during the
1996 program could not differentiate these compounds.
Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
6-25
-------
Figure 6-8 (Page 2 of 4)
Annual Variations in Concentrations of Selected SNMOC at JUMX
0)
O)
ro
o
.Q
Q.
Q.
C
O
15.0
12.0
0) TO
.5 ~
< C
Q)
O
C
o
o
0.0
Ethylene
1995
1998
Isobutane
1995
1998
32.0
Isopentane
1995
1998
Note: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
6-26
-------
Figure 6-8 (Page 3 of 4)
Annual Variations in Concentrations of Selected SNMOC at JUMX
15.0
1995
n-Pentane
1998
150.0
O
1995
Propane
1998
25.0
O
0. 20.0
O) = 15.0
TO .9.
g | 10.0
< c
a)
£ 5.0
O
° 0.0
1995
Propylene
1996 1997
Year
1998
Note: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
6-27
-------
Figure 6-8 (Page 4 of 4)
Annual Variations in Concentrations of Selected SNMOC at JUMX
72.0
Toluene
1995
1998
— 40.0
O
.Q
0.
0- 30.0
TO °
•- = 20.0
0) TO
> J=
0) 10.0
o
c
o
O 0.0
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
1995
1996 1997
Year
1998
iT7,p-Xylene
1995
1998
Note: Every graph is shown on a different scale.
The "error bars" indicate 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
6-28
-------
Figure 6-9
Ozone Indices for the 20 SNMOC with Highest Geometric Mean Concentration at JUMX
45.0
Geometric Mean Concentration
Ozone Index
to
VO
35
30
25
20
to
o
'•5
o
-------
Table 6-1
Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at JUMX
Category
Prevalence
Concentration
Range
Central Tendency
Variability
Parameter
Number of valid sampling days
Number of nondetects
Frequency of detection
Lowest concentration (ppmC)
25th percentile concentration (ppmC)
50th percentile concentration (ppmC)
75th percentile concentration (ppmC)
Highest concentration (ppmC)
Median concentration (ppmC)
Arithmetic mean concentration (ppmC)
Geometric mean concentration (ppmC)
Standard deviation (ppmC)
Coefficient of variation
Monitoring Station JUMX
21
0
100%
0.173
0.531
0.633
0.944
20.317
0.633
2.060
0.845
4.414
2.14
6-30
-------
Table 6-2
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 21 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
w-Butane
c/s-2-Butene
fraws-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
w-Decane
1-Decene
m-Diethylbenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
w-Dodecane
Prevalence of
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.14
1.39
0.10
2.25
0.33
0.22
0.72
0.31
0.11
0.46
ND
0.26
0.30
0.43
0.71
0.80
0.55
0.15
Highest
(ppbC)
17.42
14.34
1.47
27.41
1.39
1.32
110.41
2.33
1.04
4.20
ND
0.86
0.85
1.62
9.00
7.11
4.61
9.72
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
5.28
4.88
0.55
10.11
0.62
0.43
2.08
0.83
0.41
1.46
0.14
0.46
0.49
0.79
2.42
2.49
1.63
0.43
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
6.36
5.93
0.64
12.00
0.70
0.59
10.78
0.96
0.43
1.66
0.14
0.47
0.50
0.88
2.67
3.04
1.99
1.14
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
5.08
4.85
0.49
9.41
0.63
0.52
3.09
0.84
0.36
1.43
0.14
0.45
0.48
0.82
2.19
2.60
1.67
0.54
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
4.12
3.69
0.43
7.74
0.34
0.32
26.00
0.52
0.25
0.95
0.00
0.13
0.14
0.34
1.90
1.71
1.18
2.18
Coefficient of
Variation
0.65
0.62
0.67
0.65
0.49
0.54
2.41
0.54
0.58
0.57
0.00
0.28
0.28
0.38
0.71
0.56
0.59
1.91
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size, data for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they may not be representative of SNMOC concentrations in the morning
hours throughout the summer.
-------
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 21 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
1-Dodecene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
w-Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
?ra«s-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Prevalence of
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
1
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
95%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
19%
100%
95%
90%
95%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
3.43
1.11
ND
1.28
0.71
0.36
0.53
0.50
ND
1.03
ND
ND
ND
0.92
1.18
8.83
0.34
Highest
(ppbC)
1.07
31.80
7.34
ND
13.87
5.20
1.97
2.78
5.73
0.94
12.20
0.56
1.10
1.01
11.73
4.37
51.10
1.21
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.32
11.32
3.87
0.12
4.89
2.17
0.86
1.29
2.13
0.26
4.09
0.21
0.17
0.22
4.07
2.47
18.42
0.72
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.37
13.07
3.90
0.12
6.05
2.28
0.93
1.31
2.22
0.36
4.88
0.25
0.28
0.30
4.35
2.68
24.17
0.71
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.31
11.10
3.46
0.12
5.02
2.01
0.84
1.20
1.89
0.31
3.84
0.21
0.19
0.21
3.53
2.51
21.11
0.67
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.23
7.76
1.79
0.00
3.56
1.15
0.41
0.57
1.27
0.22
3.33
0.14
0.25
0.26
2.71
0.95
13.11
0.24
Coefficient of
Variation
0.63
0.59
0.46
0.00
0.59
0.51
0.45
0.43
0.57
0.63
0.68
0.55
0.91
0.87
0.62
0.35
0.54
0.34
to
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size, data for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they may not be representative of SNMOC concentrations in the morning
hours throughout the summer.
-------
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 21 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
«-Octane
1-Octene
Prevalence of
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10
0
0
0
1
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
90%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
52%
100%
100%
100%
95%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.27
0.13
0.14
ND
0.58
0.62
0.46
0.49
0.93
0.64
1.22
0.91
ND
ND
0.40
0.87
0.48
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
0.65
2.72
4.32
26.14
4.21
7.94
2.03
2.26
5.32
6.07
14.64
9.29
0.93
0.21
2.06
11.49
2.26
0.46
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.40
0.88
0.84
0.62
1.66
2.31
1.14
1.17
2.38
2.69
4.51
3.05
0.27
0.12
0.91
2.44
1.09
0.18
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.43
1.08
1.24
2.01
1.83
2.94
1.22
1.27
2.39
2.64
5.59
3.75
0.33
0.11
1.09
3.19
1.20
0.21
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.42
0.81
0.78
0.51
1.53
2.38
1.15
1.20
2.13
2.28
4.57
3.09
0.25
0.11
0.99
2.65
1.12
0.19
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.11
0.79
1.21
5.58
1.09
1.90
0.41
0.45
1.17
1.40
3.55
2.29
0.23
0.03
0.49
2.49
0.47
0.11
Coefficient of
Variation
0.25
0.73
0.97
2.78
0.59
0.65
0.33
0.35
0.49
0.53
0.63
0.61
0.70
0.29
0.45
0.78
0.39
0.50
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size, data for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they may not be representative of SNMOC concentrations in the morning
hours throughout the summer.
-------
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 21 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
trans -2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
«-Propylbenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
«-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1,2, 3 -Trimethy Ibenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
2,2, 3 -Trimethy Ipentane
Prevalence of
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
1
16
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
100%
100%
100%
100%
71%
100%
100%
95%
24%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.68
0.29
0.28
0.37
ND
0.10
7.34
0.39
0.68
ND
1.48
11.30
ND
ND
0.26
1.00
0.57
0.57
Highest
(ppbC)
21.58
1.84
1.99
3.73
2.12
3.32
242.48
1.76
8.76
0.51
9.50
188.03
1.42
0.14
2.02
8.53
3.29
7.28
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
6.32
0.76
0.73
1.00
0.37
1.23
28.64
0.86
2.84
0.22
3.53
38.18
0.11
0.14
0.77
3.17
1.68
1.83
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
8.06
0.82
0.83
1.34
0.58
1.35
51.09
0.86
3.48
0.24
4.04
48.46
0.24
0.13
0.84
3.60
1.69
2.16
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
6.37
0.71
0.71
1.07
0.41
1.08
31.51
0.80
2.81
0.21
3.56
41.63
0.14
0.12
0.74
3.14
1.55
1.90
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
5.44
0.46
0.50
0.94
0.53
0.81
59.79
0.34
2.23
0.12
2.17
36.08
0.37
0.03
0.43
1.90
0.67
1.38
Coefficient of
Variation
0.68
0.56
0.60
0.71
0.93
0.60
1.17
0.39
0.64
0.49
0.54
0.74
1.51
0.20
0.52
0.53
0.40
0.64
a\
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size, data for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they may not be representative of SNMOC concentrations in the morning
hours throughout the summer.
-------
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 21 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
Prevalence of
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
76%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
1.06
6.03
0.47
ND
2.83
1.52
172.92
87.60
Highest
(ppbC)
9.44
113.85
5.06
0.28
22.71
10.89
20,317.32
552.87
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
3.62
17.03
1.24
0.14
9.80
5.33
633.12
332.57
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
4.21
23.90
1.51
0.15
10.75
5.41
2,060.40
324.89
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
3.52
18.22
1.23
0.13
9.29
4.97
844.76
294.26
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.41
24.69
1.17
0.06
5.59
2.18
4,414.40
136.34
Coefficient of
Variation
0.57
1.03
0.77
0.40
0.52
0.40
2.14
0.42
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size, data for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they may not be representative of SNMOC concentrations in the morning
hours throughout the summer.
-------
Table 6-3
Abbreviations Used in Figure 6-9
Abbreviation
tolu
propa
ispna
234tmp
etha
nbuta
m/pxy
npnta
acetyl
ethyl
benz
2mpna
nhexa
isbta
224tmp
ebenz
124tmb
3mpna
cyhex
prpyl
Compound
Toluene
Propane
Isopentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Ethane
w-Butane
m,/>-Xylene
w-Pentane
Acetylene
Ethylene
Benzene
2-Methylpentane
w-Hexane
Isobutane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
Ethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
3-Methylpentane
Cyclohexane
Propylene
Note: Abbreviations in this table are presented in the same order as in Figure 6-9 (i.e., in the order of compounds with
decreasing concentration at JUMX).
6-36
-------
Table 6-4
Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Juarez, Mexico (JUMX)
(Based on 4 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyraldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Compound in
Ambient Air
Number
of Non-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
1
1
0
4
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
75%
100%
75%
75%
100%
0%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
1.07
1.62
0.06
0.10
0.31
ND
ND
2.09
ND
ND
0.21
ND
0.06
Highest
(ppbv)
2.18
5.01
0.20
0.17
0.57
ND
0.23
3.24
0.07
0.11
0.29
ND
0.30
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
1.39
3.02
0.10
0.16
0.46
0.00
0.21
2.42
0.06
0.09
0.23
0.01
0.28
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
1.51
3.17
0.12
0.15
0.45
0.00
0.16
2.54
0.05
0.07
0.24
0.01
0.23
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
1.46
2.93
0.10
0.15
0.44
0.00
0.08
2.51
0.03
0.04
0.24
0.01
0.19
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.47
1.39
0.06
0.03
0.11
0.00
0.11
0.53
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.00
0.12
Coefficient of
Variation
0.31
0.44
0.55
0.21
0.24
0.00
0.66
0.21
0.60
0.64
0.15
0.00
0.51
ND = nondetect
Note: Due to the limited sample size (only 4 days with valid samples), the summary statistics for all compounds should be interpreted with caution, since they might not be
representative of carbonyl concentrations in the morning hours throughout the summer.
-------
7.0 Monitoring Results for Long Island, New York (LINY)
This section summarizes and interprets the total NMOC monitoring data collected at the
Long Island, NY (LINY), monitoring station during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program. This section also evaluates total NMOC data from previous years for the purpose of
investigating annual variations. As Table 2-1 noted, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl data were not
collected at this location.
The map in Figure 7-1 indicates the location of the LINY monitoring station and land use in
its vicinity. Located on a golf course in a suburban area, the monitoring station is surrounded by
open space and mostly single-story buildings. New York City is approximately 15 miles west of
the station. Emissions from many different sources impact the ambient levels of total NMOC at
LINY. These sources likely include three heavily traveled roads and many other roads that pass
within 1 mile of the station and numerous industrial facilities located in the area. Transport of
emissions from the densely populated New York City area also affects air quality at LINY.
During the 1998 program, total NMOC samples were attempted on 84 days; 81 of these
samples generated valid results, and 3 of the samples were voided. The data completeness, which
is defined as the percentage of attempted samples that are valid, was therefore 96 percent. The
high completeness figure suggests that the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program was
efficiently managed at LINY.
The remainder of this section provides a summary of the 1998 total NMOC monitoring data
for LINY (Section 7.1), compares the measured concentrations to meteorological parameters
(Section 7.2), characterizes how total NMOC concentrations have changed at this station since
1990 (Section 7.3), and briefly summarizes the key findings for LINY (Section 7.4).
7.1 Data Summary
Using the four data summary parameters defined in Section 3.1, Table 7-1 presents an
overview of the total NMOC monitoring data collected in the summer of 1998 at LINY. When
7-1
-------
reviewing these data, it is important to remember that total NMOC includes a wide range of
organic compounds (e.g., alkanes, olefins, aromatics, oxygenates, halogenated hydrocarbons), thus
providing a composite measure of the air pollution that is known to affect ozone formation
processes. Since total NMOC does not include many pollutants typically found in urban ambient
air, such as inorganic acids, particulate matter, and heavier organic compounds, the total NMOC
concentrations should not be considered the only measure of overall levels of air pollution.
An overview of the data summary presented in Table 7-1 follows:
Prevalence. In every sample collected at LINY during the 1998 program, total NMOC
was measured at levels at least an order of magnitude higher than the estimated method
detection limit, 0.005 ppmC (or 5 ppbC). The prevalence of total NMOC was therefore
100 percent, and none of the air quality measurements collected at LINY were affected by
nondetect observations. Due to the high prevalence, completeness, and measurement
precision, the summary statistics presented in Table 7-1 are believed to represent air
quality at LINY accurately.
Concentration range. According to Table 7-1, total NMOC concentrations at LINY
during the morning hours of the summer of 1998 ranged from 0.067 ppmC to 0.643 ppmC.
The quartile concentrations listed in Table 7-1 indicate that three-fourths of the total
NMOC concentrations were lower than 0.300 ppmC. Figure 7-2, which presents the
distribution of total NMOC concentrations measured at LINY, offers a better visual
perspective on the range of concentrations. The data presented in Figure 7-2 indicate that
90 percent of the total NMOC levels at LINY were lower than 0.400 ppmC. Figure 7-2
also illustrates that none of the total NMOC concentrations at LINY appeared to be
outliers. (Sections 6 and 8 present examples of outlier concentrations of total NMOC.)
Not shown in either Table 7-1 or Figure 7-2 is an apparent association between elevated
total NMOC concentrations at LINY and elevated total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ,
which is located approximately 20 miles west of the LINY station. More specifically, the
dates on which two of the three highest total NMOC concentrations were measured at
LINY (June 25 and September 25) are the same as the dates on which the nearby NWNJ
monitoring station measured its two highest total NMOC concentrations. The coincidence
of these dates suggests that certain regional phenomena contribute to the highest levels of
total NMOC measured in the Newark-New York City metropolitan area. These
phenomena might include unique meteorological conditions or enhanced long-range
transport of air pollution from other areas. The associations between selected
meteorological conditions and total NMOC concentrations are addressed in Section 7.2.
7-2
-------
Central tendency. As Table 7-1 shows, the geometric mean concentration of total NMOC
at LINY during the 1998 program was 0.195 ppmC—the lowest geometric mean
concentration that has been observed at LINY since this monitoring station first started
collecting total NMOC samples in 1990. Section 7.3, which evaluates annual variations in
air quality at LINY, shows that the total NMOC levels observed during the 1998 program
continue a statistically significant downward trend in average total NMOC concentration.
In addition to evaluating the program-average central tendency concentrations, monthly-
average central tendencies were calculated and evaluated. During the 1998 program, the
total NMOC concentrations were, on average, higher during the morning hours of
September than during the morning hours of June, July, or August. However, none of these
concentration differences were found to be statistically significant.
Variability. As Table 7-1 shows, the standard deviation of total NMOC concentrations
during the 1998 program was 0.137 ppmC, which is 60 percent of the arithmetic mean
concentration. This finding is notably consistent with the coefficients of variation
observed at LINY in the past three summers. More specifically, the coefficient of variation
for total NMOC concentrations was 0.62 in 1995, 0.67 in 1996, 0.64 in 1997, and 0.60 in
1998. This similarity suggests that the variability in total NMOC levels at LINY does not
change considerably from year to year, even though the average concentration does (see
Section 7.3).
7.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions
To provide greater insight into the trends and patterns among the total NMOC
concentrations at LINY, the following discussion identifies associations between levels of total
NMOC and selected meteorological parameters. This analysis considers 3-hour average
observations of relative humidity, precipitation, temperature, wind direction, and wind speed, all
of which were measured between 7:00 and 10:00 a.m. at nearby John F. Kennedy International
Airport. Due to the close proximity of this meteorological station to the LINY monitoring station,
the meteorological data are believed to represent typical conditions at the LINY site.
To facilitate comparison of data trends from the 1998 program to those identified
previously, the following analyses of meteorological conditions are presented in a format almost
identical to that used in Section 4.2.1.1 of the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report. As a notable
improvement, however, the analyses in this report differentiate the data trends that were found to
7-3
-------
be statistically significant from those that were not. The following discussion puts the associations
between total NMOC at LINY and local meteorological conditions into perspective:
Humidity. The graph in Figure 7-3 shows that, during the summer of 1998, levels of total
NMOC at LINY tended to be lower on mornings when the relative humidity was high.
However, the concentration differences shown in the figure are marginal, and none of them
are statistically significant. In short, total NMOC levels at LINY were observed to be
lower, on average, on the more humid mornings, but the association between humidity and
total NMOC concentrations was found to be relatively weak and possibly anomalous.
This general finding is notably different from that reported in the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC
report. During the summer of 1997, total NMOC concentrations at LINY on mornings
when the relative humidity was less than 60 percent were, on average, nearly 1.5 times
higher than NMOC concentrations on mornings when relative humidity was greater than or
equal to 60 percent. The different findings between the 1997 and 1998 programs highlight
an inherent difficulty with assessing and understanding the impacts of local meteorological
conditions on air quality: Since so many different factors influence levels of air pollution,
a single factor's effect on air quality might be masked in years when other conditions
(e.g., temperature or precipitation) have unusually high or low values. As a result,
researchers are encouraged to conduct multivariate statistical analyses on the total NMOC
monitoring data to understand how different combinations of conditions affect local air
quality. Such analyses, however, are not included in the scope of this project.
Precipitation. Measurable rain was observed at John F. Kennedy International Airport
during 5 of the 81 valid sampling events at the LINY station. The average concentration of
total NMOC for the 5 days with measurable precipitation was 0.111 ppmC, and the
average concentration for all other days was 0.237 ppmC. In short, total NMOC
concentrations during hours with measurable precipitation were, on average, less than half
of the total NMOC concentrations on other days; this difference in concentrations was
found to be statistically significant. This general trend—total NMOC levels being lower
on rainy days—not only is consistent with the data trends of the 1997 program, but is also
consistent with "wet deposition" algorithms in EPA-approved dispersion models
(USEPA 1995). These algorithms indicate that precipitation removes portions of gases
and particles from ambient air.
Temperature. Figure 7-3 shows that, during the 1998 program, total NMOC
concentrations at LINY were generally higher on warmer mornings. More specifically,
average levels of total NMOC on mornings when temperatures exceed 80°F were roughly
50 percent higher than levels on cooler mornings; this difference in concentrations was
statistically significant. Though this trend of higher concentrations of total NMOC on
warmer mornings was also observed during the 1997 program, no such trend was observed
7-4
-------
during the summer of 1996 (i.e., concentrations of total NMOC were completely uncorrelated with
temperature). Continued review of ambient air monitoring data and meteorological data can
confirm the existence of a relationship between total NMOC and temperature.
• Wind Speed. According to Figure 7-3, total NMOC concentrations at LINY were, on
average, lower on windier mornings than they were on mornings with light or no winds.
The roughly 15 percent difference between NMOC concentrations on the windiest days
(wind speeds greater than or equal to 14 mph) and concentrations on the moderately windy
days (wind speeds greater than or equal to 9 mph, but less than 14 mph) was not
statistically significant; however, the 25 percent difference between NMOC concentration
on the windiest days and on the least windy days (wind speeds less than 9 mph) was
statistically significant. This statistically significant trend is consistent both with findings
presented in the 1997 report and dispersion modeling algorithms, which predict that
dispersion of pollutants increases with wind speed (USEPA 1995).
• Wind Direction. To examine associations between wind direction and total NMOC
concentrations, the scatter plot in Figure 7-4 indicates how levels of total NMOC at LINY
varied with wind direction during the 1998 program. (The figure does not present
sampling results collected when winds were calm or variable.) As Figure 7-4 shows, no
particularly strong correlation between total NMOC concentrations and any specific wind
direction was observed. Though some of the highest levels of total NMOC were observed
when winds were blowing from the south (wind directions between 150 and 210 degrees),
the average concentration of total NMOC for this subset of wind directions (0.27 ppmC)
was not considerably higher than the average concentration of total NMOC for all other
wind directions (0.21 ppmC). Moreover, the difference in these concentrations was not
statistically significant.
The absence of statistically significant data correlations between wind direction and total
NMOC concentration suggests that the direction of the wind has little bearing on ambient
levels of total NMOC at LINY during the morning hours. The absence of notable
correlations is best explained by the hypothesis that the primary components of total
NMOC are emitted from sources that are found in all directions from the LINY monitoring
station, such as motor vehicles. The analyses in the 1997 report reached the same
conclusion.
When interpreting associations between meteorological conditions and total NMOC
monitoring data for LINY, it is important to note that this section presents only a small subset of the
numerous data analyses that could be performed on this data set. Greater insight into the factors
7-5
-------
that affect levels of air pollution can be gained by examining meteorological conditions from
longer time frames (e.g., are total NMOC concentrations considerably lower or higher after
24 hours of warmer temperatures?) and by using multivariate statistical techniques (e.g., do higher
levels of total NMOC occur when both humidity and temperature are high?). Researchers are
encouraged to conduct such additional analyses to identify data trends that are not readily apparent
from the analyses presented in this section.
7.3 Annual Variations
Several different measures can be used to evaluate how air quality at a particular location
varies from year to year. To put the annual variations for the LINY monitoring stations into
perspective, the following discussion examines how average levels of total NMOC and peak
levels of total NMOC have changed from the 1990 to the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Programs. (Note: Total NMOC monitoring data from LINY are not available from the 1992
program.)
Changes in average concentrations of total NMOC. Figure 7-5 indicates how the
average concentration of total NMOC has changed at LINY since the 1990
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. Note that the figure presents the average
concentrations of total NMOC measured during the morning hours of the summer months,
which are likely quite different from annual average concentrations. Clearly, average
levels of total NMOC at LINY increased in some years and decreased in others.
Several important observations can be drawn from the figure. For example, the average
concentration of total NMOC observed during the 1998 program is the lowest level that
has been observed at LINY over the last 9 years. This trend was found to be statistically
significant, except that the average concentration observed in the 1997 program was not
found to be statistically different from that of the 1998 program. Furthermore, closer
inspection of the diagram reveals that the average concentrations of total NMOC for the
1995, 1997, and 1998 programs are all lower than the average concentrations observed
prior to 1995, but the concentration differences in some cases were not statistically
significant. It is interesting to note that this apparent decline in concentrations of total
NMOC began after motor vehicles in the New York City-Newark metropolitan area began
using reformulated fuels. In fact, the average concentration of total NMOC measured in the
summer months between 1995 and 1998 is 23 percent lower than the average concentration
measured in the summer months between 1990 and 1994; this decrease was statistically
significant. The exact causes of the decreasing concentrations are not known, but are likely
to include some combination of motor vehicle fuel usage, changes in traffic patterns, and
7-6
-------
impacts from various pollution control initiatives. It is also possible that the statistically
significant decline in total NMOC concentrations over the last 4 years is merely part of
longer-term fluctuations in levels of air pollution. Results from continued monitoring at the
same location are needed to determine if the apparent downward trend in levels of total
NMOC persists, if the downward trend levels off, or if the average levels of total NMOC
increase back to their 1990-1994 levels.
Changes in peak concentrations of total NMOC. Since many environmental statues
regulate both long-term average and short-term peak (or "episodic") levels of air pollution,
annual variations in the frequency of peak concentrations were evaluated. As one measure
of the changing frequency of peak concentrations at LINY, Figure 7-6 shows the number of
total NMOC concentrations measured at levels greater than 1.0 ppmC in the 1990-1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. According to the figure, total NMOC
concentrations have not exceeded 1 ppmC during the summer morning hours at LINY since
1996. However, unlike the annual variations of the average concentrations, no downward
long-term trend in the peak concentrations is readily apparent. Analyses of continued
monitoring are needed to confirm if the frequency and magnitude of peak concentrations of
total NMOC at LINY have indeed decreased.
7.4 Chapter Summary
Generally, the total NMOC data collected at the LINY monitoring station are consistent
with the data from other years and support the conclusions made in previous reports. For instance,
the data collected during the 1998 program indicated that ambient air concentrations of total
NMOC were lower on more humid days, on cooler days, on rainier days, and on windier
days—all of these trends were observed, to a certain extent, at LINY during the 1997 program.
The associations between total NMOC concentration and temperature, precipitation, and wind
speed were all found to be statistically significant, but the apparent association between total
NMOC concentration and humidity was not. No obvious correlation between wind direction and
total NMOC concentration was observed.
On average, the 3-hour average concentrations of total NMOC during 1998 were the
lowest that have been observed during the summer months since the station first sampled for this
pollutant. Moreover, in the years since 1994, a statistically significant downward trend in
concentrations of total NMOC are apparent for the LINY monitoring station. This trend might be
due, at least in part, to the introduction of reformulated fuels between the 1994 and 1995
7-7
-------
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. Continued monitoring at LINY is encouraged to
characterize trends in air quality over the longer term.
7-S
-------
Figure 7-1
Long Island, New York (LINY), Monitoring Station
•: 'twTi'ftcWwcs '
•'.'.>- V
S'rMirwv' '°>™ ri
si BUM* • Hoe _
--*•: -V ' '.
• ft BrieM] ' S)i§
t'VI' /.»*- vi/51- T*
-"• • I1..
'j«_£ ,1«.IM"
U^v --^" '
11 % - ';A iS\
>fc. " A"*
•^gOHSg^Si
lANuK V 5^^^*"*!^^
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series. Map scale: 1:24,000.
7-9
-------
Figure 7-2
Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at LINY
35
01
O) 30
c
ro
o:
•c
«! 25 -
c
in 20
c
O
4-1
ro
> 15
Ol
0
«- 10
0
Ol
E 5
z
o
9
32
19
13
3
<=0.1 >0.1 and <=0.2 >0.2 and <=0.3 >0.3 and <=0.4 >0.4 and <=0.5
Concentration Range (ppmC)
2
>0.5 and <=0.6
3
>0.6 and <=0.7
0
>0.7
-------
Figure 7-3
Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at LINY to Selected Meteorological Parameters
NMOC Concentration vs. Humidity
_ o 300
0 0
*^ E 0 250
TO g. °^&0
*- Q.
g o °-2°°
§ i °-i5°
o z
0) — 0.100
0) $
2. 0 0.050
0 •-
> ^
< ° 0 000
<50 >=50 and <70 >=70
Relative Humidity (percent range)
NMOC Concentration vs. Temperature
- n ssn
\verage Concentratior
of Total NMOC (ppmC)
D O O O O O O
D b -^ li kj kj co
D Ol O Ol O Ol O
D O O O O O O
<=70 >70 and <=80 >80
Temperature Range (degrees Fahrenheit)
c _ 0.300
0 O
=5 E 0.250
•t Q.
= •— 0.200
g o
§ 1 0.150
o -z.
0) — 0.100
ro £
2. 0 o.OSO
0) >~
> <*:
< ° 0.000
NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Speed
<9
>=9 and <14
Wind Speed (mph)
>=14
7-11
-------
Figure 7-4
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at LINY to Wind Direction
0 700
0 600
0
E o 500
Q.
C
O
'Jo o 400
c
0)
o
C
o
On inn
O
O
re 0.200
Omn
Onnn
* *
* *
» * * * *
* *
• ^
' * *
* * * *
* *
» * * * *
• * * * * *
..:.»*.»
' »
>
>
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Wind Direction (degrees)
to
Note: Wind direction is the direction from which wind blows. Observations with calm or variable winds are not included in this figure.
-------
Figure 7-5
Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY
0.60
0.00
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
Note: Total NMOC data from 1992 are not available for the LINY monitoring station.
The "error bars" in the graph indicate the 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations.
-------
Figure 7-6
Annual Variations in Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY
8^
o
0 E
OQ_ ft
z *-
ra re
£ «
umber of Days wi
icentrations Great
10 *-
2 O
O
n
5 5
1
\
\
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Year
1
1996
0 0
1997 1998
Note: Total NMOC data from 1992 are not available for the LINY monitoring station.
-------
Table 7-1
Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at LINY
Category
Prevalence
Concentration
Range
Central Tendency
Variability
Parameter
Number of valid sampling days
Number of nondetects
Frequency of detection
Lowest concentration (ppmC)
25th percentile concentration (ppmC)
50th percentile concentration (ppmC)
75th percentile concentration (ppmC)
Highest concentration (ppmC)
Median concentration (ppmC)
Arithmetic mean concentration (ppmC)
Geometric mean concentration (ppmC)
Standard deviation (ppmC)
Coefficient of variation
Value
81
0
100%
0.067
0.122
0.196
0.300
0.643
0.196
0.225
0.195
0.137
0.60
7-15
-------
8.0 Monitoring Results for Newark, New Jersey (NWNJ)
This section summarizes and interprets the total NMOC, SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl
monitoring data collected at the NWNJ monitoring station during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC
Monitoring Program; total NMOC data from previous years are also included for the purpose of
investigating annual variations.
Figure 8-1 indicates the location of the NWNJ monitoring station, which is in an area of
mixed industrial, commercial, and residential land use. Many transportation-related emissions
sources are in the immediate vicinity of NWNJ: Interstate 95, U.S. Highway 1, numerous surface
streets, and several railroads pass within 1 mile of the monitoring station, and the Newark
International Airport is approximately 2 miles southwest of the station. In addition, for the 1996
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), more than 30 industrial facilities within the city limits of Newark
reported using large quantities of toxic chemicals and emitting air pollutants. Further, many other
industrial facilities operate in this area (i.e., facilities that are not subject to TRI reporting).
Therefore, emissions from a great variety of sources impact the air quality at NWNJ.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the NWNJ station collected total
NMOC samples every weekday morning, and collected SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl samples
periodically. Overall, valid total NMOC samples were collected on 75 of the 77 days when
sampling events were scheduled. Thus, the completeness for the total NMOC measurements,
defined as the percentage of attempted samples that are valid, was 97 percent. For the other
monitoring options (SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl), every attempted sampling event was valid, but
fewer than 10 samples were scheduled for these three groups of compounds. The analyses in this
section focus on interpreting trends and patterns among the daily measurements of total NMOC,
with a lesser emphasis placed on evaluating the periodic measurements of SNMOC, VOC, and
carbonyls.
The remainder of this section puts the monitoring data collected at NWNJ into perspective.
Section 8.1 provides detailed analyses of the total NMOC monitoring data, including comparisons
3-1
-------
to selected meteorological conditions and evaluations of long-term trends in total NMOC levels.
Sections 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 summarize the SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyl monitoring results,
respectively. Readers should note that Section 8.3 addresses two topics that have not been
addressed in earlier NMOC/SNMOC reports: air quality trends for methyl tert-buty\ ether
(MTBE) and a comparison of monitoring results for compounds that are identified by both the
SNMOC and VOC sampling and analytical methods. For quick reference, Section 8.5 highlights
the most notable data trends observed at NWNJ.
8.1 Total NMOC Monitoring Data
To highlight key findings of the total NMOC monitoring data collected at NWNJ, the
following discussion reviews data summary parameters (Section 8.1.1), associations between total
NMOC levels and selected meteorological conditions (Section 8.1.2), and annual variations in
total NMOC concentrations (Section 8.1.3). When reading these sections, it is important to
remember that the total NMOC sampling and analytical method detects a wide range of organic
compounds (e.g., alkanes, olefms, aromatics, oxygenates, halogenated hydrocarbons), thus
providing a measure of overall levels of a large group of "ozone precursors." However, this
method does not characterize total levels of air pollution, because the method does not measure
other pollutants common to urban air, such as inorganic acids, particulate matter, and heavier
organic compounds.
Note: The SNMOC analytical method also measures the concentration of total NMOC.
Section 8.2 compares how total NMOC concentrations differed when measured with the
total NMOC and SNMOC sampling and analytical methods.
8.1.1 Data Summary
Using the data summary parameters that were defined in Section 3.1, Table 8-1 presents a
concise overview of the total NMOC measurements at NWNJ during the summer of 1998. A
review of this data summary follows:
8-2
-------
Prevalence. In each of the 75 valid samples collected at NWNJ, concentrations of total
NMOC were at least an order of magnitude higher than the estimated method detection
limit of 0.005 ppmC (or 5 ppbC). Therefore, the prevalence of total NMOC at NWNJ was
100 percent. With no nondetect observations among the total NMOC measurements, the
summary statistics presented in Table 8-1 are believed to accurately portray air quality
trends at NWNJ.
Concentration range. According to Table 8-1, total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ
during the 1998 program ranged from 0.091 ppmC to 6.941 ppmC. The 75th percentile
concentration reveals that most samples at NWNJ contained less than 0.386 ppmC of total
NMOC. Only two total NMOC concentrations exceeded 1 ppmC during the summer of
1998; these observations are believed to be "outliers" that probably represent anomalous
air pollution episodes. In some cases, these two outliers greatly influenced statistical
analyses of the monitoring data. As a result, the two outlier concentrations were omitted
from certain analyses in this section. (Note, this section clearly indicates which analyses
omitted the concentration outliers.)
As Section 7.1 noted, the dates on which the outlier concentrations were observed at
NWNJ (June 25, 1998, and September 25, 1998) correspond to the dates on which two of
the highest total NMOC concentrations were observed at LINY. This coincidence suggests
that levels of air pollution throughout the Newark-New York City metropolitan area might
have been elevated on these two days, but monitoring data from other locations in the area
are needed to confirm this hypothesis.
For greater insight into the concentration distribution, Figure 8-2 presents a histogram of
the total NMOC monitoring data collected at NWNJ. As the figure shows, nearly
90 percent of the total NMOC concentrations fell in the range of 0.1-0.5 ppmC. This
observation suggests that levels of total NMOC at NWNJ during the morning hours on
summer days tend to fall within a fairly narrow range of concentrations, with notably
higher or lower concentrations occurring infrequently.
Central tendency. During the 1998 program, the geometric mean concentration for total
NMOC at NWNJ was 0.303 ppmC—the lowest geometric mean concentration that has
been observed at this site for more than 10 years (see Section 8.1.3). For greater insight
into the central tendency concentrations, monthly-average central tendencies were
calculated and evaluated. When considering the entire set of total NMOC measurements
from NWNJ, the monthly-average concentrations for June and September were notably
higher than those for July and August. When considering the data set without the two
outlier concentrations, however, no statistically significant differences were observed
between the average concentrations of total NMOC for any 2 months. Therefore, the data
collected during the 1998 program showed no evidence of considerable monthly variations
in concentrations of total NMOC at NWNJ during the morning hours.
8-3
-------
Variability. According to Table 8-1, the standard deviation of the total NMOC monitoring
data atNWNJ was 0.799 ppmC, and the coefficient of variation was 1.93. This data
variability is notably greater than the variability observed at NWNJ during previous
monitoring programs. More specifically, the coefficients of variation observed during the
1995, 1996, and 1997 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs were 0.49, 0.59, and 0.70,
respectively. Not surprisingly, the greater variability during the 1998 program appears to
be linked to the two outlier concentrations. Omitting these observations from the
variability calculation, the coefficient of variation for the 1998 data set at NWNJ is 0.44,
which is more comparable to the previous data trends.
8.1.2 Comparison to Selected Meteorological Conditions
To provide greater insight into the trends and patterns among the total NMOC
concentrations atNWNJ, this section compares the measured levels of NMOC to selected
meteorological parameters. The analysis considers 3-hour average observations of relative
humidity, precipitation, temperature, wind direction, and wind speed, all of which were measured
between 7:00 and 10:00 a.m. at the Newark International Airport. Since the airport is
approximately 2 miles from the ambient air monitoring station, the meteorological data are
believed to represent conditions at the NWNJ site.
To enable readers to compare data trends from the 1998 program to those from earlier
programs, the following analyses of associations between local meteorological conditions and
total NMOC concentrations are presented in a format almost identical to that used in
Section 4.2.1.2 of the 1997 NMOC/SNMOC report. Since the following analyses rely on the
grouping of meteorological data and total NMOC monitoring data into subsets on the order often
to twenty observations, the subsets can be significantly influenced by the values of outliers. To
avoid this potential bias, the two outliers of total NMOC concentrations were not considered when
evaluating correlations between meteorological conditions and the ambient air monitoring data.
An overview of the comparisons of meteorological conditions to total NMOC levels at
NWNJ follows:
8-4
-------
Humidity. According to Figure 8-3, concentrations of total NMOC at NWNJ, on average,
tended to be higher on days with higher relative humidity. However, the concentration
differences for the different categories of humidity shown in the figure are all less than
20 percent, and none of these differences were found to be statistically significant.
Therefore, the association between total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ during the
morning hours and humidity was found to be very weak and possibly anomalous.
It is interesting to note that the 1997 report showed that levels of total NMOC tended to be
lower on days with higher relative humidity, contrary to the trend illustrated in Figure 8-3
for the 1998 data. The discrepancy in trends between the 1997 and 1998 programs might
result from several factors, such as the possibility that the association between humidity
and total NMOC levels is weak and might have been overshadowed during the 1998
program by other influences or that the trend observed in either 1997 or 1998 was atypical.
Further research is needed to better understand the relationship between total NMOC
levels at NWNJ and humidity, if such a relationship exists.
Precipitation. Measurable rain was observed at the Newark International Airport during 7
of the 75 valid sampling events at NWNJ. The average concentration of total NMOC for
the 7 days with measurable precipitation was 0.320 ppmC, and the average concentration
for all other days (excluding the two days with outlier concentrations) was 0.308 ppmC.
Therefore, levels of total NMOC on rainy mornings were, on average, 4 percent higher
than the levels on days without rain, but this concentration difference was not found to be
statistically significant.
The relationship between precipitation and total NMOC levels in Newark during the 1998
program contradicts the data presented in the 1997 report: At every station that
participated in the 1997 program (including NWNJ), total NMOC levels on rainy days
were notably lower than they were on days without measurable precipitation. The
inconsistent trends at NWNJ during the 1998 program might result from many factors,
including the fact that only trace amounts of precipitation (0.01 inches or less) were
recorded at Newark International Airport on 4 of the 7 days with measurable rain. This
trace precipitation was not likely to remove considerable portions of the airborne organic
compounds, thus explaining the apparent lack of association between precipitation events
and total NMOC concentrations. Additional data from NWNJ must be collected and
reviewed to better understand how precipitation events affect local air quality.
Temperature. As Figure 8-3 shows, ambient air concentrations of total NMOC at NWNJ
on warmer mornings were, on average, higher than those measured on cooler mornings.
The differences in concentrations for the three categories of temperature, however, were
only marginal, and none were statistically significant. The temperature in the morning
hours, therefore, appears to have minimal impact on levels of total NMOC at NWNJ—a
finding that is consistent with conclusions reached in the 1997 report. It should be noted
that total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ during the afternoon hours, or during other times
3-5
-------
of year, might be temperature-dependent, despite the apparent lack of temperature
dependence observed during the past two NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs, which
focused on characterizing air quality only during the morning hours. Continued review of
temperature and total NMOC concentrations can help clarify the relationship, if any,
between these two measurements.
Wind Speed. Figure 8-3 shows that, similar to findings in previous years and at other
monitoring stations, total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ tended to be lower on the
windiest mornings. In fact, levels of total NMOC when wind speeds were greater than or
equal to 14 mph were almost 40 percent lower than levels of total NMOC when wind
speeds were less than 9 mph; this concentration difference was statistically significant.
This association between wind speed and total NMOC concentration is generally
consistent with the analyses presented in the 1997 report and is also supported by the
science of atmospheric dispersion, which suggests that pollutants disperse more efficiently
as wind speed increases (USEPA 1995).
Wind Direction. The scatter plot in Figure 8-4 shows how total NMOC concentrations
varied with wind direction at NWNJ. The figure does not include results from the
12 samples that were collected when the winds were calm or variable, and, to avoid
distorting the scale of the figure, the two outlier concentrations also are not shown. On the
dates the outliers were detected, winds were blowing from directions of 240 degrees and
280 degrees.
According to the figure, low to moderate levels of total NMOC were detected at NWNJ,
regardless of the direction that the wind was blowing, and total NMOC concentrations do
not appear to be strongly correlated with any single span of wind directions. Though the
average concentration of total NMOC for some wind directions (e.g., 240 to 310 degrees)
was higher than the average concentration for others, the differences in concentrations for
the various subsets of wind directions were modest, typically 30 percent or less. The
absence of notable associations between total NMOC concentrations and any specific wind
direction suggests that emissions sources throughout the Newark-New York City
metropolitan area contribute to the levels of total NMOC at NWNJ.
Though average levels of total NMOC did not vary significantly with wind direction, some
of the highest concentrations of total NMOC appeared to be linked to specific wind
patterns. More specifically, the three highest total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ
occurred primarily during westerly winds (i.e., wind directions of 240 to 300 degrees),
and five of the six highest total NMOC concentrations occurred during similar conditions.
This trend is somewhat consistent with a trend observed during the 1997 program, when
almost every total NMOC concentration greater than 0.5 ppmC occurred when winds blew
either from the west to northwest (i.e., wind directions between 270 and 300 degrees) or
from the north to northeast (i.e., wind directions between 0 and 60 degrees). Analyses of
-------
additional monitoring data will help confirm whether wind direction in the Newark area is
indeed linked with elevated concentrations of total NMOC atNWNJ.
As noted in Section 7.2, the analyses comparing selected meteorological conditions and
total NMOC concentrations in this report are only a small subset of the numerous types of
graphical and statistical analyses that could be performed on this data set. Use of multivariate
statistical techniques and consideration of meteorological conditions from longer time frames
(e.g., for the 24 hours prior to a sampling event) might provide greater insight into the many
complex factors that affect levels of air pollution at NWNJ.
8.1.3 Annual Variations
The NWNJ monitoring station has measured total NMOC concentrations on weekday
mornings every summer since 1988, thus providing 11 years of data to consider for evaluating
annual variations. To put the past data into perspective, this section examines how average levels
of total NMOC and peak levels of total NMOC have changed at NWNJ from the 1988 to 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. A summary of the key findings regarding annual variations
follows:
Changes in average concentrations of total NMOC. Figure 8-5 indicates how the
average concentration of total NMOC has changed atNWNJ since the 1988
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. It is important to remember that the figure depicts
annual variations in levels of air pollution during the morning hours of the summer and
annual variations for other time frames (e.g., annual-average concentrations) might differ
from those shown in Figure 8-5.
In general, Figure 8-5 shows that average concentrations of total NMOC have increased at
NWNJ in some years and decreased in others; the figure also clearly shows that average
levels of total NMOC from 1995 to 1998 rank among the lowest observed at this station
over the last 11 years. The downward trend likely results from many factors, including the
requirement that all motor vehicles in the Newark-New York City metropolitan area use
reformulated fuels as of January 1, 1995. To examine the potential impact of motor
vehicles switching from conventional fuels to reformulated fuels, average concentrations of
total NMOC from 1988 to 1994 were compared to those from 1995 to 1998. On average,
the levels of total NMOC in the last 4 years (0.418 ppmC) was 31 percent lower than the
levels observed between 1988 and 1994 (0.603 ppmC), and this concentration difference
3-7
-------
was found to be statistically significant. Though the use of reformulated fuels might have
caused, to a certain extent, the considerable decrease in total NMOC concentrations at
NWNJ, other factors likely contributed to this decrease as well. These other factors might
include state and local pollution prevention initiatives, declining emissions from industrial
sources, and long-term patterns in meteorological conditions.
Changes in peak concentrations of total NMOC. For additional insight into annual
variations in levels of total NMOC, Figure 8-6 indicates how the frequency of peak
concentrations of total NMOC (defined here as concentrations greater than 1.0 ppmC) has
changed at NWNJ between the 1988 and 1998 programs. Clearly, the frequency of peak
concentrations of total NMOC was considerably higher between 1988 and 1994 than it was
between 1995 and 1998. Though this notable decline in total NMOC concentrations
greater than 1.0 ppmC might be linked to the use of reformulated fuels, it is extremely
difficult to determine the extent to which the decline in peak concentrations is linked to any
one factor.
Overall, the two different measures of annual variations—considering average and peak
concentrations—indicate that levels of total NMOC at NWNJ have decreased over the last
11 years and that the levels of total NMOC between 1995 and 1998, in particular, are lower than
those measured between 1988 and 1994.
For greater insight into the specific compounds that constitute total NMOC at NWNJ, the
remainder of this section summarizes the monitoring results for SNMOC, VOC, and carbonyls.
Since fewer than 10 samples were collected at NWNJ for these categories of compounds, the
analyses in Sections 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 are less detailed than those presented in Section 8.1 for the
extensive total NMOC sampling.
8.2 SNMOC Monitoring Data
During the 1998 program, SNMOC samples were collected at NWNJ on seven days. As
Section 2.3.2 explained, the SNMOC sampling and analytical method measures ambient air
concentrations of 80 different hydrocarbons as well as the concentration of total NMOC, thus
providing extensive information on the composition and magnitude of selected components of air
pollution. The following discussion summarizes the SNMOC data, comments on the composition
-------
of the SNMOC samples, and compares the total NMOC concentrations measured by the total
NMOC sampling and analytical method to those measured concurrently by the SNMOC sampling
and analytical method.
8.2.1 Data Summary
Table 8-2 presents the data summary parameters, which Section 3.1 defined, for SNMOC
measurements atNWNJ in 1998. An overview of these summary parameters follows:
Prevalence. According to Table 8-2, 73 of the 80 hydrocarbons identified by the SNMOC
sampling and analytical method were detected in all seven samples collected at NWNJ
during the 1998 program. These compounds, therefore, have a prevalence of 100 percent
and their summary statistics are not biased by nondetect observations. Only three
compounds (1-decene, 2-ethyl-l-butene, and 1-heptene) were detected in fewer than
50 percent of the SNMOC samples. Summary statistics for these compounds should be
interpreted with caution, as they might be significantly biased by a high fraction of
nondetect observations. In general, however, the high prevalence for almost every
SNMOC confirms that air pollution at the NWNJ monitoring station during the summer
months is a complex mixture of numerous hydrocarbons.
Concentration range. As Table 8-2 indicates, concentration ranges for SNMOC vary
greatly from one compound to the next, and the highest concentrations at NWNJ were
observed for ethylene (23.20 ppbC), ethane (32.92 ppbC), propane (35.70 ppbC),
isopentane (42.52 ppbC), and toluene (33.54 ppbC). The highest concentrations for the
remaining 75 SNMOC were all lower than 20 ppbC.
Readers should note two limitations when interpreting the concentration range data in
Table 8-2. First, because air concentrations were measured only between 6:00 a.m. and
9:00 a.m., local time, the concentration range data in Table 8-2 only represent the span of
concentrations during the morning hours. It is highly likely that ambient levels of many
compounds rose to higher levels or fell to lower levels during other times of day. Second,
since the NWNJ station collected SNMOC samples on only 7 days of the monitoring
program, the concentration range data might not even characterize the actual lowest and
highest concentrations between 6:00 and 9:00 a.m.
Central tendency. Not surprisingly, the central tendency concentrations in Table 8-2 also
vary widely among the compounds detected at NWNJ. For the most prevalent compounds,
the measures of central tendency shown in Table 8-2 are believed to accurately represent
actual central tendency levels. However, for the three compounds detected in fewer than
half of the SNMOC samples, the magnitude of the central tendency values is influenced by
8-9
-------
nondetects, which were all replaced with concentrations equal to one-half their
corresponding detection limits.
On average, the 80 compounds identified by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method
accounted for 79 percent of the total NMOC concentrations. The geometric mean
concentration for almost every individual compound was less than 10 ppbC. Only the
following nine compounds, presented in order of decreasing concentration, had geometric
mean levels greater than 10 ppbC: isopentane (30.13 ppbC), ethane (20.44 ppbC), toluene
(20.13 ppbC), propane (19.28 ppbC), ethylene (14.21 ppbC), propylene (11.16 ppbC),
2,3-dimethylbutane (11.13 ppbC), and m,p-xy\ene (10.87 ppbC). Combined, the
concentrations of these compounds comprised nearly 40 percent of the total NMOC
collected in the seven SNMOC samples at NWNJ.
Readers should keep in mind an important data limitation regarding the central tendency
concentrations: Since only 7 SNMOC samples were collected at NWNJ, each sample
contributes approximately 14 percent to the arithmetic mean concentrations. Therefore,
results from each individual sample at NWNJ have a considerable influence on the central
tendency concentrations. Central tendency estimates for the stations that collected SNMOC
samples every day, however, are believed to be much more representative of the actual
central tendencies (see Sections 5.2 and 6.2).
Variability. According to Table 8-2, coefficients of variation for most SNMOC measured
at NWNJ were comparable and lower than 1.0. The compounds with the most variable air
monitoring data, as gauged by the coefficient of variation, were 1-dodecene (2.20),
c/s-2-hexene (1.60), and 1-undecene (1.57). The greater variability for 1-dodecene and
1-undecene likely results from the fact that these compounds contain more than 10 carbon
atoms, and the calculation of coefficients of variation from concentrations measured in
units of ppbC inherently gives greater weight to compounds with more carbon atoms. The
reason for the greater variability in the c/s-2-hexene concentrations is not known.
For greater insight into the SNMOC sampling, the following analyses comment on the
composition of the air samples (Section 8.3.2) and on the accuracy of the SNMOC measurements
(Section 8.3.3).
8.2.2 Composition of Air Samples
As previous NMOC/SNMOC reports have explained, the composition of air samples is
an important consideration when evaluating sources of pollution within airsheds. For instance,
air samples collected near significant emissions sources typically contain relatively high
8-10
-------
concentrations of reactive compounds that are known to decompose readily in ambient air (such
as olefins). On the other hand, air samples collected in locations far downwind from emissions
sources typically contain lower levels of the reactive compounds and higher levels of their
decomposition products. In general, olefinic and aromatic compounds tend to be much more
reactive in ambient air than alkanes.
During the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program, the identified SNMOC atNWNJ
contained, on average, 57 percent alkanes, 30 percent olefins, and 13 percent aromatic
compounds. This composition was calculated from a database of SNMOC concentrations that
had been converted to a volume basis (i.e., units of ppbv) in order to avoid artificially weighing
the composition by the number of carbons in different compounds. The composition of SNMOC
samples at NWNJ during the 1998 program was nearly identical to that observed at NWNJ
during the 1997 program (55 percent alkanes, 31 percent olefins, and 14 percent aromatic
compounds), and was quite similar to that observed at the other NMOC/SNMOC monitoring
stations. Results from monitoring conducted in earlier and future years should be reviewed to
determine if the composition of air atNWNJ has changed considerably over the years;
researchers should be sure to make such comparisons on a consistent basis (e.g., either on a
ppbC or a ppbv basis).
8.2.3 Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured by Two Different Methods
As Section 2.3 explained, both the total NMOC and the SNMOC sampling and analytical
methods measure concentrations of total NMOC. Of the six monitoring stations that participated
in the 1998 program, only the NWNJ monitoring station collected samples by both methods.
More specifically, on 6 of the 7 days when SNMOC samples were collected atNWNJ, total
NMOC samples were also collected. These common sampling events provide a basis for
comparing the total NMOC concentrations measured by two different methods. Overall, the
total NMOC concentration measured by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method and that
measured by the total NMOC sampling and analytical method differed, on average, by
8-11
-------
21 percent. This reasonable agreement in concentrations suggests that both methods are capable
of measuring levels of total NMOC accurately.
8.3 VOC Monitoring Data
This section summarizes results of the seven VOC sampling events conducted atNWNJ
during the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC program. As Section 8.2.1 noted, the 80 hydrocarbons
identified in the SNMOC samples, on average, accounted for nearly 80 percent of the airborne
total NMOC. The VOC monitoring data are useful for characterizing ambient levels of certain
organic compounds (e.g., selected halogenated hydrocarbons, nitriles, and oxygenated
compounds) that the SNMOC analytical method cannot identify: Of the 47 compounds that the
VOC analytical method identifies, 11 are currently identified by the SNMOC method, and the
remaining 36 are not. The following discussion highlights notable trends among the VOC
monitoring data.
8.3.1 Data Summary
Using the data summary parameters that were defined in Section 3.1, Table 8-3 provides
a concise summary of the VOC monitoring data collected at NWNJ during the 1998 program.
An overview of the data summary parameters follows:
Prevalence. According to Table 8-3, 21 of the 47 VOC were detected in more than
50 percent of the samples collected at the NWNJ monitoring station. The high
prevalence for these compounds, many of which are not identified by the SNMOC
analytical method, confirms that air pollution at the NWNJ monitoring station during the
summer months contains a complex mixture of numerous organic compounds. These
compounds' high prevalence suggests that their summary statistics are not significantly
affected by nondetect observations. Conversely, summary statistics for the
26 compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with
caution, as they might be significantly biased by nondetects, which were replaced within
the air monitoring database with an estimated concentration of one-half the detection
limit. Of the 26 compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples, 22 were not
detected in a single sample. The analyses in the remainder of this section focus on the
most prevalent compounds.
8-12
-------
Concentration range. As Table 8-3 indicates, the highest VOC concentrations measured
in the seven sampling events were for propylene (8.04 ppbv), acetylene (7.15 ppbv),
toluene (6.92 ppbv), and MTBE (6.21 ppbv). Concentrations of the other compounds
were all less than 3.0 ppbv during the seven valid sampling events, and concentrations of
many compounds never exceeded 1.0 ppbv.
The limitations regarding the concentration range of SNMOC (see Section 8.2.1) also
apply to the analysis of VOC concentrations. These limitations include the following:
Because sampling only occurred during the morning hours, the concentration ranges do
not characterize the highest and lowest concentrations that might have occurred during
other times of day; and due to the limited number of VOC samples collected, the
concentration range data probably do not even characterize the actual highest and lowest
concentrations during the morning hours on summer days.
Central tendency. Table 8-3 presents the median, arithmetic mean, and geometric mean
concentrations as different measures of the central tendency concentration. Overall, only
seven compounds had geometric mean concentrations greater than 1.0 ppbv: propylene
(4.08 ppbv), acetylene (3.98 ppbv), toluene (3.04 ppbv), MTBE (2.51 ppbv),
w,/>-xylene (1.32 ppbv), and methyl ethyl ketone (1.15 ppbv). Two of these seven
compounds (MTBE and methyl ethyl ketone) are believed to account for a notable
portion of the total NMOC that could not be identified by the SNMOC analytical method.
The majority of the remaining VOC has geometric mean concentrations less than
0.5 ppbv.
Variability. The coefficient of variation for all of the most prevalent VOC compounds
detected atNWNJ during the 1998 program was less than 1.0. This consistently low
indicator of variability suggests that concentrations of many VOC do not change
considerably from one summer morning to the next. This result is consistent with VOC
originating from sources throughout the Newark area (e.g., motor vehicles), as emissions
would be detected regardless of wind direction. The relatively low data variability is
not consistent with emissions originating primarily from a single source at a discrete
location, since emissions would be expected to be highly variable (i.e., dependent upon
wind direction) from day to day. The impact of motor vehicle emissions is investigated
further in the following section.
8.3.2 Data Trends for MTBE
Ambient air quality trends for MTBE are expected to be influenced by requirements that
motor vehicles in selected metropolitan areas use reformulated fuels. As of January 1, 1995,
EPA required all motor vehicle fuels sold in the Newark-New York City area to be
reformulated gasoline (Main et al. 1998). Though the composition of reformulated gasoline
varies among urban centers, reformulated gasoline in the Newark area contains approximately
8-13
-------
11 percent MTBE, by weight (Main et al. 1998). As a result, motor vehicle emissions in this
area are expected to contain MTBE, along with the many other pollutants typically found in car
exhaust.
In support of this hypothesis, ambient air concentrations of MTBE were found to be
much more strongly correlated with concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
isomers (i.e., compounds known to be found in motor vehicle exhaust) than with concentrations
of any other compound. To illustrate this correlation, Figure 8-7 compares concentrations of
benzene and toluene to concentrations of MTBE. Though the correlation between MTBE and the
other compounds is certainly not perfect and is somewhat uncertain due to the limited number of
samples, the figure indicates that concentrations of MTBE were generally higher when levels of
benzene and toluene were higher, and vice versa. As quantitative evidence of this trend, the
Pearson correlation coefficient for MTBE and benzene was 0.84, and for MTBE and toluene
was 0.94. These highly correlated data strongly suggest that emissions from motor vehicles
probably account for a large portion of the MTBE measured at NWNJ. However, a larger
volume of monitoring data is needed to establish statistically significant correlations between
these compounds' concentrations.
For purposes of comparison, Figure 8-7 also shows how concentrations of ethylbenzene
and toluene varied during the monitoring program. Though the figure does not show correlations
between all possible pairings of compounds typically associated with motor vehicle exhaust, the
trends displayed in Figure 8-7 suggest that correlations between MTBE and selected aromatic
hydrocarbons are weaker than correlations between pairs of aromatic hydrocarbons (the
correlation between toluene and ethylbenzene is 0.98), but the difference in data correlations
appears to be marginal. Further research is needed to explain the relatively weaker correlations
involving MTBE and to characterize the many different sources of MTBE in the Newark area
(e.g., motor vehicles, gasoline stations, refineries).
8-14
-------
8.3.3 Comparison of VOC and SNMOC Analytical Methods
As noted previously, the VOC analytical method identifies 11 compounds that the
SNMOC analytical method can also identify, thus providing a basis for comparing
concentrations measured by these two methods. During the 1998 program, air samples collected
at NWNJ on 7 days were analyzed for both SNMOC and VOC. Table 8-4 lists the 11
compounds identified by both methods, as well as the average concentrations measured by the
VOC and SNMOC analytical methods for these 7 days.
According to Table 8-4, the average concentrations for 9 of the 11 compounds identified
by both methods were not more than 15 percent different when measured by both the VOC and
SNMOC analytical methods. Only two compounds, styrene and o-xylene, had higher
concentration differences for the two analytical methods, but neither of these differences were
statistically significant. The notable concentration difference observed for styrene is believed to
result, to a certain extent, from the fact that the average concentration measured by the VOC
method (0.14 ppbv) is only marginally higher than the corresponding detection limit
(0.11 ppbv). It has long been established that laboratory analytical methods are least precise
when measuring concentrations near their limits of detection. Overall, the absence of
statistically significant differences among the concentrations shown in Table 8-4, and the low
concentration differences themselves, suggest that the VOC and SNMOC analytical methods are
in excellent agreement when measuring ambient air concentrations of selected hydrocarbons.
8.4 Carbonyl Monitoring Data
Since neither the VOC nor the SNMOC analytical methods currently identify carbonyls,
the carbonyl monitoring option measures ambient air concentrations of an entire group of
compounds not characterized by other monitoring options of the NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring
Program. Ambient air concentrations of carbonyls are of particular interest because this group
of compounds is both formed by, and consumed by, the complex series of photochemical
reactions that produce ozone. During the 1998 program, carbonyl samples were collected at
NWNJ on 8 days between June and September. Due to the limited number of samples, extensive
8-15
-------
analyses of the carbonyl monitoring data were not conducted. Rather, this section only presents
data summary parameters for the carbonyl monitoring results (see Table 8-5). An overview of
this data summary follows:
Prevalence. According to Table 8-5, 11 of the 16 compounds identified by the carbonyl
analytical method were detected in more than half of the samples collected atNWNJ
during the 1998 program. Summary statistics for these compounds are expected to
accurately represent the actual distribution of concentrations, since few data points were
replaced with concentrations of one-half the detection limit. Since the remaining
5 compounds were not detected in any of the samples, the summary statistics for those
compounds shown in Table 8-5 are essentially meaningless.
Concentration range. Referring again to Table 8-5, the highest ambient air
concentrations for carbonyls were observed for formaldehyde (25.34 ppbv), acetone
(8.83 ppbv), and acetaldehyde (5.43 ppbv). Every concentration measured for the
remaining carbonyls was lower than 5.0 ppbv, and concentrations of many carbonyls
never exceeded 1.0 ppbv. Since ambient air concentrations of many carbonyl
compounds are known to reach their highest levels during the early afternoon hours
(Brimblecombe 1996), and not during the scheduled sampling times for this program
(between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.), the concentration ranges shown in Table 8-5
probably do not characterize the actual span of ambient air concentrations during the
summertime. Moreover, the concentration ranges in Table 8-5 might not be
representative of the ranges observed in other seasons.
Central tendency. The central tendency data in Table 8-5 indicate that acetaldehyde,
acetone, and formaldehyde account for more than 90 percent of the carbonyls detected in
the air at NWNJ. This result is consistent with previous measurements at NWNJ and
with measurements at the other NMOC/SNMOC monitoring stations. Of the remaining
carbonyls, only butyr/isobutyraldehyde had a geometric mean concentration greater than
1.0 ppbv, and the remaining compounds had considerably lower geometric mean
concentrations.
To put the central tendency figures into perspective, the geometric mean concentrations
of the 16 carbonyls were compared to those for the 47 VOC and the 80 SNMOC. This
analysis found that the geometric mean concentration of formaldehyde (12.46 ppbv) was
higher than that of any other compound measured at NWNJ. Moreover, the geometric
mean concentrations of acetone (5.99 ppbv) and acetaldehyde (3.21 ppbv) had the sixth
highest and ninth highest geometric mean concentrations of all compounds, respectively.
This analysis shows that certain carbonyls are among the most abundant organic
compounds found in the Newark ambient air.
8-16
-------
Variability. As Table 8-5 shows, the coefficient of variation for all 16 carbonyls was
less than 1.0. This relatively low coefficient of variation suggests that carbonyls were
consistently measured in the air at NWNJ, regardless of changing wind directions. This
trend is not consistent with carbonyls originating primarily from a single emissions
source at a discrete location, since this scenario would be likely to lead to carbonyls
being detected only under certain wind conditions. Rather, the relatively low data
variability is consistent with carbonyls being emitted from sources throughout the
Newark-New York City area (e.g., motor vehicles) or being formed by photochemical
reactions throughout this airshed.
The carbonyl monitoring data collected at NWNJ provide important context for
understanding the composition of air pollution during the morning hours. Greater insight into the
air quality trends for carbonyls can be gained through additional air monitoring efforts that
collect samples more frequently than was done during the 1998 program.
8.5 Chapter Summary
The ambient air monitoring data collected at NWNJ during the 1998 program provide a
wealth of information on the composition and magnitude of air pollution in the Newark area.
Characterizing ambient air concentrations of more than 125 compounds, the NMOC/SNMOC
monitoring data from NWNJ identified the subset of compounds consistently found at highest
levels during the morning hours. The compounds with the highest concentrations include several
hydrocarbons (ethane, ethylene, propane, isopentane, acetylene, propylene, and toluene),
carbonyls (formaldehyde, acetone, and acetaldehyde), and other oxygenated compounds
(MTBE). Emissions from motor vehicles are believed to account for much of the airborne
hydrocarbons and MTBE at NWNJ.
The daily total NMOC measurements allowed for a detailed analysis of associations
between selected meteorological parameters and levels of air pollution. In general, no
statistically significant trends were observed between total NMOC concentrations and humidity,
precipitation, temperature, and wind direction. However, the absence of statistically significant
trends does not mean that these meteorological parameters have no impact on air quality.
Rather, the effect of these parameters on total NMOC concentrations at NWNJ might have been
8-17
-------
masked by other factors that exhibit a stronger influence on levels of air pollution. Wind speed
was the only meteorological parameter that had a statistically significant association with levels
of total NMOC: concentrations of total NMOC tended to be lower on windier days, and higher
when winds were calm or light. This trend was also observed at NWNJ during the 1997
program.
On average, the 3-hour average concentrations of total NMOC during the 1998 program
ranked among the lowest observed during the summer months since 1988—the year that the
NWNJ monitoring station first sampled for total NMOC. In the years since 1994, levels of total
NMOC at NWNJ have been, on average, more than 30 percent lower than the levels measured in
the years 1988-1994, and the concentration difference was found to be statistically significant.
Furthermore, the frequency with which total NMOC concentrations exceed 1.0 ppmC has also
decreased considerably since 1994. The decreasing average and peak levels of total NMOC
might be due, at least in part, to the introduction of reformulated fuels between the 1994 and
1995 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs. Ongoing monitoring at NWNJ is needed,
however, to determine whether future levels of total NMOC continue to decrease, stay roughly
the same, or rise back to their 1988-1994 levels.
8-18
-------
Figure 8-1
Newark, New Jersey (NWNJ), Monitoring Station
rv1 >•' '-•"• " • ii TT. . V
IJ^^^I ^vi
•J " -'-Ii; : »*« -*t
-:.i '.•••;
HAftKISDN
KEARNY
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series. Map scale: 1:24,000.
8-19
-------
oo
to
o
Figure 8-2
Distribution of Total NMOC Concentrations Measured at NWNJ
30
0)
O)
m 25
•c
0)
+«i
_c
0.1 and >0.2and >0.3and >0.4and >0.5and
<=0.2 <=0.3 <=0.4 <=0.5 <=0.6
2
>0.6 and
<=0.7
0
>0.7 and
<=0.8
1
>0.8 and >0.9 and
<=0.9 <=1.0
2
>1.0
Concentration Range (ppmC)
Note: The two concentrations higher than 1.0 ppmC were 1.208 ppmC and 6.941 ppmC.
-------
Figure 8-3
Comparison of NMOC Concentrations at NWNJ to Selected Meteorological Parameters
NMOC Concentration vs. Humidity
— 04
TO
+•»
0
( } n ^
o> ° E
O) C Q-
2 .2 S 0.2
^ TO 0
< ~ 0
g | 0.1 -
0 Z
C
£ 00
<50 >=50 and <70 >=70
Relative Humidity (percent range)
NMOC Concentration vs. Temperature
— 04
TO
+-
O
I- —
11- O 03
o o E
0) c 0-
2 | 3 0.2
g TO 0
< i= 0
g | 0.1 -
0 z
C
o oo
<=70 >70 and <=80 >80
Temperature Range (degrees Fahrenheit)
NMOC Concentration vs. Wind Speed
— 04
jS
o
*- ^ 0.3
a) o E
ro c Q-
TO O Q- „ „
>- ~ — 0.2
g TO 0
< i= 0
s i °-1
0 z
C
0 00
o "•"
<9
>=9 and <14
Wind Speed (mph)
>=14
8-21
-------
Figure 8-4
Comparison of Total NMOC Concentrations at NWNJ to Wind Direction
oo
to
to
0.9
0.8
0.7
O
a.
B 0.6
c
g
+j
2
I
o
O 0.4
O
O
1
0.3
0.2
0.1
•
•
I
' »
« »
« .
60
120 180
Wind Direction (degrees)
240
300
360
Notes: Wind direction is the direction from which wind blows. Observations with calm or variable winds are not included in this figure. As Section 8.1.2 notes, two outlier
concentrations are not included in this figure: When the total NMOC concentration was 1.208 ppmC, the wind direction was 280 degrees; when the total NMOC
concentration was 6.941 ppmC, the wind direction was 240 degrees.
-------
Figure 8-5
Annual Variations in Average Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ
oo
to
oo
1.40
0.00
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
Year
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Note: The "error bars" in the graph indicate the 95-percent confidence intervals of the average concentrations. All valid sampling results are considered in this figure,
including suspected data outliers.
-------
Figure 8-6
Annual Variations in Peak Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ
oo
to
o
O E
O g.
5 Q.
(Q m
+* SS
£ £J
i | 10
S g
o-2
fe E
•i =
C m
\ =
^- o
O
16
13
11
10
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
-------
Figure 8-7
Data Correlations for Ambient Air Concentrations of Selected Compounds
Concentration of Benzene
(ppbv)
2 50
2 00
1 50
1 00
0 50
0 00
• • •
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Concentration of MTBE (ppbv)
Concentration of Toluene
(ppbv)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.
1
00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Concentration of MTBE (ppbv)
Concentration of
Ethylbenzene (ppbv)
1 20
1 00
0 80
0 60
0 40
0 20
n nn
I
»
**«
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Concentration of Toluene (ppbv)
Note: Refer to Section 8.3.2 for interpretations of these plots.
8-25
-------
Table 8-1
Summary Statistics for Concentrations of Total NMOC at NWNJ
Category
Prevalence
Concentration
Range
Central Tendency
Variability
Parameter
Number of valid sampling days
Number of nondetects
Frequency of detection
Lowest concentration (ppmC)
25th percentile concentration (ppmC)
50th percentile concentration (ppmC)
75th percentile concentration (ppmC)
Highest concentration (ppmC)
Median concentration (ppmC)
Arithmetic mean concentration (ppmC)
Geometric mean concentration (ppmC)
Standard deviation (ppmC)
Coefficient of variation
Monitoring Station NWNJ
75
0
100%
0.091
0.216
0.292
0.386
6.941
0.292
0.411
0.303
0.799
1.93
8-26
-------
Table 8-2
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
n -Butane
c/s-2-Butene
fraws-2-Butene
Cyclohexane
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
«-Decane
1-Decene
m -Diethy Ibenzene
/7-Diethylbenzene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
«-Dodecane
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
5.38
3.84
0.33
6.25
0.87
0.84
1.03
0.67
0.39
1.41
ND
0.53
0.34
1.25
5.90
1.32
0.94
0.41
Highest
(ppbC)
12.75
9.33
1.53
19.43
2.33
2.57
2.01
1.66
1.50
4.14
ND
2.19
1.66
2.31
19.30
2.39
1.92
1.05
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
8.80
5.73
0.76
9.12
1.12
1.08
1.38
0.95
0.98
1.67
0.14
0.85
0.75
1.72
10.09
1.87
1.32
0.64
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
8.69
5.98
0.76
10.23
1.32
1.33
1.50
1.10
0.95
2.35
0.14
1.00
0.79
1.64
11.90
1.90
1.37
0.69
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
8.40
5.78
0.69
9.55
1.24
1.23
1.45
1.06
0.85
2.14
0.14
0.90
0.70
1.60
11.13
1.85
1.34
0.65
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.41
1.75
0.39
4.49
0.55
0.62
0.42
0.33
0.43
1.14
0.00
0.57
0.43
0.38
4.60
0.44
0.32
0.24
Coefficient of
Variation
0.28
0.29
0.51
0.44
0.41
0.46
0.28
0.30
0.45
0.48
0.00
0.57
0.55
0.23
0.39
0.23
0.23
0.35
oo
to
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
1-Dodecene
Ethane
Ethylbenzene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Ethylene
m-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
/?-Ethyltoluene
w-Heptane
1-Heptene
w-Hexane
1-Hexene
c/s-2-Hexene
?ra«s-2-Hexene
Isobutane
Isobutene/1 -Butene
Isopentane
Isoprene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
1
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
86%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
14%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
ND
11.59
2.35
ND
10.42
1.80
0.93
1.13
1.62
ND
2.83
0.23
0.09
0.15
4.88
3.31
20.05
0.32
Highest
(ppbC)
5.46
32.92
5.83
ND
23.20
4.89
2.44
2.92
3.84
0.89
5.93
0.51
2.46
0.74
14.71
9.51
42.52
2.61
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.15
21.47
3.33
0.12
12.61
2.77
1.46
1.68
1.94
0.26
3.60
0.30
0.22
0.30
6.16
5.04
29.00
1.25
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.91
21.50
3.76
0.12
14.84
3.13
1.54
1.97
2.29
0.35
4.15
0.33
0.53
0.33
8.44
5.51
30.91
1.30
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.24
20.44
3.56
0.12
14.21
2.95
1.46
1.86
2.20
0.30
4.02
0.32
0.28
0.30
7.82
5.22
30.13
1.13
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.01
7.27
1.35
0.00
5.00
1.14
0.56
0.73
0.77
0.24
1.15
0.11
0.85
0.20
3.69
2.04
7.45
0.68
Coefficient of
Variation
2.20
0.34
0.36
0.00
0.34
0.36
0.37
0.37
0.34
0.69
0.28
0.32
1.60
0.59
0.44
0.37
0.24
0.53
oo
I
to
oo
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Isopropylbenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
2-Methylhexane
3-Methylhexane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
w-Nonane
1-Nonene
«-Octane
1-Octene
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
86%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
86%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
0.55
0.66
0.86
ND
1.18
1.68
0.84
0.80
1.91
1.96
3.84
2.35
0.23
0.06
1.15
0.23
1.27
ND
Highest
(ppbC)
1.59
2.64
3.92
3.37
2.06
3.51
1.87
1.52
4.22
3.79
9.25
5.59
0.65
0.17
2.50
0.58
2.73
0.28
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
0.84
1.28
1.69
0.53
1.44
2.25
1.17
1.04
2.54
2.46
5.62
3.50
0.31
0.11
1.92
0.31
1.58
0.18
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
0.90
1.34
1.85
1.39
1.58
2.50
1.23
1.14
2.81
2.77
6.30
3.78
0.36
0.11
1.75
0.37
1.87
0.19
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
0.85
1.22
1.66
0.64
1.55
2.43
1.18
1.11
2.68
2.69
6.05
3.64
0.34
0.10
1.67
0.35
1.80
0.18
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
0.35
0.66
1.02
1.44
0.33
0.66
0.37
0.28
0.92
0.71
1.94
1.14
0.14
0.03
0.56
0.16
0.57
0.07
Coefficient of
Variation
0.39
0.49
0.55
1.03
0.21
0.26
0.30
0.25
0.33
0.26
0.31
0.30
0.39
0.32
0.32
0.42
0.31
0.38
oo
to
VO
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
«-Pentane
1-Pentene
c/s-2-Pentene
trans -2-Pentene
• -Pinene
• -Pinene
Propane
n -Propy Ibenzene
Propylene
Propyne
Styrene
Toluene
w-Tridecane
1-Tridecene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethy Ibenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
57%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
5.02
0.66
0.68
0.94
0.32
0.21
14.05
0.81
6.74
0.14
1.11
13.03
0.09
ND
0.72
2.94
1.14
0.58
Highest
(ppbC)
11.32
1.84
1.76
3.02
1.82
3.75
35.70
2.04
18.22
0.52
5.10
33.54
1.36
0.61
2.47
8.17
3.23
1.64
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
7.14
1.14
1.05
1.58
0.74
0.81
19.56
1.07
10.60
0.28
1.83
20.91
0.18
0.14
1.32
4.37
1.84
0.98
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
8.09
1.29
1.14
1.76
0.99
1.14
20.28
1.26
11.82
0.31
2.16
21.44
0.39
0.17
1.41
5.06
2.23
1.03
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
7.73
1.22
1.08
1.64
0.84
0.83
19.28
1.19
11.16
0.29
1.94
20.13
0.25
0.11
1.29
4.75
2.06
0.98
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
2.59
0.45
0.40
0.71
0.60
1.18
7.59
0.47
4.45
0.13
1.32
8.37
0.46
0.20
0.64
1.93
0.91
0.34
Coefficient of
Variation
0.32
0.35
0.35
0.40
0.60
1.03
0.37
0.37
0.38
0.41
0.61
0.39
1.17
1.14
0.45
0.38
0.41
0.33
oo
OJ
o
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for SNMOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
w-Undecane
1-Undecene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Range of Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbC)
2.86
1.05
1.09
0.04
7.10
2.71
239.93
198.22
Highest
(ppbC)
7.67
2.83
2.94
2.02
18.74
6.50
518.03
420.63
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbC)
4.49
1.77
1.52
0.25
10.78
4.06
312.97
260.37
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbC)
4.93
1.77
1.90
0.45
11.63
4.43
367.31
291.18
Geometric
Mean
(ppbC)
4.72
1.70
1.78
0.22
10.87
4.20
351.72
280.26
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbC)
1.57
0.57
0.75
0.70
4.69
1.56
116.80
88.80
Coefficient of
Variation
0.32
0.32
0.39
1.57
0.40
0.35
0.32
0.30
oo
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-3
Summary Statistics for VOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetonitrile
Acetylene
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
1,3 -Butadiene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chloroprene
Dibromochloromethane
m -Dichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
7
0
7
0
7
7
7
6
2
0
7
7
2
0
7
7
7
6
Frequency
of
Detections
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
14%
71%
100%
0%
0%
71%
100%
0%
0%
0%
14%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
ND
1.76
ND
0.50
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
ND
ND
0.39
ND
ND
ND
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
ND
7.15
ND
2.23
ND
ND
ND
0.02
0.46
0.11
ND
ND
0.10
0.89
ND
ND
ND
0.05
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
0.11
3.74
0.03
0.69
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.09
0.11
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.57
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.05
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
0.11
4.28
0.03
0.98
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.16
0.09
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.62
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.04
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
0.11
3.98
0.03
0.87
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.10
0.09
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.60
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.04
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.00
1.66
0.00
0.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
Coefficient of
Variation
0.00
0.39
0.00
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.97
0.22
0.00
0.00
0.68
0.27
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.22
oo
OJ
to
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for VOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
/7-Dichlorobenzene
1, 1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
trans- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene
trans- 1 ,3 -Dichloropropene
Ethyl Acrylate
Ethylbenzene
Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether
Methylene Chloride
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Methyl Methacrylate
Methyl tert-Butyl Ether
n -Octane
Propylene
Styrene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
1
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
0
7
1
0
3
7
0
2
0
2
Frequency
of
Detections
86%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
86%
100%
57%
0%
100%
71%
100%
71%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.31
ND
ND
0.79
ND
ND
1.28
ND
1.92
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
0.26
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.96
ND
1.25
1.88
0.31
ND
6.21
0.35
8.04
0.24
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
0.07
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.45
0.03
0.50
1.09
0.12
0.03
2.31
0.15
3.77
0.16
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
0.10
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.51
0.03
0.60
1.18
0.12
0.03
2.85
0.16
4.54
0.14
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.47
0.03
0.42
1.15
0.09
0.03
2.51
0.13
4.08
0.12
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.23
0.00
0.42
0.34
0.10
0.00
1.69
0.11
2.24
0.07
Coefficient of
Variation
0.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.45
0.00
0.70
0.28
0.84
0.00
0.59
0.66
0.49
0.48
oo
I
OJ
00
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-3 (Continued)
Summary Statistics for VOC Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 7 Days with Valid Samples)
Compound
tert-Awyl Methyl Ether
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1, 1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
«,/7-Xylene
o-Xylene
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
5
7
1
0
0
7
4
7
0
0
Frequency
of
Detections
29%
0%
86%
100%
100%
0%
43%
0%
100%
100%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
ND
ND
ND
1.87
0.42
ND
ND
ND
0.85
0.46
Highest
(ppbv)
0.16
ND
0.42
6.92
1.01
ND
0.37
ND
2.88
1.43
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
0.03
0.03
0.20
2.95
0.62
0.02
0.03
0.04
1.32
0.63
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
0.06
0.03
0.18
3.37
0.63
0.02
0.09
0.04
1.45
0.73
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
0.05
0.03
0.14
3.04
0.61
0.02
0.05
0.04
1.32
0.68
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
0.05
0.00
0.13
1.79
0.19
0.00
0.13
0.00
0.73
0.34
Coefficient of
Variation
0.88
0.00
0.73
0.53
0.30
0.00
1.39
0.00
0.51
0.47
oo
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
Table 8-4
Comparison of Concentrations for Compounds Measured by
Both the VOC and SNMOC Analytical Methods
(Based on 7 Days with Valid VOC and SNMOC Samples at NWNJ)
Compound
Acetylene
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
Ethylbenzene
w-Octane
Propylene
Styrene
Toluene
m,p-Xy\Qne
o-Xylene
Average
Concentration
Measured by the
VOC Method
(ppbv)
4.28
0.98
0.16
0.51
0.16
4.54
0.14
3.37
1.45
0.73
Average
Concentration
Measured by the
SNMOC Method
(ppbv)
4.35
1.00
0.19
0.47
0.23
3.94
0.27
3.06
1.45
0.55
RPD
2%
2%
11 %
8%
12%
14%
44%
10%
1%
28%
Is the Concentration
Difference Between the
Two Methods
Statistically
Significant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes: Concentrations measured by the SNMOC method were converted to units of ppbv for this analysis.
RPD = relative percent difference (see sidebar in Section 2.3 for a definition).
Nondetect observations were omitted from the calculation of RPDs.
8-35
-------
Table 8-5
Summary Statistics for Carbonyl Concentrations Measured at Newark, NJ (NWNJ)
(Based on 8 Days with Valid Samples)
/-I 1
Compound
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Benzaldehyde
Butyr/Isobutyr aldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
2,5 -Dimethylbenzaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Valeraldehyde
Prevalence of
Compound in Ambient
Air
Number
ofNon-
detects
0
0
0
3
0
8
8
0
0
2
0
8
2
Frequency
of
Detections
100%
100%
100%
63%
100%
0%
0%
100%
100%
75%
100%
0%
75%
Range of
Measured
Concentrations
Lowest
(ppbv)
1.92
3.80
0.13
ND
0.28
ND
ND
3.79
0.11
ND
0.13
ND
ND
Highest
(ppbv)
5.43
8.83
1.26
0.46
3.54
ND
ND
25.34
0.49
0.30
0.46
ND
0.24
Central Tendency of
Measured Concentrations
Median
(ppbv)
3.24
6.31
0.48
0.30
1.53
0.00
0.00
19.22
0.32
0.20
0.29
0.01
0.14
Arithmetic
Mean
(ppbv)
3.38
6.18
0.55
0.23
1.64
0.00
0.00
15.28
0.29
0.17
0.29
0.01
0.13
Geometric
Mean
(ppbv)
3.21
5.99
0.45
0.07
1.09
0.00
0.00
12.46
0.25
0.08
0.27
0.01
0.07
Variability in Measured
Concentrations
Standard
Deviation
(ppbv)
1.18
1.61
0.35
0.20
1.29
0.00
0.00
8.55
0.15
0.13
0.12
0.00
0.09
Coefficient of
Variation
0.35
0.26
0.64
0.85
0.79
0.00
0.00
0.56
0.51
0.73
0.42
0.00
0.72
oo
ND = nondetect
Note: Data for compounds detected in less than 50 percent of the samples should be interpreted with caution, since their summary statistics might be influenced by low
prevalence (see Section 3.1).
-------
9.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
The National 1998 NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program thoroughly characterized the
magnitude and composition of ozone precursors during the summer months at six monitoring
locations. The following discussion reviews the main conclusions of this report and recommends
several improvements for ongoing NMOC/SNMOC monitoring efforts.
9.1 Conclusions
Several different graphical, numerical, and statistical analyses were used to identify and
interpret trends and patterns in the data collected during the 1998 program, as well as data
collected during earlier NMOC/SNMOC programs. Though these analyses offer an extensive
account of air quality near the monitoring stations, they should not be viewed as comprehensive.
An overview of key findings from the data analyses follows:
Total NMOC Monitoring Data. During the 1998 program, concentrations of total NMOC
were measured on summer weekday mornings at six monitoring stations. Results from
duplicate samples and replicate analyses indicated that these measurements were highly
precise. Overall, total NMOC concentrations at JUMX were notably higher than those at
the other five stations. More specifically, the average concentration of total NMOC at
JUMX was 2.06 ppmC, while average levels at the other stations were less than
0.55 ppmC. The relatively high concentrations at JUMX resulted, in part, from several
outliers. In fact, one air sample collected at JUMX had a total NMOC concentration higher
than 20 ppmC—a level far higher than any other total NMOC concentration measured
during the past five NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Programs.
At all six stations, total NMOC levels were lower on windier days and higher on days with
calm or light winds, but no consistent trends were observed between total NMOC
concentrations and other meteorological parameters (i.e., humidity, precipitation,
temperature, and wind direction). Even the record high temperatures in Dallas and Fort
Worth during the 1998 program appeared to have little bearing on the total NMOC levels
in these cities. The trend of decreasing total NMOC levels with increasing wind speed is
consistent with a fundamental principle of atmospheric dispersion: High wind speeds
enhance the dispersion of pollution.
The annual variations in total NMOC levels provided insight into long-term trends in air
quality at the six monitoring stations. No consistent annual variations were observed
among the 4 years of monitoring data available for the three stations in Dallas and Fort
Worth: At some stations (CAMS5 and DLTX), total NMOC levels decreased from 1995
9-1
-------
to 1998; at the other station (CAMS 13), total NMOC levels increased over this time frame.
At the monitoring station in Juarez, Mexico, concentrations of total NMOC during the 1998
program were, on average, roughly four times higher than those measured during the 1995,
1996, and 1997 programs. Even when the outlier concentrations were omitted from the
analysis, the total NMOC levels at JUMX during 1998 were higher than those during
previous years. At the two monitoring stations in the Newark-New York City area (LINY
and NWNJ), total NMOC levels have steadily decreased over the last 10 summers.
Moreover, the average concentration of total NMOC at LINY during the 1998 program was
the lowest level observed at this station since 1990, and the average concentration at
NWNJ during the 1998 program was the second lowest observed at the station since 1988.
The factors that accounted for each station's unique annual variations were not considered
in this report.
SNMOC Monitoring Data. Four of the monitoring stations that participated in the 1998
program collected SNMOC samples every weekday morning during the summer, thus
providing a wealth of information on the composition of airborne hydrocarbons. The
SNMOC monitoring data were shown to be highly precise, based on the results of
39 duplicate samples that were analyzed in replicate. An overview of key findings for the
El Paso-Juarez and Dallas-Fort Worth areas follows.
At JUMX, the SNMOC monitoring data offered insight into the unusually high levels of
total NMOC that were measured during the 1998 program. For example, the SNMOC
monitoring data revealed an interesting pattern on the composition of the air mass at
JUMX: On days when total NMOC levels exceeded 1.0 ppmC, the 80 hydrocarbons
identified by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method accounted for only 11 percent of
the total NMOC; on all other sampling days, however, these 80 hydrocarbons accounted
for 57 percent of the total NMOC. Thus, the many observations of elevated total NMOC
levels at JUMX were highly influenced by compounds that the SNMOC sampling and
analytical method does not currently identify. For the most abundant SNMOC, average
concentrations during the 1998 program were not notably higher or lower than those
measured during the 1995, 1996, and 1997 programs.
In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, ambient air concentrations of the most abundant SNMOC at
CAMS 13 were considerably higher than concentrations of the same compounds at CAMS5
and DLTX. Closer examination of the data revealed that the air mass at CAMS 13
contained the greatest proportion of alkanes, while the air mass at DLTX contained the
greatest proportion of olefms. This trend was found to be very consistent with the
hypothesis that gasoline vapor emissions have a relatively greater influence on air quality
at CAMS 13 and that mobile source emissions have a relatively greater influence on air
quality at DLTX—a hypothesis that should be verified by comparing the SNMOC
monitoring data to local emissions inventories for these three stations. With few
exceptions, the annual variations for the most abundant SNMOC tended to parallel each
station's annual variations in total NMOC levels. In other words, at stations where total
9-2
-------
NMOC levels gradually increased from 1995 to 1998, concentrations of the most abundant
SNMOC generally increased as well. As one exception to this general trend, the ambient
air concentrations of 2,3-dimethylbutane at all three monitoring stations in Dallas and Fort
Worth during the 1998 program were significantly higher than those during previous years.
This notable increase throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth area might be linked to the record
high temperatures observed during the 1998 program, but detailed evaluations of additional
monitoring data are needed to verify this association.
At all four stations that collected daily SNMOC samples, data analyses revealed that the
compounds with the greatest potential for forming ozone were often not the compounds
with the highest ambient air concentrations. This same finding was presented in the 1996
NMOC/SNMOC report.
VOC Monitoring Data. Only one station (NWNJ) collected VOC samples during the 1998
NMOC/SNMOC Monitoring Program. The VOC monitoring data provided insight into air
quality trends for many compounds that the SNMOC sampling and analytical method does
not identify. Of these compounds, methyl ethyl ketone and MTBE had geometric mean
concentrations that ranked among the highest levels measured at NWNJ. Closer evaluation
of the monitoring data revealed that mobile source emissions likely accounted for a large
portion of the airborne MTBE in the Newark area. Due to the limited number of VOC
samples collected during the 1998 program, further analysis of trends and patterns among
the VOC data were not performed.
The precision of the VOC monitoring data was not known, because too few duplicate
samples were collected to quantify the measurement precision. However, comparison of
the VOC and SNMOC sampling results from NWNJ showed that the VOC and SNMOC
sampling and analytical methods generated very consistent results for the 11 compounds
that can be identified by both methods.
Car bonyl Monitoring Data. The limited carbonyl sampling performed during the 1998
program characterized ambient air concentrations for an entire group of compounds that the
SNMOC sampling and analytical method does not identify. Results from four duplicate
sampling events demonstrate that the carbonyl monitoring data were highly precise.
Further, some noteworthy data trends were identified that appeared to be common to the
five stations that collected carbonyl samples (CAMS5, CAMS13, DLTX, JUMX, NWNJ).
For instance, at all five stations, acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde accounted for a
large portion—80 percent or higher—of the combined concentration of the 18 carbonyls
that the sampling and analytical method can identify. Moreover, at many stations, the
average air concentrations of these compounds ranked among the ten highest average
concentrations measured during the program (including the 80 SNMOC). Therefore,
carbonyls were shown to account for a substantial portion of the total NMOC that was not
identified by the SNMOC sampling and analytical method.
9-3
-------
9.2 Recommendations
Based on lessons learned from analyzing the 1998 NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data, a
number of improvements are recommended for future national ambient air monitoring efforts:
Conduct more extensive statistical analyses on the data. Though this report highlighted
numerous trends and patterns in the large volume of monitoring data collected during the
1998 program, the analyses in this report should not be viewed as an exhaustive evaluation
of the data collected at the six monitoring stations. Additional statistical analyses of the
NMOC/SNMOC monitoring data could reveal subtle trends that were not identified by the
data analysis methodology used in this report. Examples of such additional analyses
include the use of multivariate statistics to understand how many different parameters affect
air quality and the use of factor analyses to determine the extent to which certain emissions
profiles are reflected in the air monitoring data.
Compare ambient air monitoring data to emissions data. Though several air quality
trends identified in this report appeared to be consistent with emissions profiles for certain
types of sources, the link between emissions and ambient air concentrations could not be
verified since site-specific emissions inventories were not considered in this report.
Consequently, a comparison of air quality trends documented in this report to local
emissions inventories should be performed. Understanding the extent to which emissions
from specific sources affect air quality is a critical step in developing effective air
pollution control strategies.
Encourage stations to include the VOC (i.e., Air Toxics) monitoring option. The VOC
monitoring data collected during the 1998 program provided important insight into ambient
air quality in the Newark area, primarily by measuring concentrations of many compounds
that the SNMOC sampling and analytical method does not identify. Of particular interest,
the VOC sampling and analytical method measures concentrations of MTBE—a compound
that has gained recent attention in the environmental field—and other oxygenates that are
present in photochemical smog (e.g., methyl ethyl ketone). For a more complete picture of
air quality in their jurisdictions, agencies that sponsor NMOC/SNMOC monitoring stations
are encouraged to have all samples analyzed for both SNMOC and VOC, rather than having
samples analyzed for only SNMOC.
Encourage long-term participation in the program. As noted in other NMOC/SNMOC
reports, state and local agencies can assess long-term trends in air pollution only by
evaluating the results of ongoing ambient air monitoring efforts. These long-term data
trends can answer important questions often asked of sponsoring agencies, such as: To
what extent has a certain pollution control strategy affected air quality? Is air quality in our
city improving or degrading? How can we best reduce ozone levels? To help answer
these and other important questions, sponsoring agencies are encouraged to continue
measuring levels of air pollutants at the same monitoring locations used in this program.
9-4
-------
10.0 References
Brimblecombe, 1996. Air Composition & Chemistry. Second edition. University Press:
Cambridge, England. 1996.
Carter, 1994. Development of Ozone Reactivity Scales for Volatile Organic Compounds. Journal
of the Air and Waste Management Association 44: 881-899. 1994.
Conner, Lonneman, Seila, 1995. Transportation-Related Volatile Hydrocarbon Source Profiles
Measured in Atlanta. Teri L. Conner, William A. Lonneman, Robert L. Seila. Journal of
the Air and Waste Management Association 45: 383-394. 1995.
ERG, 1996. 1995 Nonmethane Organic Compounds and Speciated Nonmethane Organic
Compounds Monitoring Programs. Eastern Research Group, Inc. Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
December 1996.
ERG, 1997a. 1995 Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Program. Eastern Research Group, Inc.
Prepared for U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards. January 1997.
ERG, 1997b. 1996 Nonmethane Organic Compound and Speciated Nonmethane Organic
Compound Monitoring Program. Eastern Research Group, Inc. Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
November 1997.
ERG, 1999. 1997 Nonmethane Organic Compounds (NMOC) and Speciated Nonmethane Organic
Compounds (SNMOC) Monitoring Program. Eastern Research Group, Inc. Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
January 1999.
FR, 1984. Definition and Procedure for the Determination of the Method Detection Limit—
Revision 1.1. Federal Register 49'/209. October 26, 1984.
Harnett, 1982. Statistical Methods. Donald L. Harnett. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company:
Reading, Massachusetts. 1982.
Grosjean, 1991. Daniel Grosjean. Ambient Levels of Formaldehyde, Acetaldehyde, and Formic
Acid in Southern California: Results of a One-Year Base-Line Study. Environmental
Science and Technology 25:710-715. 1991.
10-1
-------
Main et al., 1998. Analysis of Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) Data to
Evaluate a Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) Effect. Hilary H. Main, Paul T. Roberts,
Richard Reiss. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources. April 1998.
Scheff and Wadden, 1993. Receptor Modeling of Volatile Organic Compounds: 1. Emission
Inventory and Validation. Peter A. Scheff and Richard A. Wadden. Environmental
Science and Technology. 27:617-625. 1993.
SGD, 1996. Street Guide and Directory: Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico. Index Publications,
Inc., El Paso, TX. 1996.
Sonoma, 1996. PAMS Data Analysis Workshop: Illustrating the Use of PAMS Data to Support
Ozone Control Programs. Sonoma Technology, Inc. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. October 1996.
Sterrett, 1995. Alternative Fuels and the Environment. Edited by Frances Sterrett. Lewis
Publishers, Inc. 1995.
USDOC, 1993. 1990 Census of Population and Housing. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau
of the Census. July 1993.
USEPA, 1988. Method for the Determination of Non-Methane Organic Compounds (NMOC) in
Ambient Air Using Cryogenic Preconcentration and Direct Flame lonization Detection
(PDFID). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Assurance Division,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory. May 1988.
USEPA, 1989. Determination of C2 to C12 Ambient Air Hydrocarbons in 39 U.S. Cities from 1984
through 1986. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atmospheric Research and
Exposure Assessment Laboratory. March 1989.
USEPA, 1995. User's Guide for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) Dispersion Models:
Volume II - Description of Model Algorithms. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. October 1996.
USEPA, 1996a. PAMS Data Analysis Workshop: Illustrating the Use of PAMS Data to Support
Ozone Control Programs. Prepared by Sonoma Technology, Inc., for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. October 1996.
USEPA, 1996b. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations: 1996 Data Analysis Results
Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards. October 1996.
10-2
-------
USEPA, 1999a. Compendium Method TO-15: Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs) in Air Collected in Specially-Prepared Canisters and Analyzed by Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Center for Environmental Research and Information. January 1999.
USEPA, 1999b. Compendium Method TO-11 A: Determination of Formaldehyde in Ambient Air
Using Adsorbent Cartridge Followed by High Performance Liquid Chromatography
(HPLC) [Active Sampling Methodology]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Center
for Environmental Research and Information. January 1999.
10-2
-------
Long Island, NY
Eisenhower Park Monitoring Station
NMOC Results 1998
SITE
CODE
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
SAMPLE
ID
12832
12853
12856
12890
12911
12912
12938
12940
12966
12933
12995
13013
13025
13026
13025
13026
13046
13070
13080
13173
13174
13196
13197
13196
13197
13209
13250
13318
13326
13344
13365
13375
13529
13257
13558
13594
13595
13594
13595
13581
13617
13705
13731
13760
13776
13890
13891
13890
13891
13780
13898
13916
COLLECTION
DATE
6/4/98
6/5/98
6/9/98
6/10/98
6/11/98
6/12/98
6/16/98
6/17/98
6/18/98
6/19/98
6/22/98
6/23/98
6/24/98
6/24/98
6/24/98
6/24/98
6/25/98
6/26/98
6/29/98
6/30/98
7/1/98
7/2/98
7/2/98
7/2/98
7/2/98
7/3/98
7/6/98
7/7/98
7/8/98
7/9/98
7/10/98
7/13/98
7/14/98
7/15/98
7/16/98
7/17/98
7/17/98
7/17/98
7/17/98
7/20/98
7/21/98
7/22/98
7/23/98
7/24/98
7/27/98
7/28/98
7/28/98
7/28/98
7/28/98
7/29/98
7/30/98
7/31/98
AVERAGE
CONC.
0.148
0.084
0.221
0.072
0.110
0.093
0.208
0.220
0.213
0.331
0.116
0.112
0.159
0.148
0.144
0.139
0.642
0.300
0.148
0.122
0.140
0.149
0.147
0.152
0.150
0.313
0.100
0.241
0.118
0.229
0.508
0.353
0.239
0.177
0.273
0.216
0.210
0.208
0.204
0.127
0.383
0.361
0.339
0.187
0.244
0.109
0.112
0.113
0.117
0.162
0.272
0.094
Long Island, NY, NMOC Results, June 1998
Date
Long Island, NY, NMOC Results, July 1998
0.000
COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO
0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)
sSs[SS5SS.£§5SS&§5
r^ r^ r-Date r^ r^ r^ r^ r^ r^ r^
1 Of 2
-------
Long Island, NY
Eisenhower Park Monitoring Station
NMOC Results 1998
SITE
CODE
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
LINY
SAMPLE
ID
13923
13968
13969
13968
13969
12853
14054
14060
14094
14178
14239
14237
14230
14221
14238
14353
14364
14485
14496
14498
14564
14548
14549
14548
14549
14563
14692
14676
14694
14707
14708
14707
14708
14768
14779
14798
14807
14826
14832
14833
14832
14833
14892
14900
14964
14979
14991
15005
15006
15005
15006
15026
15027
15026
15027
15039
15040
15039
15040
15044
COLLECTION
DATE
8/3/98
8/4/98
8/4/98
8/4/98
8/4/98
8/6/98
8/7/98
8/10/98
8/11/98
8/13/98
8/14/98
8/14/98
8/17/98
8/18/98
8/20/98
8/24/98
8/25/98
8/26/98
8/27/98
8/28/98
8/31/98
9/1/98
9/1/98
9/1/98
9/1/98
9/2/98
9/3/98
9/4/98
9/8/98
9/9/98
9/9/98
9/9/98
9/9/98
9/10/98
9/11/98
9/14/98
9/15/98
9/16/98
9/17/98
9/17/98
9/17/98
9/17/98
9/18/98
9/21/98
9/22/98
9/23/98
9/24/98
9/25/98
9/25/98
9/25/98
9/25/98
9/28/98
9/28/98
9/28/98
9/28/98
9/29/98
9/29/98
9/29/98
9/29/98
9/30/98
AVERAGE
CONC.
0.326
0.467
0.522
0.540
0.426
0.643
0.230
0.113
0.260
0.077
0.089
0.117
0.169
0.425
0.111
0.178
0.248
0.129
0.116
0.077
0.205
0.180
0.208
0.199
0.198
0.350
0.170
0.552
0.303
0.115
0.074
0.116
0.141
0.130
0.357
0.147
0.209
0.278
0.190
0.109
0.208
0.102
0.132
0.216
0.170
0.067
0.355
0.553
0.611
0.642
0.644
0.134
0.096
0.142
0.156
0.289
0.307
0.295
0.301
0.476
Long Island, NY, NMOC Results, August 1998
0.700
O 0.600
§0.500
-0.400
o
§0.300
o
00.200
io.ioo
0.000
s§> s§> s§> s§> -cS>
^\4^AVA°T
Long Island, NY, NMOC Results, September, 1998
Date
2 of 2
-------
SNMOC OPTION REPORT
SITE CODE: NWNJ
Reported in ppbC
Newark, NJ
SNMOC 1998 Results
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1,3,5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1,2,3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13179
6/29/98
7/23/98
12.61
8.80
0.00
10.60
14.05
0.28
11.66
6.45
0.76
10.83
1.49
1.66
3.37
31.04
1.84
1.51
10.08
2.61
2.11
1.56
1.87
1.30
1.37
0.12
1.66
13.46
6.87
3.75
0.31
0.30
ND
4.60
0.30
0.32
2.61
1.50
6.66
1.84
4.22
2.39
3.13
0.89
5.42
2.44
1.83
0.99
1.78
21.00
1.31
1.32
0.28
2.42
4.26
12.30
5.10
5.02
0.58
1.92
1.59
1.82
2.04
3.61
2.92
3.23
2.44
3.75
6.09
ND
2.50
2.47
2.19
1.66
0.25
2.94
5.46
1.05
0.61
0.57
437.60
307.94
13899
7/29/98
12/1/98
10.42
9.88
11.59
6.74
14.41
0.23
4.88
4.08
0.67
7.20
0.84
0.87
0.29
29.00
0.91
0.85
5.56
1.28
1.28
0.83
1.30
1.25
0.39
0.09
0.95
8.63
4.74
2.90
0.31
0.25
ND
3.24
0.23
0.19
2.03
1.23
4.76
1.15
2.10
1.54
2.18
ND
3.81
1.62
1.29
0.85
1.38
14.71
0.93
0.80
0.12
1.34
2.93
8.25
1.11
3.30
0.24
1.17
1.05
0.64
0.94
2.51
1.55
1.71
1.46
0.21
4.26
ND
1.44
1.32
1.10
0.85
0.13
1.52
0.15
0.72
ND
1.36
259.34
217.98
14059
8/6/98
9/21/98
20.71
9.78
32.92
18.22
35.70
0.43
9.76
5.69
0.81
11.45
1.56
1.53
2.82
42.52
1.61
1.54
11.32
1.42
2.09
1.24
2.20
1.73
1.50
0.11
1.38
15.92
8.30
5.01
0.43
0.45
ND
5.29
0.41
0.31
3.24
1.54
6.19
2.01
3.41
2.29
3.54
ND
5.92
2.58
2.06
1.27
2.06
33.54
1.52
1.40
0.26
2.18
5.83
18.74
1.79
6.35
0.58
2.22
0.85
1.80
1.53
4.21
2.54
3.05
1.79
0.71
6.52
ND
3.68
1.95
0.72
0.75
0.25
2.50
ND
0.64
0.03
0.12
518.03
400.35
14468
8/24/98
9/23/98
11.84
6.93
16.69
9.08
19.90
0.26
6.16
4.48
0.33
9.12
0.92
0.90
ND
27.96
1.12
0.92
6.71
0.32
1.27
0.86
1.13
1.84
0.98
0.06
0.95
10.09
5.50
3.50
0.27
0.30
ND
3.58
0.20
0.14
2.25
1.17
5.33
1.03
1.91
1.55
2.31
ND
4.31
1.76
1.44
0.90
1.53
14.80
0.96
1.02
0.13
1.56
2.50
7.24
1.61
3.05
0.23
1.25
0.83
0.32
0.84
2.12
1.29
1.41
0.95
0.87
3.08
ND
1.41
0.73
0.53
0.34
2.02
1.09
0.17
0.41
0.04
0.18
299.17
232.78
14487D1
8/25/98
9/24/98
15.29
8.79
23.72
12.43
22.77
0.37
6.93
5.88
0.95
8.50
1.29
1.27
0.85
30.14
1.40
1.47
8.23
1.41
1.85
1.26
2.03
2.01
1.17
0.10
0.93
11.56
6.50
3.95
0.42
0.35
ND
4.38
0.34
0.19
2.56
1.69
6.61
1.25
2.60
2.08
2.84
ND
5.27
2.21
1.54
1.25
2.03
22.36
1.34
1.06
0.16
1.90
3.76
12.34
1.92
4.52
0.28
1.48
0.59
0.70
1.13
2.94
1.75
2.01
1.31
0.66
4.60
ND
1.81
1.10
0.65
0.49
0.09
1.17
0.02
0.32
ND
0.07
346.79
293.15
14487R1
8/25/98
12/1/98
11.80
6.16
17.90
9.36
17.05
0.25
5.14
4.48
0.70
6.23
0.97
1.00
0.17
27.33
0.89
1.21
6.14
1.03
1.35
0.90
1.39
1.50
0.72
0.10
0.81
8.58
5.38
2.87
0.26
0.27
ND
3.05
0.34
0.19
1.93
1.11
4.82
1.04
2.13
1.72
2.14
ND
3.77
1.64
1.16
0.75
1.50
16.42
1.02
0.92
0.11
1.27
2.95
9.47
1.89
3.62
0.20
1.15
0.59
0.48
1.04
2.65
1.69
1.76
1.20
1.02
4.38
ND
1.66
1.31
1.03
0.88
0.12
1.47
0.38
0.68
0.06
0.28
289.73
230.90
For the 6/29/98 sample, ethane was not quantitated due to an analytical problem.
-------
SNMOC OPTION REPORT
SITE CODE: NWNJ
Reported in ppbC
Newark, NJ
SNMOC 1998 Results
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14488D2
8/25/98
9/24/98
14.75
8.30
23.35
11.59
21.33
0.38
6.84
5.46
0.88
8.22
1.18
1.23
0.92
28.02
1.31
1.35
8.06
1.37
1.78
1.17
1.89
1.84
1.11
0.14
1.05
11.26
6.00
3.80
0.35
0.29
ND
4.09
0.34
0.32
2.38
1.39
6.42
1.27
3.06
2.08
2.82
ND
5.16
2.30
1.59
1.16
2.05
24.01
1.36
1.25
0.10
1.86
3.71
12.00
1.82
4.44
0.26
2.01
0.58
0.69
1.08
2.88
1.68
1.84
1.20
0.63
4.33
ND
1.72
1.02
0.65
0.44
0.10
1.23
0.02
0.41
ND
0.10
336.57
285.08
14488R2
8/25/98
12/1/98
12.14
6.08
18.04
9.29
17.10
0.26
5.20
4.36
0.68
6.31
0.87
0.98
0.16
24.10
0.97
1.10
6.13
1.05
1.35
0.88
1.43
1.54
0.66
0.08
0.80
8.48
4.59
2.82
0.30
0.23
ND
2.88
0.25
0.20
1.92
1.10
5.06
1.04
2.37
1.62
2.06
ND
3.77
1.60
1.30
0.75
1.47
20.85
0.96
0.94
0.06
1.30
2.91
9.33
1.75
3.65
0.24
3.62
0.58
0.47
1.02
2.61
1.61
1.74
1.20
0.70
4.17
ND
1.50
1.14
1.05
0.89
0.12
1.55
0.12
0.65
ND
0.25
278.78
232.34
14984
9/18/98
11/3/98
11.58
5.38
22.19
9.57
15.18
0.14
5.89
3.31
0.43
6.25
0.86
0.87
0.15
20.05
0.66
0.66
5.02
0.99
0.94
0.68
0.86
1.31
0.41
0.08
0.67
5.90
3.84
2.35
0.23
0.23
ND
2.83
0.15
0.09
1.68
0.94
3.84
1.38
1.93
1.32
1.96
ND
2.86
1.86
1.18
0.58
1.05
13.03
0.84
0.85
ND
1.27
2.35
7.10
1.88
2.71
0.31
1.15
0.55
0.74
0.81
1.80
1.13
1.14
0.93
0.87
2.94
ND
1.60
0.72
0.56
0.41
0.04
1.31
0.25
0.52
ND
0.09
239.93
198.22
15058
9/30/98
10/28/98
23.20
12.75
24.86
17.87
23.18
0.52
14.71
9.51
1.53
19.43
2.57
2.33
2.50
38.38
1.74
2.64
10.78
1.25
3.02
1.76
3.92
2.31
1.07
0.17
1.18
19.30
9.25
5.59
0.65
0.51
ND
5.93
0.74
2.46
3.51
1.92
9.33
1.94
3.55
2.33
3.79
ND
7.67
3.84
1.85
1.64
2.83
32.08
1.87
1.52
0.26
2.73
5.15
17.03
1.83
6.50
0.44
2.50
0.84
0.99
1.60
4.89
2.71
3.21
2.00
0.81
8.17
ND
4.14
1.51
1.06
0.85
0.32
2.57
0.07
0.96
ND
0.23
504.13
420.63
For the 6/29/98 sample, ethan;
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13011
6/22/98
7/9/98
1.99
1.28
3.10
1.00
2.27
0.11
1.28
1.81
ND
4.89
0.36
0.44
0.82
18.41
0.58
1.12
4.61
1.36
1.16
0.55
1.52
0.55
0.48
0.03
0.62
9.67
5.13
2.73
0.22
0.19
ND
3.16
0.18
0.12
1.42
0.46
2.18
0.41
1.81
0.68
1.44
ND
1.92
0.99
0.54
0.47
0.57
6.12
0.32
0.29
0.08
0.44
1.02
3.29
0.95
1.27
0.11
0.31
0.07
0.27
0.32
1.05
0.49
0.47
0.48
0.62
1.41
ND
0.26
0.31
0.09
0.10
ND
0.49
ND
3.74
ND
0.06
159.79
109.03
13012
6/23/98
7/10/98
2.63
2.14
2.73
1.24
3.04
0.19
3.00
2.35
0.19
19.41
1.29
1.50
1.42
44.13
2.20
3.65
14.79
1.58
4.08
2.09
5.58
1.88
1.19
0.27
1.93
28.62
14.86
9.70
0.85
0.43
ND
10.68
0.87
0.46
4.42
1.28
4.73
1.13
4.36
1.58
4.04
ND
4.38
3.06
1.31
1.04
1.27
12.87
0.85
0.63
0.11
0.98
2.21
7.64
1.12
2.77
0.14
0.51
0.15
0.29
0.69
2.32
1.38
1.29
1.00
0.60
3.47
ND
0.41
0.68
0.16
0.16
ND
0.31
ND
4.35
0.11
ND
329.08
270.80
13021D1
6/24/98
7/8/98
2.01
1.71
2.58
1.21
3.64
0.13
1.75
1.87
0.19
9.49
0.61
0.70
0.62
24.05
1.06
1.76
7.31
1.09
1.88
0.95
2.50
0.96
0.54
0.11
0.94
13.87
7.40
4.61
0.43
0.27
ND
5.22
0.32
0.19
2.28
0.70
2.90
0.71
2.57
0.83
2.18
ND
2.60
1.76
0.90
0.65
0.84
8.68
0.51
0.40
0.06
0.62
1.42
4.87
1.14
1.80
0.11
0.39
0.09
0.22
0.41
1.38
0.71
0.73
0.73
0.69
1.88
ND
0.52
0.36
0.09
0.12
ND
0.15
ND
1.97
0.54
0.77
200.25
152.20
13021R1
6/24/98
13022D2
6/24/98
7/8/98
1.88
1.63
2.07
1.29
3.55
0.14
1.79
2.16
0.19
9.51
0.65
0.74
0.62
24.94
0.97
1.75
7.55
1.14
1.95
1.00
2.67
1.00
0.61
0.12
0.97
14.33
7.55
4.77
0.46
0.25
ND
5.28
0.32
0.20
2.34
0.71
2.98
0.66
2.43
0.85
2.32
ND
2.72
1.81
0.93
0.70
0.87
9.04
0.56
0.42
0.06
0.69
1.46
4.96
1.19
1.87
0.10
0.42
0.10
0.21
0.42
1.70
0.85
0.75
0.67
0.66
2.04
ND
0.47
0.45
0.12
0.15
ND
0.18
ND
1.08
0.57
0.80
210.54
155.36
13022R2
6/24/98
7/9/98
1.94
1.23
2.78
1.10
3.07
0.07
1.49
1.83
0.16
8.84
0.55
0.63
0.80
20.35
0.89
1.58
6.24
1.23
1.67
0.79
2.13
0.78
0.50
0.10
0.88
12.75
6.51
3.89
0.31
0.23
ND
4.43
0.35
0.14
1.95
0.62
2.53
0.56
2.13
0.82
1.75
ND
2.21
1.37
0.71
0.54
0.70
7.50
0.45
0.34
0.05
0.56
1.21
4.05
0.86
1.53
0.06
0.32
0.07
0.17
0.35
1.42
0.67
0.59
0.44
0.51
1.65
ND
0.31
0.35
0.08
0.08
ND
0.13
ND
0.11
1.12
2.22
184.62
133.32
The replicate sample file was lost at the lab, and could not be reanalyzed.
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13054
6/25/98
7/10/98
2.41
1.91
7.07
1.47
12.00
0.19
2.08
2.05
0.22
6.44
0.14
0.16
1.25
14.84
0.24
0.43
3.77
1.13
0.42
0.19
0.51
0.30
0.49
0.03
0.34
3.23
3.18
1.42
0.09
0.13
ND
1.98
0.07
0.05
1.18
0.37
2.24
0.62
1.54
0.49
1.12
ND
1.90
0.97
0.89
0.48
0.67
7.16
0.43
0.26
0.09
0.51
1.24
4.00
0.94
1.41
0.08
0.29
0.04
0.60
0.28
1.92
0.71
0.44
0.49
0.56
1.48
ND
0.21
0.27
0.07
0.06
ND
0.29
ND
2.21
ND
0.09
153.89
108.88
13091
6/29/98
7/11/98
4.20
3.30
7.04
1.95
11.74
0.28
6.09
3.19
0.33
32.87
ND
2.29
2.43
70.43
3.34
5.58
26.07
1.24
6.12
3.17
8.82
3.00
1.64
0.44
3.62
47.71
24.80
15.94
1.46
0.76
ND
17.97
1.43
0.77
7.67
2.33
7.61
14.20
6.68
2.71
6.51
1.13
6.00
5.25
2.37
1.76
2.20
21.73
1.54
1.42
0.17
1.69
3.57
12.25
1.45
4.57
0.24
0.97
0.34
0.45
1.19
3.90
2.06
1.95
1.76
0.54
5.37
ND
1.67
1.10
0.88
0.57
1.02
24.37
ND
3.19
ND
ND
637.34
486.39
13093
6/30/98
7/11/98
2.15
2.05
2.72
1.45
4.49
0.18
4.42
2.77
0.22
28.89
1.95
2.15
1.99
57.88
3.04
5.12
21.22
1.19
5.70
3.13
8.26
2.73
1.62
0.42
3.27
44.78
23.80
14.77
1.27
0.81
ND
16.39
1.30
0.70
6.88
2.09
6.41
1.72
5.98
2.26
6.39
ND
6.49
4.60
1.94
1.55
1.98
17.80
1.31
1.26
0.09
1.39
3.08
10.84
1.04
4.05
0.15
0.72
0.25
0.35
1.03
3.49
1.80
1.62
1.45
0.78
4.72
ND
0.58
1.06
0.21
0.22
ND
0.29
ND
ND
ND
ND
454.51
380.70
13195
7/1/98
7/10/98
6.18
5.86
9.24
3.66
10.42
0.59
7.68
6.30
0.74
51.86
3.90
4.15
3.51
108.20
5.92
9.83
41.12
2.03
11.11
6.01
16.20
5.41
3.05
0.78
6.29
88.82
46.28
29.87
2.60
1.62
ND
32.42
2.64
1.46
13.86
4.39
13.22
2.69
12.03
4.30
13.12
ND
14.16
9.42
3.76
3.44
4.68
38.86
2.70
2.66
0.15
2.82
6.65
23.25
1.76
8.77
0.28
1.35
0.54
0.67
2.17
7.77
3.81
3.52
3.16
1.26
10.00
ND
1.02
1.89
0.53
0.61
0.07
0.87
ND
0.43
ND
0.07
883.78
762.46
13194D1
7/2/98
7/8/98
4.91
4.60
4.75
2.83
7.28
0.45
3.97
4.14
0.28
18.87
1.63
1.72
2.02
53.13
2.61
4.07
19.92
1.58
5.07
2.67
6.87
2.59
1.70
0.30
2.96
39.41
21.28
13.65
1.30
0.76
ND
16.18
1.37
0.74
7.23
2.55
9.91
9.69
8.44
3.23
8.37
ND
12.88
7.06
3.30
3.48
5.40
34.12
2.73
2.74
0.19
3.19
6.25
20.43
1.75
7.48
0.39
1.94
0.39
0.63
1.79
6.10
3.03
3.05
2.82
1.53
8.32
ND
1.56
1.57
0.58
0.60
0.20
1.14
ND
ND
ND
0.12
561.44
451.78
13194R1
7/2/98
7/8/98
6.00
4.14
6.53
2.63
6.56
0.38
3.54
4.01
0.40
19.51
1.48
1.57
2.22
47.82
2.37
3.80
18.03
1.52
4.65
2.31
6.30
2.37
1.65
0.36
2.68
35.80
20.03
12.36
1.26
0.63
ND
14.65
1.24
0.67
6.52
2.29
8.86
8.79
7.18
2.97
7.65
ND
11.69
6.41
2.89
3.16
4.92
31.48
2.54
2.51
0.17
2.94
5.67
18.78
1.55
6.97
0.54
1.76
0.36
0.56
1.64
5.68
2.77
2.83
2.43
1.34
7.55
ND
1.30
1.42
0.51
0.54
0.17
0.94
ND
0.26
ND
0.10
507.04
418.12
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13207D2
7/2/98
7/9/98
2.05
4.01
6.09
2.23
6.67
0.29
3.10
3.31
0.39
16.33
1.11
1.21
1.13
39.07
1.72
2.83
15.58
1.35
3.65
1.79
4.74
1.75
1.18
0.23
1.97
28.75
15.60
10.11
0.94
0.54
ND
11.56
0.76
0.37
5.34
1.73
6.37
7.47
4.84
1.98
5.96
ND
9.68
5.14
2.33
2.48
4.13
26.84
2.11
1.70
0.08
2.44
5.46
18.62
1.47
5.91
0.34
1.82
0.37
1.00
1.19
4.50
2.15
2.30
1.79
0.77
6.01
ND
3.81
1.27
0.36
0.39
0.18
6.13
ND
1.69
ND
0.13
405.16
350.69
13207R2
7/2/98
7/10/98
4.97
3.59
5.92
2.17
6.86
0.28
3.07
3.21
0.37
16.12
1.11
1.19
1.85
37.25
1.82
2.92
14.53
1.72
3.50
1.69
4.29
1.86
1.19
0.23
2.12
27.35
15.70
9.66
0.92
0.49
ND
11.46
0.93
0.50
5.06
1.80
6.28
7.73
5.67
2.32
5.79
ND
9.20
4.98
2.40
2.52
3.96
26.03
2.10
2.02
0.13
2.38
5.27
18.18
1.64
5.68
0.39
1.82
0.37
1.30
1.36
4.60
2.23
2.33
2.01
0.94
5.53
ND
4.21
1.68
0.42
0.42
0.20
5.98
ND
1.55
ND
0.06
436.80
349.40
13202
7/3/98
7/11/98
5.10
5.13
9.85
3.66
15.77
0.50
10.67
4.52
0.11
46.28
3.52
3.70
3.22
100.52
5.73
8.76
43.40
1.52
11.38
5.93
15.34
5.00
3.21
0.74
6.32
81.45
43.88
27.53
2.68
1.53
ND
34.61
2.93
1.55
13.69
4.25
16.99
4.81
12.98
4.84
13.83
ND
15.95
11.45
5.01
4.55
7.33
57.39
4.21
3.91
0.36
5.29
11.14
38.01
1.79
13.40
0.58
3.21
0.99
0.82
3.14
10.68
5.45
5.30
4.38
0.87
14.15
ND
2.20
2.62
0.86
0.95
0.16
0.98
0.05
0.46
0.05
0.02
1011.96
825.15
13249
7/6/98
VOID
13324
7/7/98
7/15/98
3.00
1.97
3.91
1.22
4.02
0.06
4.13
2.52
0.22
30.48
2.47
2.67
1.65
64.14
3.92
6.30
26.22
0.66
8.13
4.22
9.38
3.26
2.23
0.50
4.18
58.21
29.73
18.41
1.89
1.04
ND
22.63
2.04
1.08
8.73
2.74
10.77
1.63
7.26
2.77
8.18
0.72
8.59
6.75
2.58
2.46
3.49
33.77
2.08
2.00
0.15
2.76
6.96
25.61
1.13
8.92
0.32
1.95
0.46
0.28
2.14
7.41
3.73
3.62
2.87
0.40
10.32
ND
1.54
1.83
0.55
0.55
0.98
0.53
ND
ND
ND
ND
609.15
516.02
13328
7/8/98
7/16/98
2.59
3.12
4.67
1.87
6.22
0.27
3.19
2.41
0.32
20.17
1.45
1.62
1.07
45.79
2.57
3.95
18.06
0.83
5.09
2.56
6.61
2.20
1.81
0.34
2.86
34.07
20.33
12.39
1.19
0.74
ND
15.16
1.31
0.69
5.97
1.89
7.77
1.30
4.17
1.72
5.54
0.74
5.85
4.52
1.89
1.66
2.25
25.09
1.32
1.01
0.16
1.79
4.47
16.06
0.62
5.42
0.23
1.12
0.28
0.31
1.21
4.07
2.14
1.87
1.67
0.33
5.33
ND
0.78
1.12
0.23
0.29
ND
0.15
ND
ND
ND
ND
398.21
349.87
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13369
7/9/98
7/16/98
1.73
0.89
4.72
0.74
3.97
0.07
1.04
1.59
0.10
3.51
0.19
0.19
0.18
13.13
0.37
0.63
2.96
0.40
0.70
0.31
0.70
0.29
0.82
0.04
0.29
4.12
3.61
1.72
0.16
0.20
ND
2.47
0.23
0.11
1.01
0.31
2.01
0.37
1.93
0.60
1.09
0.22
1.40
0.93
0.61
0.40
0.50
6.40
0.28
0.24
0.12
0.52
1.19
4.33
0.96
1.46
0.13
0.37
0.06
0.24
0.31
1.10
0.58
0.48
0.39
0.48
1.57
ND
0.58
0.28
0.09
0.12
ND
2.78
ND
1.12
ND
0.04
113.97
89.77
13531
7/10/98
8/7/98
14.58
4.68
21.61
10.33
27.95
0.29
5.83
4.95
0.91
6.85
1.09
1.15
2.07
27.14
1.21
1.08
6.21
1.94
1.59
1.07
1.61
1.14
1.18
ND
0.72
10.37
5.39
3.06
0.38
0.34
ND
3.38
0.34
0.17
1.98
1.28
4.85
1.39
2.22
1.50
2.45
ND
4.10
1.93
1.46
1.01
1.46
19.74
1.17
1.27
0.18
2.05
3.26
10.05
2.86
4.17
0.47
1.72
0.53
1.87
1.07
2.91
1.82
1.88
1.39
2.35
4.70
ND
2.57
1.45
0.54
0.62
0.16
2.34
0.50
0.96
ND
0.37
350.43
271.17
13371
7/13/98
7/16/98
1.50
8.84
12.70
7.98
16.42
0.95
19.84
8.89
1.06
33.96
3.74
3.69
3.53
76.12
3.41
4.83
17.29
2.99
5.04
2.61
4.95
3.21
1.83
0.47
1.89
35.99
15.18
8.44
0.86
0.64
ND
7.55
1.10
0.49
4.92
1.85
9.26
1.91
4.87
2.66
5.40
0.62
8.80
4.39
2.82
2.11
2.92
34.33
1.83
1.51
0.19
2.13
4.60
14.79
1.47
5.73
0.64
2.10
0.08
1.53
1.21
4.09
2.09
2.46
2.23
1.15
6.73
ND
3.65
1.56
0.59
0.38
0.15
1.77
ND
ND
ND
ND
571.38
469.51
13530
7/14/98
8/7/98
7.76
4.75
19.01
3.17
22.23
0.34
9.41
3.71
0.52
29.55
2.76
2.41
1.75
77.10
3.64
4.71
27.37
1.19
6.68
3.66
7.83
3.08
3.51
0.38
3.22
44.57
22.19
15.23
1.37
1.07
ND
19.92
1.32
0.86
7.78
2.73
11.92
2.47
7.09
3.23
7.78
0.18
9.39
7.29
3.05
2.62
3.82
42.53
2.61
2.68
0.24
3.79
8.03
28.60
2.05
9.97
0.58
2.90
1.13
0.37
2.53
8.40
4.67
4.32
3.31
1.45
12.52
ND
2.09
3.23
1.13
1.21
0.17
1.72
0.29
1.14
ND
0.34
686.14
579.62
13523
7/15/98
8/8/98
9.02
6.27
18.16
4.06
24.00
0.41
4.89
5.00
0.86
27.64
2.68
2.91
1.72
78.75
4.34
6.00
28.62
1.38
8.18
4.45
10.01
3.71
1.87
0.42
3.80
49.81
26.04
16.61
1.62
0.93
ND
20.85
1.45
0.95
8.36
3.09
12.35
2.21
6.99
2.85
7.80
ND
10.17
7.38
2.89
2.49
3.61
39.34
2.44
2.54
0.15
3.17
7.78
26.93
1.65
9.31
0.45
2.46
0.86
0.46
2.44
7.81
4.27
4.24
2.97
1.16
11.32
ND
2.29
2.82
1.08
1.32
0.16
1.77
0.46
0.92
ND
0.19
685.36
590.36
13584
7/16/98
8/8/98
16.71
10.22
25.52
7.46
20.29
0.73
6.88
8.98
1.71
34.87
3.25
3.67
2.20
104.80
5.61
8.02
55.52
1.85
10.57
5.67
13.97
4.98
2.19
0.58
5.37
65.26
34.45
21.99
2.36
1.24
ND
26.36
1.96
1.30
10.90
4.27
17.00
3.94
9.01
3.72
10.85
0.33
15.03
9.35
3.41
3.87
5.50
56.63
3.29
3.20
0.17
4.12
11.37
39.33
1.60
13.85
0.28
2.79
1.12
1.02
3.39
11.14
5.73
5.79
4.21
1.37
16.14
ND
2.51
3.86
1.59
1.18
0.32
2.28
0.29
1.34
ND
0.34
934.38
813.96
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13703D1
7/17/98
8/8/98
13.28
8.48
26.23
5.53
26.19
0.58
11.87
6.13
1.17
36.53
2.91
3.04
1.73
85.59
4.32
5.72
38.88
1.45
7.45
3.94
9.29
4.37
2.75
0.39
4.10
46.90
25.29
16.60
1.51
0.98
ND
20.59
1.41
0.91
8.16
3.26
12.79
2.43
7.32
3.10
8.10
ND
11.40
7.25
3.34
2.78
4.05
42.74
2.61
2.65
0.22
3.41
11.07
39.92
2.16
11.97
0.45
2.48
0.90
1.25
2.36
7.77
4.19
4.15
3.02
1.30
10.98
ND
2.61
3.37
0.90
1.03
0.22
2.07
0.11
0.98
ND
0.21
765.83
667.20
13703R1
7/17/98
8/19/98
10.96
7.64
20.08
5.19
23.59
0.33
10.96
5.46
0.95
32.81
2.49
2.79
1.55
81.49
3.97
5.19
35.65
1.30
6.80
3.62
8.38
4.16
2.06
0.44
3.92
42.82
23.36
15.19
1.29
0.86
ND
18.90
1.40
0.87
7.56
2.81
11.58
2.35
6.97
2.87
7.25
ND
10.43
6.60
2.74
2.51
3.62
39.26
2.36
2.21
0.19
3.18
10.38
37.27
1.91
11.07
0.38
2.40
0.84
1.17
2.31
7.16
3.87
3.66
2.86
1.22
10.29
ND
2.35
2.61
1.01
1.09
0.16
1.99
0.08
0.96
ND
0.25
692.66
608.27
13704D2
7/17/98
8/8/98
13.74
8.43
26.13
5.58
26.15
0.55
12.12
6.21
1.18
36.47
2.62
3.14
2.36
86.40
4.21
5.73
38.97
1.46
7.50
4.08
9.49
4.50
3.85
0.36
4.03
51.09
27.03
16.67
1.62
0.83
ND
20.11
1.28
0.97
8.30
3.36
12.89
2.47
7.21
3.07
8.02
ND
11.40
7.30
3.20
2.95
3.98
42.82
2.66
2.63
0.34
3.78
11.23
40.12
2.58
12.13
0.42
2.52
1.07
1.24
2.38
7.79
4.28
4.35
3.06
1.68
10.96
ND
2.55
3.22
0.79
1.01
0.10
2.17
0.20
1.02
ND
0.25
785.93
678.34
13704R2
7/17/98
8/19/98
11.43
7.55
20.36
5.02
23.86
0.39
11.05
5.83
1.10
33.65
2.64
2.78
2.06
84.58
4.01
5.33
35.91
1.33
6.82
3.66
8.69
3.99
3.69
0.41
4.10
46.26
25.35
15.22
1.15
0.81
ND
18.76
1.37
0.76
7.59
2.72
12.24
2.12
6.57
2.74
7.20
ND
10.41
6.63
2.90
2.60
3.73
39.67
2.45
1.90
0.18
3.27
10.40
37.36
2.22
11.18
0.44
2.36
1.03
1.18
2.21
7.35
4.01
3.94
2.94
1.36
10.19
ND
2.45
2.56
0.77
1.00
0.15
1.93
0.19
0.77
ND
0.27
712.71
623.04
13604
7/20/98
8/8/98
2.89
1.65
12.35
1.54
9.27
0.67
2.45
2.17
0.13
5.48
0.59
0.61
ND
17.59
0.90
0.57
7.10
0.86
1.15
0.75
0.96
0.98
0.48
0.07
0.67
7.27
4.83
2.97
0.16
0.19
ND
4.10
0.26
0.05
1.83
0.95
3.44
0.69
1.43
0.96
1.97
ND
2.75
1.63
1.09
0.61
1.13
10.77
0.81
0.81
0.09
1.16
2.28
7.15
4.50
2.59
0.17
1.18
0.55
0.12
0.88
2.17
1.58
1.34
1.01
2.28
3.21
ND
1.26
0.60
0.51
0.61
0.06
1.16
ND
0.32
ND
0.22
214.50
159.57
13727
7/21/98
8/20/98
3.84
3.56
6.11
2.10
4.81
0.05
2.75
2.76
0.42
13.53
1.42
1.65
0.78
44.26
2.33
3.51
15.85
1.01
4.93
2.64
6.08
2.49
1.62
0.31
2.68
30.44
15.98
9.59
0.85
0.51
ND
11.53
0.84
0.54
4.67
1.90
7.28
1.34
4.20
1.99
4.25
ND
5.51
3.72
1.47
1.28
1.98
20.00
1.28
1.27
0.07
1.66
3.92
13.72
1.66
4.89
0.22
1.27
0.68
0.13
1.40
4.25
2.34
2.25
1.82
1.19
6.08
ND
0.88
1.47
0.84
0.71
0.10
0.81
0.17
0.51
0.05
0.13
372.37
317.15
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13729
7/22/98
8/20/98
3.11
1.97
4.70
1.55
4.16
0.10
2.14
2.04
0.25
10.85
1.15
1.37
0.67
34.92
2.12
2.99
13.08
1.03
4.14
2.26
5.32
2.03
1.14
0.23
1.94
24.16
13.07
8.18
0.88
0.41
ND
9.89
0.78
0.37
4.10
1.70
5.79
1.21
3.37
1.52
3.54
ND
4.44
2.74
1.25
1.04
1.58
16.87
1.10
1.17
0.15
1.47
3.43
11.64
1.15
4.05
0.19
1.17
0.65
0.29
1.23
3.50
2.03
1.86
1.47
1.06
5.16
ND
1.01
1.26
0.71
0.61
0.13
0.78
0.38
0.41
ND
0.13
306.00
260.31
13763
7/23/98
8/20/98
2.34
1.32
3.33
1.12
3.20
0.08
1.96
1.68
0.20
9.65
1.01
1.21
0.65
34.18
1.83
2.54
11.56
0.98
3.62
2.07
4.70
1.70
1.14
0.21
1.99
22.73
12.31
7.28
0.76
0.41
ND
8.71
0.62
0.36
3.60
1.29
4.61
1.16
3.21
1.62
3.17
0.79
4.13
2.62
1.17
0.84
1.47
14.14
0.92
1.00
0.08
1.37
2.92
9.99
1.34
3.58
0.13
1.22
0.61
0.20
1.33
3.31
2.04
1.80
1.53
1.16
4.90
ND
1.18
1.07
0.81
0.71
0.06
0.83
0.13
0.38
0.03
0.10
279.41
236.02
13762
7/24/98
8/21/98
1.54
3.77
1.24
42.22
ND
13.28
1.83
0.23
37.08
0.94
1.18
0.77
35.31
1.88
2.71
12.23
0.92
3.42
1.93
4.45
2.20
1.12
0.10
2.14
24.79
12.80
7.93
0.79
0.31
ND
8.47
0.59
0.40
3.49
1.42
3.97
1.12
2.93
1.49
2.98
ND
3.91
2.02
1.02
0.80
1.36
9.94
0.88
0.95
0.06
1.13
2.07
6.07
1.23
2.38
ND
0.92
0.52
0.23
0.88
2.22
1.44
1.31
1.17
1.16
3.31
ND
0.94
0.93
0.76
0.63
ND
0.78
0.37
0.35
ND
0.11
345.64
300.53
13781
7/27/98
8/21/98
2.61
1.18
4.10
1.28
4.17
0.06
1.78
1.76
0.20
9.05
0.94
1.10
0.65
36.97
1.92
2.61
11.56
1.10
3.32
1.93
4.36
1.96
1.13
0.23
2.01
24.06
12.21
7.59
0.67
0.46
ND
8.22
0.59
0.34
3.33
1.47
3.77
1.17
2.85
1.66
2.83
ND
3.61
2.09
0.91
0.72
1.24
8.93
0.87
0.86
0.08
1.08
1.73
5.35
1.35
2.11
ND
0.82
0.52
0.28
0.84
1.95
1.36
1.15
0.92
1.27
2.80
ND
0.63
0.70
0.65
0.51
ND
0.64
0.23
0.26
ND
0.09
267.56
214.69
13803D1
7/28/98
8/28/98
2.53
2.57
4.98
1.22
4.66
0.05
1.89
1.59
0.25
7.77
0.87
0.92
0.49
30.03
1.75
2.01
9.40
0.87
2.78
1.61
3.40
1.61
0.94
0.16
1.59
17.50
9.13
5.93
0.62
0.29
ND
7.28
0.57
0.28
2.82
1.17
3.96
3.00
2.50
1.37
2.65
ND
3.35
1.93
1.06
0.72
1.22
11.77
0.83
0.95
0.05
1.08
2.27
7.47
1.22
2.73
0.13
0.86
0.53
0.17
0.93
2.37
1.47
1.30
1.06
0.89
3.36
ND
0.67
0.90
0.56
0.43
0.04
0.91
0.08
0.51
ND
0.17
228.33
199.00
13803R1
7/28/98
9/14/98
2.49
2.47
4.99
1.37
5.01
0.10
1.94
1.67
0.24
7.91
0.77
0.94
0.49
31.11
1.70
2.07
9.58
0.92
2.78
1.60
3.48
1.51
0.88
0.16
1.67
18.75
9.63
6.39
0.61
0.31
ND
7.26
0.47
0.29
3.11
1.25
4.52
3.36
2.85
1.54
2.89
ND
3.54
2.30
1.15
0.80
1.28
12.16
0.86
0.71
0.05
1.13
2.34
7.56
0.97
2.75
0.12
0.82
0.48
0.14
0.93
2.32
1.47
1.16
1.14
0.82
3.13
ND
0.65
0.84
0.50
0.41
0.04
0.95
0.10
0.54
ND
0.14
237.64
205.39
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13804D2
7/28/98
8/28/98
2.54
2.55
5.08
1.24
4.59
0.11
1.77
1.64
0.23
7.52
0.84
0.86
0.48
27.78
1.58
1.86
9.12
0.93
2.65
1.55
3.34
1.55
1.05
0.14
1.48
17.00
9.05
5.79
0.58
0.34
ND
6.81
0.43
0.29
2.79
1.22
4.55
3.00
2.59
1.40
2.55
ND
3.39
2.10
1.11
0.78
1.22
11.54
0.84
0.84
0.09
1.05
2.23
7.32
1.34
2.72
0.11
0.85
0.48
0.21
0.86
2.34
1.40
1.29
1.17
1.17
3.35
ND
0.62
0.86
0.46
0.45
0.09
0.54
0.25
0.27
ND
0.10
230.11
194.28
13804R2
7/28/98
9/14/98
2.55
2.46
5.08
1.33
4.77
0.13
1.88
1.69
0.24
7.60
0.84
0.92
0.48
29.34
1.77
2.03
9.61
0.96
2.77
1.59
3.38
1.66
0.99
0.17
1.63
18.55
9.86
6.31
0.61
0.36
ND
7.18
0.47
0.30
3.22
1.35
5.00
3.37
2.79
1.51
2.74
ND
3.57
2.01
1.25
0.86
1.28
12.12
0.92
0.87
0.08
1.15
2.30
7.57
1.50
2.72
0.14
0.85
0.52
0.19
0.84
2.28
1.43
1.17
1.07
1.31
3.14
ND
0.57
0.78
0.48
0.46
0.09
0.57
0.13
0.18
ND
0.08
247.18
203.96
13905
7/29/98
8/18/98
1.90
1.46
3.03
1.10
2.95
ND
1.72
1.72
0.19
10.05
0.97
1.25
ND
33.30
2.19
2.96
13.38
0.88
4.10
2.30
5.28
1.91
1.03
0.20
1.73
25.03
12.93
8.78
0.87
0.48
ND
10.67
0.87
0.45
4.11
1.55
5.02
1.88
2.61
1.35
3.19
ND
4.05
2.95
1.10
0.96
1.36
15.07
1.01
1.01
0.06
1.42
2.92
10.08
1.15
3.41
0.30
1.11
0.66
0.25
1.07
2.79
1.80
1.50
1.19
0.97
4.08
ND
0.80
1.04
0.46
0.43
0.05
0.71
ND
0.26
ND
0.10
284.64
241.51
13897
7/30/98
8/18/98
1.56
1.73
2.99
1.04
3.15
ND
1.51
1.50
0.12
7.89
0.88
1.06
0.49
28.49
1.64
2.28
10.40
0.93
3.24
1.86
4.10
1.35
0.86
0.16
1.76
20.23
10.96
6.91
0.71
0.37
ND
8.24
0.57
0.33
3.35
1.43
4.23
1.01
2.95
1.53
2.71
ND
3.24
2.13
0.95
0.40
1.27
12.03
0.90
0.87
0.12
1.19
2.35
8.04
1.17
2.77
ND
0.84
0.52
0.15
0.94
2.36
1.54
1.26
0.81
1.18
3.53
ND
0.64
0.81
0.59
0.46
ND
0.59
ND
0.14
ND
0.05
239.25
200.37
13914
7/31/98
8/18/98
2.90
1.48
3.92
1.45
3.51
ND
1.76
1.98
0.22
9.97
1.06
1.36
0.80
34.85
2.11
3.17
13.61
1.58
4.37
2.46
5.88
2.19
1.24
0.25
2.41
26.73
14.39
9.18
0.97
0.51
ND
11.07
0.87
0.47
4.13
1.59
5.54
1.35
3.65
1.86
3.55
ND
4.39
3.10
1.32
0.93
1.57
16.16
1.07
1.06
0.14
1.46
3.20
10.89
1.01
3.72
0.10
1.08
0.62
0.30
1.12
3.08
1.91
1.63
1.36
0.90
4.40
ND
0.87
1.12
0.62
0.56
0.05
0.67
ND
0.29
ND
0.10
309.49
261.20
13918
8/3/98
8/19/98
2.41
6.60
16.04
4.92
18.32
0.61
5.54
5.94
1.06
25.04
3.12
2.89
ND
90.38
4.98
7.30
35.84
1.51
9.88
5.21
12.88
4.61
2.66
0.67
5.12
62.87
33.79
21.52
2.13
1.21
ND
25.61
2.56
ND
10.36
3.62
15.45
2.47
8.66
3.16
9.00
0.30
11.70
8.11
3.47
2.75
4.07
42.74
2.66
2.64
ND
3.41
7.91
27.39
1.81
9.43
0.35
2.75
0.94
1.04
2.54
8.32
4.67
4.59
3.24
1.71
11.97
ND
2.47
3.34
0.98
1.14
ND
1.61
ND
0.79
ND
0.24
768.76
657.01
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13972
8/4/98
8/28/98
12.78
10.92
26.32
5.46
40.68
0.52
12.14
6.63
0.98
42.85
3.14
3.84
2.55
156.62
7.10
9.70
55.00
1.69
12.75
6.91
15.84
7.17
4.61
0.74
7.34
93.66
50.29
30.79
2.96
1.73
ND
37.18
2.32
1.53
14.28
5.08
21.87
22.40
11.87
5.42
12.81
ND
15.67
11.21
4.32
3.74
5.19
59.45
3.79
3.50
0.29
4.89
10.40
35.07
3.81
11.85
0.71
3.56
1.37
2.02
3.16
9.92
5.73
4.93
4.20
2.76
13.68
ND
3.22
3.23
1.46
1.62
0.17
3.63
0.27
2.20
ND
0.55
1164.63
1010.04
13977D1
8/5/98
8/28/98
4.10
4.02
17.10
1.85
17.85
0.17
4.40
2.27
0.33
13.88
0.92
1.11
0.60
45.61
1.97
2.74
15.12
0.61
3.61
2.02
4.44
2.26
1.06
0.22
2.37
27.28
15.47
9.54
0.84
0.48
ND
11.69
0.68
0.48
4.63
1.77
7.10
1.64
3.71
1.64
4.02
ND
5.91
3.66
1.75
1.38
1.96
18.94
1.23
1.27
0.15
1.59
3.47
11.17
1.32
3.99
0.10
1.11
0.58
0.21
1.21
3.28
1.96
1.58
1.34
1.12
4.47
ND
0.76
1.09
0.64
0.68
0.04
0.68
0.14
0.27
ND
0.12
367.51
320.82
13977R1
8/5/98
9/16/98
3.00
2.75
9.69
1.47
11.75
0.10
3.33
1.62
0.21
8.01
0.55
0.69
0.36
46.32
1.26
1.50
8.13
2.94
1.94
1.17
2.15
1.57
1.06
0.12
1.25
13.98
9.16
6.00
0.45
0.28
ND
7.84
0.33
1.90
3.05
1.37
4.57
1.61
3.27
1.66
3.10
ND
4.02
2.40
1.42
0.88
1.46
15.81
1.08
0.85
0.10
1.76
2.39
7.30
1.67
2.72
0.21
1.13
0.52
1.91
0.85
2.16
1.34
1.22
1.10
1.88
4.08
ND
0.95
0.72
0.50
0.47
0.05
0.79
0.36
0.30
0.06
0.15
289.91
236.11
13978D2
8/5/98
8/28/98
4.12
3.97
17.36
1.76
18.22
0.14
4.51
2.28
0.39
14.31
0.98
1.09
0.57
45.45
2.16
2.84
15.82
0.67
3.78
2.06
4.55
2.37
1.07
0.21
2.40
28.17
15.83
10.02
0.89
0.56
ND
12.09
0.73
0.51
4.82
1.87
7.19
1.83
4.04
1.94
4.29
ND
6.06
3.86
0.45
1.41
1.99
19.52
1.34
1.19
0.12
1.67
3.60
11.60
1.22
4.11
0.14
1.21
0.61
0.26
1.14
3.29
1.97
1.67
1.41
1.15
4.65
ND
0.74
1.22
0.62
0.61
ND
0.71
0.16
0.29
0.05
0.12
375.79
328.02
13978R2
8/5/98
10/20/98
3.57
2.86
14.02
1.59
15.65
0.17
3.87
1.98
0.35
12.19
0.80
0.93
0.57
40.79
1.62
2.33
13.29
0.52
3.06
1.74
3.78
2.11
0.88
0.19
2.14
24.33
13.94
8.80
0.75
0.48
ND
10.49
0.73
0.40
4.43
1.74
6.12
1.79
3.68
1.83
3.89
ND
5.09
3.00
1.67
1.21
1.82
16.40
1.07
1.05
0.11
1.45
2.92
9.68
1.15
3.31
0.11
0.97
0.45
0.11
0.99
2.62
1.61
1.23
1.14
0.94
3.62
ND
0.65
0.88
0.46
0.47
0.04
0.61
0.34
0.27
0.04
0.07
322.55
281.97
14052
8/6/98
8/28/98
2.23
2.39
26.57
1.25
30.60
0.08
7.12
1.70
0.27
22.77
1.12
1.39
0.81
44.27
2.40
3.60
20.84
0.69
5.06
2.80
6.76
2.58
0.98
0.32
2.82
31.10
17.89
12.11
1.09
0.64
ND
15.27
0.96
0.62
6.01
2.08
7.00
2.46
4.68
2.19
4.80
ND
5.68
4.69
2.44
1.30
1.79
19.19
1.42
1.31
0.13
2.12
3.59
12.46
0.94
4.09
0.24
1.19
0.49
0.41
1.13
3.23
1.93
1.66
1.28
0.81
4.48
ND
0.64
1.21
0.49
0.45
ND
0.54
0.11
0.16
ND
0.12
429.12
382.02
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14057
8/7/98
8/28/98
3.65
3.96
11.64
1.82
7.87
0.12
2.74
2.28
0.36
5.57
0.47
0.55
0.19
19.19
0.74
0.64
6.04
1.75
0.99
0.67
0.87
0.88
0.33
ND
0.75
7.72
4.80
2.97
0.23
0.19
ND
3.36
0.18
0.12
1.75
0.87
3.90
0.67
1.43
0.94
1.94
ND
3.22
1.82
1.12
0.73
1.26
12.82
0.89
0.84
ND
1.09
2.76
8.92
0.98
2.98
0.11
1.00
0.51
0.58
0.90
2.38
1.50
1.45
1.13
0.60
3.70
ND
1.28
1.17
0.46
0.51
0.08
1.10
ND
0.33
ND
0.14
198.60
163.51
14090
8/10/98
8/29/98
1.90
1.61
2.68
1.11
3.79
0.04
1.10
1.87
0.20
2.59
0.36
0.44
0.09
11.53
0.55
0.40
2.89
1.69
0.75
0.51
0.66
0.58
0.44
ND
0.52
4.11
2.90
1.77
0.16
0.14
ND
2.35
0.12
0.11
1.07
0.60
2.05
0.62
1.42
1.00
1.21
ND
1.80
0.96
0.78
0.24
0.74
6.93
0.51
0.57
ND
0.60
1.39
4.23
0.84
1.61
ND
0.62
0.44
0.25
0.61
1.34
0.96
0.81
0.65
0.70
2.00
ND
0.57
0.54
0.50
0.39
ND
0.56
0.08
0.19
ND
0.09
117.88
90.45
14174
8/11/98
9/2/98
1.75
1.49
12.42
0.92
14.15
ND
4.24
1.45
0.13
16.17
1.07
1.34
0.69
44.61
2.24
3.00
22.46
0.67
4.39
2.47
5.56
2.82
1.30
0.23
2.83
31.31
16.65
10.53
1.07
0.50
ND
13.23
1.00
0.58
5.18
2.31
5.73
2.00
4.13
2.34
4.27
ND
7.38
3.93
2.17
1.49
2.61
17.99
1.22
1.22
0.07
1.78
3.13
11.02
1.30
3.54
0.20
1.13
0.50
0.70
1.09
2.53
1.59
1.25
0.93
1.01
3.50
ND
0.71
0.73
0.56
0.59
0.05
0.61
0.21
0.18
ND
0.08
382.27
326.17
14173
8/12/98
10/19/98
5.82
3.99
15.56
2.46
20.48
0.24
4.30
2.85
0.42
16.00
1.16
1.39
0.90
58.55
2.88
3.84
22.68
0.96
5.37
2.86
7.36
3.00
1.81
0.29
3.39
40.03
23.06
14.18
1.31
0.76
ND
17.43
1.28
0.66
7.25
2.62
9.64
2.52
5.82
2.51
6.36
ND
7.81
5.47
2.64
1.98
2.75
30.40
1.60
1.76
0.11
2.33
5.47
19.13
2.03
6.35
0.17
1.56
0.63
1.24
1.61
4.92
2.70
2.26
2.16
1.67
6.66
ND
1.06
1.59
0.72
0.59
0.10
0.96
0.26
0.49
ND
0.14
523.94
445.28
14195
8/13/98
9/2/98
6.59
7.13
13.88
2.91
14.60
0.28
5.27
3.67
0.54
19.70
1.65
1.99
1.19
83.82
3.56
5.11
36.60
0.92
6.75
3.81
8.88
3.61
2.05
0.40
4.13
51.64
26.94
17.49
1.71
0.91
ND
21.36
1.67
0.87
8.59
3.18
11.52
5.78
7.77
3.47
9.40
ND
9.74
7.34
2.74
2.32
3.47
36.84
1.97
1.91
0.10
2.66
5.94
20.53
1.86
6.76
0.28
1.78
0.69
0.83
1.90
5.62
3.15
2.80
2.08
0.75
7.82
ND
1.63
1.99
0.64
0.69
0.08
1.75
0.21
0.96
ND
0.25
636.59
551.37
14233D1
8/14/98
9/11/98
7.68
7.92
12.52
3.57
9.78
0.32
2.68
4.29
0.86
12.96
1.30
1.41
0.98
49.53
2.65
4.03
20.60
1.00
5.53
3.01
7.09
3.12
1.20
0.35
3.54
43.49
23.17
15.32
1.35
0.86
ND
18.13
1.25
0.80
8.03
3.02
10.86
2.11
6.27
2.81
7.41
ND
9.80
6.09
2.55
2.31
3.41
34.09
1.97
2.02
0.15
2.45
6.39
21.61
1.26
7.28
0.22
1.50
0.72
0.27
1.80
5.70
3.09
2.72
2.33
0.46
7.79
ND
1.04
1.91
0.71
0.59
0.10
0.93
0.13
0.40
ND
0.16
510.68
446.75
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14233R1
8/14/98
9/11/98
7.79
8.10
12.62
3.73
9.95
0.40
2.77
4.34
0.78
13.12
1.46
1.52
0.93
49.97
2.72
4.18
20.73
0.94
5.43
3.03
7.26
3.13
1.29
0.39
3.50
43.70
23.30
15.39
1.49
0.77
ND
18.24
1.27
0.81
8.01
3.00
11.73
2.39
6.63
3.16
7.49
ND
9.98
6.11
2.59
2.34
3.49
34.66
2.11
1.93
0.13
2.40
6.42
22.09
1.29
7.46
0.20
1.51
0.83
0.27
1.86
5.82
3.26
2.95
2.43
0.50
7.95
ND
1.06
1.86
0.70
0.74
0.08
0.95
0.10
0.47
ND
0.17
519.65
454.20
14234D2
8/14/98
9/11/98
7.58
7.92
12.44
3.66
9.78
0.30
2.77
4.28
0.79
13.19
1.37
1.53
0.92
48.77
2.74
4.00
20.68
0.95
5.51
3.00
7.23
3.09
1.24
0.37
3.46
43.62
23.19
15.33
1.37
0.88
ND
18.60
1.39
0.84
7.99
2.92
10.67
2.50
6.80
2.82
7.36
ND
10.00
6.08
2.55
2.36
3.54
34.46
2.01
1.98
0.18
2.45
6.44
21.93
3.23
7.32
0.40
1.57
0.88
0.19
1.80
5.71
3.22
2.74
2.20
1.97
8.61
ND
1.01
1.59
0.67
0.66
3.33
5.34
8.61
9.56
10.55
9.62
568.81
498.63
14234R2
8/14/98
9/11/98
7.81
8.03
12.69
3.74
9.90
0.28
2.87
4.38
0.88
13.30
1.37
1.59
0.94
50.04
2.75
4.23
20.95
0.96
5.53
3.04
7.29
3.10
1.25
0.34
3.54
44.12
23.62
15.53
1.48
0.82
ND
18.68
1.27
0.80
8.03
2.92
11.07
2.58
6.69
2.82
7.37
ND
10.10
6.09
2.65
2.38
3.55
35.00
2.09
2.10
0.21
2.44
6.52
22.21
3.04
7.53
0.37
1.52
0.84
0.26
1.88
5.87
3.40
2.86
2.45
2.28
8.86
ND
1.03
1.80
0.67
0.60
3.46
5.32
8.52
9.55
10.35
9.49
577.04
505.84
14217
8/17/98
9/10/98
5.03
4.52
8.40
2.70
5.20
0.19
2.69
3.48
0.50
15.16
1.63
1.94
1.21
64.65
3.71
5.52
25.81
0.87
7.99
4.31
10.52
3.73
2.17
0.48
4.57
59.50
30.63
20.35
2.04
1.03
ND
24.34
1.92
1.08
9.74
3.42
13.17
2.71
7.59
3.08
8.28
ND
9.77
7.08
2.93
2.37
3.48
36.75
2.11
2.06
0.13
2.76
6.22
22.20
2.17
7.13
0.20
1.79
0.70
0.30
1.89
5.57
3.15
2.58
2.22
1.10
7.42
ND
1.02
1.67
0.71
0.63
0.17
0.97
0.83
0.92
0.37
0.54
606.19
517.73
14223
8/18/98
9/10/98
4.65
4.31
11.30
2.27
13.25
0.15
3.66
2.72
0.44
12.94
1.11
1.25
0.66
39.60
2.20
3.13
16.06
0.81
4.75
2.50
6.29
2.42
1.46
0.26
2.82
32.89
17.99
11.68
1.13
0.65
ND
14.60
1.22
0.63
6.16
2.34
8.10
2.52
5.25
2.45
5.50
ND
6.41
4.79
2.28
1.60
2.37
25.73
1.52
1.53
0.10
1.92
4.52
15.30
1.28
5.05
0.14
1.41
0.56
0.47
1.39
4.03
2.35
2.02
1.76
0.89
5.61
ND
1.39
1.35
0.59
0.51
0.09
0.92
0.47
0.67
0.38
0.51
426.39
356.01
14236
8/20/98
10/19/98
5.92
4.94
34.32
2.88
26.80
0.18
12.85
5.48
0.70
53.24
5.42
5.20
3.26
136.35
8.35
10.28
64.36
1.17
13.89
7.13
16.56
10.00
3.45
0.84
6.36
77.65
40.48
24.30
2.39
1.41
ND
27.27
2.26
1.23
11.81
5.01
12.14
3.09
8.71
4.81
9.27
ND
16.34
7.60
3.25
3.21
5.54
45.84
2.20
2.15
0.11
2.72
5.78
19.35
1.31
6.42
0.37
1.94
0.63
1.23
1.49
4.52
2.65
2.43
1.75
0.66
6.40
ND
2.14
1.54
0.72
0.62
0.08
1.58
0.22
0.60
0.09
0.28
918.61
825.55
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14350
8/21/98
9/22/98
7.50
7.92
53.72
3.52
18.96
0.28
7.35
5.19
0.79
32.49
3.13
3.55
2.26
95.08
6.81
9.12
46.97
1.24
11.07
5.95
14.25
6.12
4.97
0.74
5.81
73.78
36.98
23.64
2.25
1.49
ND
28.22
2.18
1.18
11.89
4.30
13.99
3.09
9.04
3.96
9.92
ND
11.69
8.13
3.20
2.88
4.12
43.68
2.49
2.49
0.14
3.11
7.25
24.60
1.44
8.03
0.39
3.01
0.82
0.95
1.96
5.68
3.53
3.61
2.07
0.71
8.07
ND
3.89
1.83
0.86
0.79
0.11
1.70
0.19
0.56
0.05
0.21
846.84
744.90
14838D1
8/24/98
9/23/98
5.64
5.55
9.89
2.48
9.19
0.19
3.13
2.89
0.52
9.42
0.93
1.08
0.56
29.78
1.74
2.50
12.59
0.86
3.57
1.98
4.62
2.12
1.28
0.20
2.29
26.50
14.68
9.75
0.93
0.55
ND
12.10
0.92
0.53
5.21
2.04
7.87
1.74
4.90
2.07
4.86
ND
6.06
4.19
1.76
1.52
2.12
25.14
1.42
1.47
0.08
1.81
4.27
13.74
0.96
4.75
0.16
1.12
0.58
0.19
1.23
3.64
2.09
1.86
1.65
0.45
4.95
ND
0.89
1.16
0.47
0.41
0.09
0.64
0.11
0.32
0.09
0.10
348.76
301.13
14383R1
8/24/98
9/24/98
7.12
7.27
9.45
3.20
11.87
0.18
4.09
3.70
0.67
12.29
1.14
1.32
0.66
38.38
2.17
3.29
16.51
0.99
4.61
2.58
6.02
2.75
1.66
0.31
2.84
33.99
19.26
12.77
1.25
0.66
ND
15.48
1.09
0.70
6.80
2.53
9.93
2.24
6.16
2.52
6.38
ND
7.88
5.42
2.32
2.02
2.73
33.04
1.91
1.48
0.17
2.27
5.37
17.51
0.90
5.98
0.23
1.39
0.64
0.22
1.43
4.40
2.46
2.25
1.99
0.20
5.68
ND
1.01
1.35
0.48
0.45
0.05
0.59
0.02
0.16
ND
0.04
430.52
380.86
14384D2
8/24/98
9/23/98
5.87
5.76
10.17
2.88
10.05
0.24
3.41
3.16
0.57
9.92
1.00
1.08
0.53
34.30
1.70
2.59
13.29
0.83
3.73
2.11
4.92
2.19
1.56
0.24
2.40
28.23
15.61
10.33
0.96
0.64
ND
12.50
0.87
0.56
5.51
2.10
8.46
1.90
5.05
2.33
5.35
ND
6.46
4.52
2.05
1.60
2.33
27.16
1.59
1.55
0.11
1.90
4.77
15.20
1.19
5.40
0.24
1.22
0.56
0.14
1.38
3.89
2.21
2.00
1.75
0.52
5.25
ND
1.68
1.13
0.56
0.51
0.08
0.67
0.06
0.33
ND
0.07
435.83
325.00
14384R2
8/24/98
9/24/98
7.05
6.92
11.83
3.16
11.59
0.20
3.93
3.60
0.64
11.81
1.04
1.27
0.44
39.63
1.93
3.14
15.64
0.96
4.41
2.43
5.70
2.79
1.81
0.23
2.81
32.62
18.46
12.27
1.22
0.65
ND
15.25
1.24
0.66
6.49
2.42
9.81
2.26
5.92
2.77
6.30
ND
7.76
5.23
2.30
1.88
2.77
31.93
1.81
1.88
0.15
2.22
5.53
17.74
1.19
6.27
0.16
1.37
0.69
0.21
1.51
4.36
2.53
2.29
1.74
0.24
5.75
ND
1.81
1.39
0.51
0.41
0.05
0.62
0.03
0.16
0.02
0.02
477.70
377.88
14486
8/25/98
9/24/98
12.69
12.03
19.33
6.40
17.95
0.55
6.28
6.86
1.29
27.21
3.21
2.94
4.05
101.24
5.67
9.12
43.76
1.59
12.78
6.83
17.48
6.24
3.95
0.86
7.40
97.60
52.49
34.60
3.27
2.01
ND
41.99
3.45
1.87
17.09
5.93
23.43
5.07
13.99
5.59
15.51
ND
18.47
12.99
5.14
5.02
6.56
75.99
3.99
3.90
0.29
4.94
12.33
41.63
1.85
13.66
0.39
3.24
1.12
0.55
3.22
10.16
5.53
4.90
4.23
0.64
13.62
ND
2.24
3.06
1.03
0.94
0.11
1.12
0.18
0.49
ND
0.09
1059.09
925.21
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14495
8/26/98
9/24/98
5.50
5.03
12.05
2.56
11.63
0.26
3.72
2.99
0.49
14.82
1.18
1.43
0.71
53.50
2.53
4.05
20.12
0.98
5.40
2.99
6.78
3.16
2.11
0.34
3.60
45.46
24.73
16.36
1.49
0.87
ND
19.97
1.53
0.90
8.18
2.94
11.19
2.64
6.96
3.22
7.56
ND
8.79
6.23
2.62
2.17
2.94
35.39
1.91
1.98
0.22
2.60
6.00
19.74
1.38
6.47
0.25
1.61
0.62
0.17
1.63
4.68
2.70
2.17
1.90
0.37
6.02
ND
0.94
1.37
0.45
0.50
0.08
0.59
0.04
0.18
ND
0.03
519.41
446.69
14494
8/27/98
10/19/98
7.14
5.90
10.61
3.25
10.72
0.31
3.05
3.86
0.79
11.13
1.09
1.20
0.70
43.09
2.08
3.30
16.28
0.87
4.38
2.41
5.44
2.67
1.46
0.29
2.92
34.05
19.40
12.76
1.29
0.71
ND
15.04
1.07
0.68
6.66
2.28
10.19
2.41
5.84
2.46
6.41
ND
7.57
5.29
2.28
1.99
2.70
34.60
1.82
1.82
0.15
2.20
5.61
18.44
1.25
6.31
0.28
1.40
0.66
0.26
1.56
4.89
2.70
2.38
2.11
0.73
6.84
ND
1.01
1.68
0.76
0.72
0.10
0.86
0.42
0.51
0.09
0.17
453.32
388.35
14516
8/28/98
10/16/98
4.85
1.86
7.82
2.71
6.51
0.18
1.67
2.10
0.45
8.23
1.23
0.96
0.51
35.02
1.82
2.53
12.03
0.66
3.38
1.96
4.63
1.86
1.29
0.24
2.29
27.38
15.68
10.07
0.99
0.59
ND
12.21
0.78
0.49
5.01
1.79
7.67
1.38
3.83
1.70
4.23
ND
4.82
3.66
1.64
1.27
1.70
19.58
1.10
1.08
0.14
1.60
3.49
12.11
1.16
3.97
0.16
1.06
0.51
0.23
1.09
2.93
1.75
1.34
1.10
0.92
4.01
ND
0.48
0.91
0.51
0.48
0.09
0.50
0.27
0.35
ND
0.07
331.65
276.72
14540
8/31/98
10/16/98
7.25
5.85
17.17
4.30
43.50
0.27
4.21
3.87
0.74
14.43
1.18
1.37
0.70
55.69
2.55
3.31
19.66
0.83
4.88
2.59
5.82
3.15
1.98
0.34
3.20
38.07
21.12
14.00
1.30
0.76
ND
16.97
1.26
0.75
7.43
2.60
11.79
2.32
6.48
0.10
7.03
ND
8.27
5.80
2.60
2.11
2.90
35.70
1.99
2.03
0.24
2.51
5.99
19.71
1.80
6.77
0.21
1.81
0.67
0.34
1.68
5.10
2.79
2.52
2.26
0.87
7.10
ND
1.39
1.96
0.82
0.84
0.13
1.07
0.29
0.64
ND
0.20
562.94
471.91
14561D1
9/1/98
10/16/98
5.50
6.50
15.40
4.21
45.47
0.27
4.14
3.68
0.76
11.03
0.93
1.07
0.55
47.13
1.65
2.40
47.25
0.71
3.37
1.79
4.32
2.40
1.62
0.24
2.89
26.15
15.38
9.78
0.80
0.61
ND
11.63
0.75
0.47
5.33
2.11
9.09
1.94
4.97
2.48
5.36
ND
7.56
4.39
2.19
1.87
2.67
32.65
1.65
1.62
0.10
1.98
6.51
21.51
1.84
7.47
0.22
1.59
0.67
1.54
1.49
4.87
2.66
2.63
2.13
0.99
6.70
ND
1.73
1.43
0.77
0.57
0.09
1.44
0.13
0.67
0.04
0.26
503.30
438.77
14561R1
9/1/98
10/22/98
8.51
6.69
15.59
4.33
46.81
0.33
4.27
3.93
0.84
11.43
0.99
1.17
0.52
48.85
2.27
2.46
48.70
0.76
3.39
1.89
4.37
2.50
1.51
0.22
3.02
26.68
16.09
10.14
0.83
0.59
ND
12.01
0.77
0.49
5.52
2.18
9.56
1.91
4.93
2.27
5.42
ND
7.73
4.50
2.25
1.88
2.82
33.17
1.70
1.76
0.15
2.11
6.66
22.30
2.06
7.60
0.23
1.63
0.70
1.59
1.57
5.01
2.74
2.70
2.22
1.13
7.05
ND
1.89
1.82
0.73
0.81
0.14
1.43
0.24
0.70
0.10
0.37
523.23
440.63
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14562D2
9/1/98
10/16/98
8.45
6.49
15.54
4.29
45.53
0.26
4.14
3.69
0.81
11.19
1.10
1.11
0.61
45.04
1.93
2.44
47.59
0.73
3.38
1.86
4.46
2.40
1.73
0.20
2.92
26.07
15.42
9.97
0.89
0.55
ND
11.83
0.79
0.47
5.35
2.15
9.40
2.01
4.81
2.19
5.34
ND
7.64
4.47
2.20
1.91
2.72
32.83
1.68
1.68
0.12
1.99
6.57
21.86
1.96
7.47
0.24
1.57
0.63
1.58
1.45
4.84
2.63
2.64
1.86
0.72
6.76
ND
1.77
1.30
0.78
0.75
0.13
1.34
0.14
0.64
0.09
0.16
508.71
442.25
14562R2
9/1/98
10/22/98
8.60
6.73
16.03
4.30
46.81
0.33
4.29
3.93
0.87
11.52
1.00
1.15
0.56
47.54
1.89
2.50
49.00
0.85
3.55
1.93
4.63
2.55
1.53
0.24
3.08
27.39
16.07
10.29
0.87
0.64
ND
12.42
0.94
0.52
5.64
2.37
9.48
2.10
5.26
2.57
5.65
ND
7.87
4.64
2.26
1.91
2.85
33.87
1.67
1.75
0.13
2.07
6.74
22.80
2.09
7.73
0.24
1.65
0.66
1.67
1.59
5.03
2.75
2.77
2.20
1.11
7.36
ND
1.92
1.69
0.84
0.70
0.15
1.42
0.29
0.67
0.10
0.28
534.08
461.07
14666
9/2/98
10/2/98
5.08
3.33
10.43
2.36
13.34
0.16
3.21
1.91
0.33
6.50
0.40
0.46
0.17
23.15
0.61
0.28
8.59
0.51
0.59
0.43
0.34
1.31
0.85
ND
0.96
6.13
5.06
3.13
0.12
0.16
ND
3.66
0.07
0.07
1.94
0.98
3.26
1.00
1.75
1.18
2.04
ND
3.39
1.50
1.14
0.78
1.25
11.12
0.74
0.75
0.05
0.94
1.99
5.85
0.72
2.18
0.10
0.76
0.38
0.79
0.60
1.70
1.05
0.96
0.73
0.80
2.31
ND
0.84
0.56
0.35
0.37
ND
0.67
0.19
0.33
ND
0.16
197.41
161.92
14673
9/3/98
10/3/98
19.51
14.51
25.47
9.75
21.36
0.89
10.15
10.35
2.04
38.78
2.74
2.75
1.10
120.06
3.45
4.74
51.21
1.39
9.74
4.56
9.10
4.43
2.74
0.53
6.47
50.32
36.34
22.15
2.29
1.07
ND
24.20
2.35
1.27
13.90
3.97
15.82
4.97
10.39
3.95
11.69
ND
14.02
8.85
4.56
3.60
4.78
60.50
3.14
3.29
0.17
3.19
8.96
28.75
1.67
10.24
0.30
1.92
0.79
0.56
2.16
7.12
3.70
3.84
2.82
0.62
9.82
ND
1.52
2.31
0.72
0.76
0.10
1.11
0.34
0.71
ND
0.24
885.00
779.69
14679
9/4/98
10/4/98
9.08
6.57
17.51
4.61
19.75
0.44
7.68
5.45
0.97
29.41
1.79
1.86
0.90
83.64
1.99
2.83
33.67
0.80
6.40
2.99
5.59
2.73
1.81
0.37
4.20
31.31
23.53
14.03
1.36
0.74
ND
14.79
1.31
0.84
8.96
2.43
8.69
3.37
6.00
2.36
6.40
ND
7.71
5.25
2.88
1.93
2.91
31.11
1.89
1.78
0.13
1.96
4.51
15.11
1.20
5.53
0.20
1.20
0.55
0.21
1.22
3.92
2.02
2.06
1.84
0.85
5.80
ND
0.76
1.37
0.42
0.45
0.09
0.73
0.16
0.45
ND
0.17
555.63
487.52
14701
9/8/98
10/9/98
11.34
9.59
16.66
5.88
19.46
0.34
8.72
7.10
1.20
36.64
2.47
2.54
1.20
119.83
3.70
4.97
48.88
1.12
11.42
5.31
11.07
4.11
3.51
0.61
6.23
58.22
38.53
22.63
2.73
1.13
ND
25.09
2.82
1.56
14.16
3.90
16.06
5.19
10.06
3.74
10.89
ND
14.18
8.89
4.52
3.56
4.87
58.99
3.05
3.12
0.16
3.33
8.74
28.52
2.18
9.76
0.28
1.97
0.82
0.53
2.27
7.28
3.74
3.51
3.10
1.28
10.01
ND
1.51
2.29
0.84
0.92
0.11
1.23
0.17
0.60
ND
0.30
881.90
757.23
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14775D1
9/9/98
10/9/98
5.39
4.12
14.36
2.64
16.06
0.23
10.78
3.47
0.36
34.93
2.38
2.86
1.34
116.04
3.18
4.54
33.01
0.90
6.88
3.65
7.19
3.28
3.05
0.34
3.51
35.12
23.24
13.57
1.30
0.65
ND
14.99
1.32
0.64
7.15
2.57
8.58
3.55
5.19
2.41
5.52
ND
7.02
4.63
2.80
1.65
2.36
28.34
1.72
1.65
0.19
2.05
3.64
11.55
1.97
4.02
0.29
1.48
0.57
0.88
1.08
2.82
1.76
1.73
1.12
0.86
4.07
ND
1.68
1.13
0.55
0.54
0.10
1.33
0.16
0.60
ND
0.10
568.95
506.75
14775R1
9/9/98
10/26/98
4.76
3.47
13.11
2.32
14.32
0.17
9.71
2.98
0.34
31.73
2.08
2.51
1.26
106.26
2.85
4.05
29.94
0.62
6.00
3.07
6.45
2.83
2.83
0.31
3.16
31.22
20.94
12.09
1.08
0.63
ND
12.90
0.96
0.57
6.41
2.22
8.40
3.07
4.59
1.98
4.85
ND
6.30
4.05
2.26
1.46
2.02
25.69
1.40
1.41
0.13
1.79
3.44
11.00
2.05
3.90
0.21
1.31
0.48
0.81
1.08
2.82
1.74
1.62
1.16
1.03
4.15
ND
1.66
1.19
0.51
0.51
0.13
1.26
0.22
0.68
ND
0.18
515.03
458.65
14776D2
9/9/98
10/9/98
4.91
3.64
12.82
2.41
14.87
0.08
9.81
3.22
0.36
33.23
2.21
2.65
1.26
108.10
2.88
4.24
31.24
0.68
6.30
3.21
6.58
3.04
2.72
0.34
3.33
32.24
21.66
12.86
1.18
0.58
ND
14.04
1.21
0.62
6.67
2.14
7.74
2.44
4.31
1.94
4.95
ND
6.59
4.17
2.40
1.44
2.11
25.20
1.50
1.46
0.12
1.81
3.28
10.43
1.53
3.64
0.19
1.26
0.47
0.78
0.90
2.51
1.47
1.40
1.01
0.94
3.62
ND
1.44
0.99
0.53
0.47
0.07
1.13
0.08
0.54
ND
0.09
517.86
464.26
14776R2
9/9/98
10/26/98
4.61
3.30
12.85
2.18
13.94
0.07
9.34
2.98
0.36
31.39
2.08
2.47
1.24
104.74
2.72
3.94
29.67
0.66
5.84
3.02
6.21
2.83
2.62
0.35
3.19
30.70
20.35
11.91
1.12
0.50
ND
12.70
0.96
0.58
6.36
2.24
8.25
2.79
4.91
1.93
4.65
ND
6.22
3.96
2.25
1.39
2.07
24.36
1.35
1.35
0.11
1.73
3.35
10.74
1.77
3.80
0.15
1.32
0.47
0.77
1.04
2.77
1.71
1.55
1.17
0.77
4.04
ND
1.57
0.81
0.62
0.53
0.08
1.26
0.09
0.65
ND
0.15
500.43
435.69
14786
9/10/98
10/17/98
3.23
3.39
30.32
1.62
10.53
0.12
4.66
2.06
0.24
20.38
1.21
1.32
0.72
59.60
1.77
2.33
31.24
0.47
5.54
2.65
4.99
2.02
1.58
0.30
3.14
27.52
18.08
10.57
1.27
0.60
ND
11.81
1.18
0.73
6.74
1.85
6.74
2.70
4.53
1.99
4.47
ND
5.24
3.79
2.07
1.20
1.85
22.12
1.29
1.00
ND
1.60
3.41
11.98
1.14
3.90
0.21
1.62
0.58
0.40
1.08
2.75
1.84
1.67
1.18
0.56
4.07
ND
1.88
0.89
0.53
0.42
0.05
0.86
ND
0.28
ND
0.07
432.92
377.69
14797
9/11/98
10/12/98
1.58
1.71
14.29
0.90
6.10
ND
3.07
1.27
0.09
12.27
1.07
0.87
0.35
38.55
1.08
1.35
16.70
0.38
3.29
1.60
2.70
1.36
1.08
0.18
1.91
16.24
10.78
6.32
0.76
0.35
ND
6.99
0.65
0.50
4.15
1.27
4.08
1.70
2.66
1.14
2.67
ND
3.13
2.54
1.67
0.81
1.13
19.50
0.92
0.91
0.06
1.21
2.74
9.35
1.19
3.07
0.11
0.96
0.43
0.13
0.75
1.90
1.27
1.06
1.05
0.76
2.72
ND
1.28
0.60
0.39
0.37
ND
0.63
0.06
0.17
0.01
0.04
275.20
236.92
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14796
9/14/98
10/17/98
6.04
7.04
9.15
3.01
9.26
0.23
5.55
3.66
0.60
23.07
1.62
1.66
0.84
68.96
2.05
3.14
30.09
0.87
7.63
3.51
7.47
2.46
1.83
0.40
3.91
37.00
23.99
14.31
1.88
0.85
ND
15.85
1.83
1.12
9.23
2.79
9.27
3.36
6.27
2.31
6.78
ND
8.02
5.72
2.93
2.00
3.00
32.41
2.03
2.17
0.10
2.14
5.50
18.52
1.14
6.40
0.15
1.22
0.65
0.30
1.61
5.19
2.77
2.44
2.04
0.60
7.04
ND
0.85
1.73
0.68
0.64
0.09
0.73
0.21
0.49
0.06
0.16
538.41
462.62
14806
9/15/98
10/17/98
2.08
1.27
7.67
1.34
11.61
ND
7.19
1.84
0.12
28.93
2.01
1.78
0.94
77.48
2.31
3.20
34.58
0.56
8.25
3.80
8.06
2.54
2.07
0.45
4.26
38.84
25.27
14.83
1.69
0.94
ND
16.75
1.90
1.16
9.43
3.20
7.97
3.60
5.24
2.41
5.74
ND
11.12
4.95
2.54
2.25
3.82
26.89
1.48
1.49
0.11
1.87
4.09
14.88
0.89
4.74
0.09
1.13
0.50
2.34
1.22
3.58
2.06
1.66
1.41
1.00
4.87
ND
0.85
1.06
0.54
0.49
0.07
0.71
0.04
0.32
0.02
0.08
520.27
458.49
14828
9/16/98
10/23/98
3.66
2.98
5.80
2.04
6.80
0.09
5.63
2.57
0.36
22.81
1.76
1.63
0.85
66.38
1.98
2.85
28.09
0.58
6.83
3.15
6.55
2.32
1.58
0.35
3.59
32.64
21.69
12.69
1.47
0.67
ND
13.56
1.53
0.93
7.88
2.33
7.76
2.97
4.80
1.84
5.12
ND
6.23
4.35
2.41
1.50
2.29
24.69
1.37
1.46
0.08
1.69
3.89
13.64
1.06
4.58
0.15
1.10
0.49
0.42
1.21
3.52
2.04
1.74
1.45
0.38
5.01
ND
0.88
1.17
0.55
0.48
0.06
0.66
0.04
0.31
ND
0.05
440.30
390.07
14906D1
9/17/98
10/20/98
2.42
2.03
5.30
1.39
9.22
ND
5.88
2.41
0.27
29.14
2.03
2.25
1.17
102.92
3.39
4.05
34.03
1.08
7.68
3.71
7.50
2.81
1.90
0.42
4.02
39.27
22.87
13.83
1.68
0.73
ND
15.29
1.47
0.87
8.13
2.35
6.81
34.74
5.22
2.29
5.39
ND
5.89
4.18
2.19
1.35
1.99
21.75
1.24
1.25
0.08
1.46
3.12
10.01
1.37
3.41
0.15
0.91
0.55
0.54
0.95
2.86
1.60
1.28
1.26
0.74
3.95
ND
0.85
0.91
0.50
0.42
0.11
1.32
0.06
1.03
ND
0.27
531.94
477.52
14906R1
9/17/98
10/26/98
2.52
1.96
5.16
1.40
9.32
0.08
5.85
2.64
0.25
29.16
2.01
2.23
1.14
106.08
3.31
3.92
33.80
0.99
7.46
3.55
7.22
2.82
1.86
0.39
3.92
38.83
22.98
13.65
1.65
0.75
ND
15.32
1.45
0.82
8.07
2.34
6.80
34.07
4.78
1.87
5.14
ND
5.71
4.14
2.22
1.37
2.10
22.07
1.29
1.27
0.09
1.60
4.08
11.62
4.25
4.45
0.09
1.07
1.79
0.42
2.19
3.76
2.88
2.21
2.25
0.76
5.20
ND
1.10
1.67
1.21
0.97
0.10
1.64
0.04
1.11
0.07
0.38
550.03
494.74
14907D2
9/17/98
10/20/98
2.29
1.98
5.25
1.35
8.97
0.05
5.70
2.60
0.29
28.40
2.05
2.24
1.23
91.85
3.36
4.06
33.12
0.96
7.78
3.70
7.49
2.82
1.94
0.43
3.95
32.97
22.53
13.49
1.65
0.76
ND
14.91
1.51
0.89
7.98
2.28
6.71
32.28
5.18
2.28
5.31
ND
5.73
4.10
2.19
1.46
1.99
21.34
1.24
1.26
0.09
1.40
3.09
9.84
1.19
3.22
0.10
0.87
0.50
0.53
0.91
2.60
1.47
1.24
1.10
0.71
3.40
ND
0.68
0.83
0.45
0.43
0.06
0.99
0.08
0.28
ND
0.03
504.48
449.96
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcydopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcydohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14907R2
9/17/98
10/26/98
2.49
2.09
5.24
1.43
9.10
0.06
5.74
2.66
0.28
28.69
2.04
2.26
1.17
92.10
3.26
4.06
33.35
0.96
7.56
3.72
7.44
2.76
1.90
0.40
3.99
32.91
22.46
13.55
1.54
0.83
ND
14.99
1.48
0.80
7.96
2.31
7.72
32.31
4.86
1.95
5.04
ND
5.68
4.09
2.18
1.45
2.06
21.18
1.28
1.28
0.09
1.47
3.00
9.63
1.97
3.35
0.12
0.84
0.73
0.60
1.60
3.36
2.63
2.28
2.21
0.78
5.26
ND
0.81
2.01
2.22
1.39
0.06
1.25
0.07
0.31
0.04
0.10
519.00
457.62
14898
9/18/98
10/21/98
3.22
2.41
76.21
1.92
74.41
0.07
20.71
2.02
0.23
54.25
1.62
1.64
0.87
88.84
2.09
2.88
49.53
0.68
7.83
3.62
7.45
2.79
1.69
0.39
4.74
37.81
29.00
17.35
1.60
0.51
ND
22.67
1.84
1.07
11.89
3.08
9.73
52.49
6.49
2.33
7.21
ND
8.45
7.38
7.38
2.08
2.83
26.94
2.21
1.52
0.19
2.93
4.24
14.83
1.30
4.81
0.20
1.41
0.54
0.69
1.23
3.56
2.06
1.79
1.53
0.47
4.98
ND
1.16
1.20
0.52
0.51
0.18
1.31
0.15
0.69
0.05
0.10
808.26
728.59
14901
9/21/98
10/21/98
3.16
2.85
7.77
1.68
7.57
0.09
4.55
2.15
0.30
16.47
1.31
1.14
0.49
47.76
1.49
1.88
20.94
0.56
4.57
2.20
4.17
1.72
1.26
0.27
2.67
23.59
15.82
9.45
1.14
0.45
ND
10.42
1.10
0.70
6.14
1.87
7.15
6.54
3.90
1.60
4.25
ND
5.31
3.60
1.95
1.25
1.95
20.44
1.18
1.20
0.06
1.42
3.48
12.07
0.89
4.02
0.10
0.90
0.48
0.10
1.10
3.10
1.84
1.57
1.34
0.49
4.44
ND
0.68
1.12
0.51
0.53
ND
0.69
0.12
0.35
ND
0.07
370.42
311.52
14982
9/22/98
10/21/98
6.34
5.62
14.81
3.14
16.03
0.30
6.17
20.42
0.60
22.31
1.53
1.58
0.67
60.20
2.06
1.78
29.25
0.78
6.01
4.94
12.75
2.21
1.98
0.36
3.72
7.58
20.64
12.32
0.95
0.80
ND
13.78
1.40
0.83
8.25
2.61
9.88
3.41
5.81
2.61
6.08
ND
7.43
5.14
2.86
1.71
2.82
29.29
1.72
1.76
0.08
2.77
4.95
17.14
1.28
5.89
0.17
1.34
0.60
ND
1.50
4.57
2.56
2.30
1.93
0.29
6.34
ND
1.15
1.73
0.69
0.64
0.11
0.87
0.16
0.47
ND
0.21
492.81
434.99
14980
9/23/98
10/21/98
1.56
1.18
9.10
0.89
13.70
ND
4.92
1.27
0.09
17.41
0.90
0.93
0.39
36.67
1.09
1.32
16.35
0.96
3.38
1.65
3.07
1.33
0.88
0.19
2.11
16.90
11.82
7.18
0.81
0.44
ND
8.47
0.79
0.50
4.83
1.67
4.96
20.22
3.55
1.81
3.32
ND
5.32
2.83
1.82
1.04
1.83
14.93
0.94
0.90
0.09
1.25
2.30
7.73
0.78
2.61
0.12
0.79
0.48
0.50
0.80
1.99
1.28
1.03
0.91
0.48
2.80
ND
0.62
0.59
0.48
0.38
ND
0.60
0.28
0.31
0.04
0.12
311.73
267.61
14995
9/24/98
10/22/98
4.43
3.83
11.31
2.25
11.98
0.17
5.74
2.62
0.38
19.29
1.13
1.23
0.58
52.10
1.63
2.13
22.87
0.59
4.88
2.36
4.65
2.00
1.86
0.25
2.83
25.14
17.39
10.49
1.14
0.59
ND
12.46
1.19
0.71
7.02
2.06
8.40
13.73
5.01
2.14
5.07
ND
5.67
4.38
2.40
1.58
2.16
28.43
1.45
1.41
0.10
1.82
3.68
12.69
1.13
4.23
0.14
1.28
0.57
0.23
1.19
3.43
2.02
1.78
1.53
0.56
4.89
ND
1.24
1.27
0.66
0.60
0.07
1.06
0.25
0.87
0.05
0.34
436.77
366.92
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15018D1
9/25/98
10/23/98
3.24
2.78
8.01
1.53
8.94
0.08
4.61
1.59
0.25
15.16
0.92
0.87
0.42
42.22
1.04
1.33
15.99
0.55
3.00
1.51
2.51
1.52
1.10
0.18
2.16
18.57
12.90
7.85
0.72
0.38
ND
8.91
0.86
0.46
5.10
1.42
5.84
4.21
3.67
1.71
3.84
ND
4.67
3.05
1.72
1.07
1.63
16.64
1.10
1.13
0.09
1.36
2.89
9.35
0.92
3.35
0.11
0.86
0.49
ND
0.94
2.52
1.51
1.27
1.19
0.56
3.64
ND
0.76
0.81
0.41
0.46
ND
0.60
0.17
0.31
ND
0.09
303.19
263.65
15018R1
9/25/98
10/27/98
3.19
2.84
8.03
1.49
8.81
0.07
4.67
1.63
0.23
15.14
0.85
0.85
0.32
42.86
1.04
1.30
15.85
0.51
3.06
1.51
2.46
1.62
1.04
0.22
2.00
18.04
12.50
7.84
0.71
0.37
ND
8.71
0.71
0.48
5.15
1.50
5.91
4.26
3.47
1.48
3.70
ND
4.62
3.02
1.68
1.14
1.65
16.70
1.11
1.15
0.11
1.35
2.91
9.28
0.74
3.35
0.12
0.88
0.45
ND
0.86
2.41
1.44
1.21
0.96
0.44
3.50
ND
0.59
0.75
0.46
0.40
ND
0.51
0.07
0.24
ND
0.05
297.64
260.61
15019D2
9/25/98
10/23/98
3.21
2.81
8.10
1.55
8.80
0.14
4.69
1.74
0.28
15.18
0.96
0.94
0.47
42.43
1.21
1.47
16.05
0.57
3.33
1.67
2.77
1.60
1.07
0.18
2.16
20.71
13.13
7.92
0.81
0.37
ND
8.77
0.83
0.54
5.20
1.52
6.02
4.29
3.76
1.74
3.83
ND
4.71
3.08
1.71
1.15
1.74
17.10
0.97
1.15
0.16
1.35
3.03
10.06
1.06
3.57
0.12
0.89
0.51
ND
1.07
2.93
1.75
1.55
1.28
0.81
4.50
ND
0.75
1.19
0.49
0.50
0.10
0.67
0.33
0.46
ND
0.13
322.95
273.69
15019R2
9/25/98
10/27/98
3.33
2.76
8.05
1.56
8.93
0.11
4.74
1.77
0.26
15.41
1.02
0.93
0.40
43.12
1.15
1.50
16.23
0.60
3.31
1.66
2.81
1.52
1.02
0.21
2.21
20.92
13.24
7.95
0.85
0.44
ND
8.84
0.78
0.56
5.23
1.50
6.29
4.13
3.78
1.41
3.83
ND
4.87
3.12
1.81
1.12
1.72
17.16
1.14
1.16
0.16
1.39
3.05
10.35
1.16
3.67
0.14
0.95
0.48
ND
1.08
2.95
1.66
1.62
1.32
0.82
4.62
ND
0.64
0.99
0.51
0.55
0.09
0.61
0.28
0.38
0.06
0.15
324.90
276.14
15032
9/28/98
10/24/98
9.57
8.43
35.49
6.13
19.46
0.46
9.36
9.57
1.27
37.08
2.30
2.40
0.91
94.52
3.25
3.96
52.27
1.25
9.53
4.58
13.64
3.62
2.25
0.56
5.57
39.37
32.05
19.46
1.96
1.33
ND
21.24
2.32
1.38
12.95
4.45
15.95
4.65
9.43
4.33
9.84
ND
16.98
8.19
4.20
3.68
6.62
52.02
2.80
2.85
0.24
3.52
8.04
27.79
1.71
9.83
0.43
2.87
0.99
0.25
2.48
8.41
4.41
4.39
2.95
0.90
11.84
ND
3.93
3.12
1.14
1.14
0.59
2.13
0.28
1.17
0.05
0.36
836.20
720.46
15030
9/29/98
10/27/98
6.56
4.46
11.38
3.29
13.91
0.25
7.64
3.19
0.62
30.46
1.96
1.83
0.97
76.30
2.61
3.13
32.85
0.81
7.25
3.39
6.88
2.80
1.78
0.43
4.31
40.27
26.19
15.92
1.72
0.82
ND
18.24
2.15
1.11
10.31
3.20
10.49
4.22
7.40
3.19
7.73
ND
10.44
6.24
3.28
2.62
3.64
37.22
2.13
2.12
0.11
2.39
6.00
20.64
0.99
7.08
0.21
1.58
0.67
1.22
1.78
5.49
3.02
2.73
2.38
1.68
7.65
ND
1.33
1.71
0.75
0.68
0.12
1.07
0.19
0.60
0.07
0.23
640.48
522.08
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 13
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15049D1
9/30/98
10/28/98
18.55
15.44
45.81
8.96
25.01
0.80
17.75
11.56
2.35
86.04
5.71
5.41
2.83
152.75
7.26
9.02
72.40
1.83
12.87
6.49
13.09
6.99
2.79
0.68
6.65
62.99
37.39
22.49
2.21
1.43
ND
23.34
2.49
1.28
12.34
4.52
16.15
4.00
9.69
4.14
10.68
ND
16.23
8.71
4.63
3.80
5.75
58.00
3.25
3.29
0.25
3.52
9.35
30.36
2.54
10.86
0.45
3.12
1.02
1.74
2.69
8.61
4.84
5.32
3.38
1.65
12.77
ND
4.69
3.02
1.31
1.14
0.30
2.77
0.26
1.23
0.08
0.41
1105.03
975.52
15049R1
9/30/98
10/28/98
18.62
15.27
44.68
8.98
25.01
0.72
17.78
11.64
2.33
85.41
5.06
5.49
2.97
151.76
7.38
9.06
71.91
1.91
12.89
6.49
13.00
6.91
2.74
0.71
6.64
63.21
37.34
22.33
2.28
1.40
ND
23.15
2.29
1.27
12.32
4.62
16.49
4.12
10.27
4.72
11.04
ND
16.04
8.64
4.49
4.21
5.59
58.06
3.30
3.30
0.23
3.44
9.41
30.55
2.78
10.99
0.45
3.22
1.18
1.74
2.83
8.92
4.96
5.53
3.31
1.73
13.14
ND
4.71
3.28
1.39
1.22
0.33
2.83
0.37
1.41
0.06
0.48
1110.96
976.35
15050D2
9/30/98
10/28/98
18.63
14.98
45.24
9.06
24.95
0.74
17.70
11.48
2.29
85.55
5.68
5.33
2.98
167.90
7.13
8.71
72.08
1.83
12.45
6.26
12.55
6.85
2.75
0.73
6.56
62.24
37.92
22.12
2.22
1.45
ND
22.18
2.01
1.22
12.16
4.31
17.58
3.58
9.52
3.97
10.72
ND
15.96
8.53
4.61
3.76
5.74
56.61
3.31
3.24
0.32
3.41
9.21
29.91
3.57
10.77
0.54
3.04
1.11
2.06
2.61
8.55
4.83
5.24
3.30
2.27
12.44
ND
4.57
3.07
1.38
1.11
0.30
2.70
0.30
1.10
0.10
0.36
1129.62
983.55
15050R2
9/30/98
10/28/98
19.00
15.26
45.36
9.10
25.39
0.80
17.96
11.68
2.32
86.58
5.01
5.44
2.76
170.97
7.61
9.09
72.90
1.91
12.89
6.59
13.16
7.13
2.90
0.70
6.70
64.72
39.18
22.80
2.31
1.45
ND
23.54
2.31
1.24
12.50
4.46
18.39
4.05
9.97
4.24
11.14
ND
16.32
8.88
4.51
3.88
5.86
58.32
3.32
3.38
0.25
3.42
9.57
31.12
3.50
11.34
0.80
3.41
1.21
1.72
2.71
9.02
4.96
5.48
3.35
2.56
13.23
ND
4.78
3.19
1.42
1.35
0.32
2.82
0.52
1.24
0.07
0.39
1169.89
1009.73
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1,3,5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1,2,3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
12967
6/15/98
VOID
12968
6/16/98
VOID
13015
6/23/98
7/9/98
2.16
1.56
3.12
1.13
2.46
0.15
0.83
3.27
0.12
3.36
0.10
0.12
1.03
17.56
0.25
0.41
2.34
2.52
0.45
0.21
0.51
0.25
0.47
0.05
0.26
6.00
3.95
1.90
0.21
0.26
ND
2.54
0.19
0.13
1.34
0.56
2.03
0.46
2.33
0.78
1.75
0.27
2.74
1.66
0.82
0.78
1.23
7.65
0.65
0.46
0.14
0.78
1.63
5.16
1.19
2.05
0.17
0.41
0.08
0.29
0.52
1.97
1.10
0.99
0.70
1.27
2.41
ND
0.68
0.44
0.23
0.18
0.05
0.77
ND
2.62
0.08
2.92
186.84
114.25
13023D1
6/24/98
7/8/98
2.04
2.21
5.81
0.94
5.87
0.10
1.60
3.73
0.13
4.90
0.07
0.11
0.57
15.08
0.31
0.71
4.65
2.01
0.64
0.32
0.97
0.52
0.44
0.11
0.39
10.22
5.98
3.79
0.45
0.35
ND
5.27
0.43
0.28
2.71
1.08
2.62
0.93
3.78
1.42
3.44
ND
4.91
3.14
1.64
1.70
1.87
12.14
1.03
0.83
0.12
1.28
2.85
9.48
1.08
3.74
0.20
0.64
0.15
0.36
0.89
3.06
1.43
1.36
1.26
0.64
4.39
ND
0.62
0.98
0.35
0.36
ND
0.75
ND
1.71
ND
ND
230.19
161.93
13023R1
6/24/98
7/9/98
1.77
2.11
5.71
0.93
5.79
0.10
1.58
3.77
0.14
5.07
0.08
0.10
0.60
15.30
0.32
0.73
4.52
1.93
0.64
0.33
0.94
0.55
0.48
0.13
0.38
10.02
6.74
3.48
0.42
0.36
ND
5.07
0.39
0.25
2.61
1.05
2.50
0.89
3.52
1.34
3.29
ND
4.80
3.04
1.60
1.67
1.81
12.10
1.03
0.81
0.11
1.28
2.80
9.31
1.06
3.68
0.18
0.59
0.14
0.33
0.84
3.06
1.38
1.43
1.35
0.97
4.42
ND
0.56
0.80
0.34
0.40
ND
0.77
ND
1.24
ND
0.10
218.67
159.95
13024D2
6/24/98
7/8/98
2.09
2.28
5.56
0.96
5.70
0.11
1.55
2.71
0.13
4.90
0.10
0.11
0.64
14.10
0.32
0.59
4.29
1.96
0.60
0.30
0.72
0.49
0.35
0.10
0.38
8.98
5.40
3.48
0.39
0.35
ND
4.78
0.35
0.25
2.40
0.91
2.51
0.85
3.55
1.32
3.14
ND
4.46
2.87
1.53
1.21
1.73
11.20
0.95
0.95
0.14
1.18
2.52
8.40
1.28
3.23
0.20
0.57
0.12
0.32
0.71
2.50
1.16
1.10
0.99
1.08
3.45
ND
0.58
0.66
0.21
0.20
ND
0.61
ND
3.64
ND
0.07
208.51
149.50
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13024R2
6/24/98
7/9/98
1.88
2.14
5.70
0.97
5.87
0.10
1.60
2.77
0.13
4.77
0.10
0.12
0.75
14.47
0.33
0.64
4.53
1.93
0.64
0.31
0.66
0.49
0.36
0.10
0.40
9.23
5.56
3.48
0.37
0.40
ND
5.11
0.48
0.24
2.44
0.91
2.43
0.81
3.00
0.91
3.10
ND
4.40
2.98
1.57
1.37
1.77
11.44
0.96
0.76
0.14
1.24
2.60
8.72
1.32
3.40
0.26
0.60
0.12
0.32
0.74
2.66
1.26
1.14
1.04
1.15
3.45
ND
0.54
0.69
0.23
0.21
ND
0.57
ND
4.35
ND
0.04
206.39
152.28
13053
6/25/98
7/10/98
1.90
1.48
5.40
1.02
4.62
0.09
1.31
2.10
0.16
3.45
0.10
0.11
1.00
11.75
0.20
0.38
3.20
2.11
0.39
0.16
0.40
0.25
0.32
ND
0.29
4.84
3.45
1.64
0.14
0.22
ND
2.44
0.19
0.09
1.21
0.44
1.77
10.14
2.35
0.75
1.53
0.22
2.02
1.17
0.83
0.58
0.79
6.56
0.42
0.44
0.13
0.59
1.32
4.11
0.87
1.61
0.18
0.43
0.06
0.23
0.40
1.45
0.73
0.56
0.60
0.86
1.83
ND
0.95
0.33
0.18
0.13
0.25
2.80
0.51
7.17
0.06
0.26
159.68
115.06
13084
6/26/98
7/10/98
2.38
1.63
6.14
0.96
5.53
0.14
2.54
2.27
0.11
5.84
0.07
0.09
1.05
15.13
0.30
0.47
2.96
2.35
0.33
0.14
0.28
0.40
0.93
ND
0.28
4.21
3.38
1.68
0.15
0.16
ND
2.26
0.11
0.07
1.14
0.37
2.13
0.53
1.81
0.57
1.16
0.36
1.59
1.13
0.75
0.56
0.68
6.10
0.48
0.32
0.13
0.64
1.14
3.49
1.35
1.41
0.18
0.39
0.05
0.09
0.32
1.16
0.58
0.36
0.51
1.61
1.61
ND
0.35
0.27
0.15
0.15
ND
0.28
ND
0.79
0.04
0.05
143.86
101.12
13092
6/29/98
7/10/98
3.61
2.12
8.09
1.42
6.77
0.11
3.01
2.73
0.13
4.85
0.06
0.10
0.70
14.31
0.20
0.34
3.19
1.33
0.27
0.12
0.20
0.26
0.91
ND
0.28
3.98
3.26
1.50
0.14
0.19
ND
2.48
0.13
0.08
1.18
0.36
2.34
0.72
1.38
0.33
1.20
0.20
1.69
1.21
0.90
0.50
0.63
5.89
0.41
0.43
0.11
0.67
1.18
3.64
1.07
1.41
0.15
0.38
0.09
0.17
0.31
1.09
0.53
0.44
0.42
0.70
1.39
ND
0.26
0.25
0.07
0.12
ND
0.46
ND
ND
ND
0.03
150.39
101.18
13211
6/30/98
7/10/98
13206
7/1/98
7/11/98
1.67
1.30
3.88
1.02
3.18
0.08
0.93
1.94
0.14
2.89
0.07
0.09
0.21
9.84
0.17
0.33
2.18
1.07
0.32
0.16
0.34
0.23
0.44
0.04
0.20
3.69
2.94
1.35
0.14
0.16
ND
1.86
0.16
0.08
0.97
0.36
1.97
0.33
1.16
0.31
1.02
0.27
1.60
1.10
0.57
0.48
0.68
5.51
0.35
0.29
0.06
0.50
1.14
3.68
0.75
1.42
0.08
0.30
0.06
0.14
0.31
1.22
0.56
0.55
0.47
0.35
1.64
ND
0.31
0.27
0.09
0.14
ND
0.27
ND
ND
ND
0.04
115.25
74.38
1.23
1.72
4.93
1.31
4.11
0.15
1.45
2.47
0.19
3.65
0.14
0.14
1.04
16.66
0.38
0.58
3.28
1.33
0.55
0.24
0.50
0.46
0.83
0.05
0.36
5.62
4.44
1.97
0.20
0.22
ND
2.79
0.23
0.12
1.30
0.49
2.52
1.07
2.11
0.77
1.65
0.40
2.30
1.46
0.77
0.68
0.95
8.93
0.50
0.40
0.06
0.62
1.67
5.36
1.24
2.08
0.18
0.50
0.10
0.36
0.53
1.85
0.89
0.79
0.76
1.04
2.46
ND
0.81
0.44
0.21
0.21
ND
0.69
ND
0.55
ND
0.21
164.41
113.25
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13193D1
7/2/98
7/8/98
0.82
1.51
7.90
1.07
7.11
0.13
2.06
1.85
0.13
5.62
0.13
0.14
0.86
12.46
0.18
0.37
3.52
1.95
0.41
0.17
0.38
0.27
1.01
ND
0.32
3.75
3.46
1.50
0.13
0.12
ND
1.91
0.09
0.07
1.07
0.34
1.92
0.58
1.22
0.35
1.15
ND
1.88
0.98
0.78
0.50
0.70
7.15
0.39
0.30
0.05
0.59
1.05
3.38
2.89
1.35
0.09
0.40
0.10
0.38
0.45
1.64
0.77
0.78
0.60
0.79
2.22
ND
0.53
0.45
0.11
0.11
ND
0.50
ND
ND
0.26
0.22
142.63
100.40
13193R1
7/2/98
7/8/98
2.11
1.54
8.09
1.11
7.33
0.10
2.10
1.94
0.16
5.99
0.13
0.15
1.10
12.87
0.25
0.42
3.58
2.08
0.45
0.19
0.39
0.32
1.01
ND
0.31
3.81
3.55
1.53
0.12
0.12
ND
1.96
0.11
0.07
1.09
0.37
2.08
0.61
1.20
0.35
1.17
ND
2.01
1.02
0.82
0.52
0.73
7.21
0.43
0.39
0.06
0.60
1.05
3.34
2.88
1.38
0.09
0.41
0.10
0.37
0.43
1.67
0.81
0.80
0.63
0.81
2.34
ND
0.47
0.46
0.09
0.12
ND
0.42
ND
0.31
ND
0.10
141.01
104.77
13208D2
7/2/98
7/10/98
0.87
1.56
8.15
1.05
7.44
0.08
2.10
1.77
0.15
5.33
0.10
0.12
0.71
13.30
0.22
0.43
3.66
1.66
0.41
0.17
0.20
0.34
0.99
ND
0.32
3.73
3.49
1.52
0.13
0.14
ND
2.15
0.18
0.07
1.08
0.35
2.15
0.46
1.32
0.34
1.11
0.23
1.73
1.06
0.81
0.47
0.69
7.12
0.42
0.30
0.05
0.64
1.06
3.31
3.07
1.35
0.09
0.42
0.10
0.39
0.41
1.52
0.72
0.78
0.70
0.77
2.19
ND
0.47
0.35
0.10
0.13
ND
0.33
ND
ND
0.10
0.29
148.16
101.50
13208R2
7/2/98
7/10/98
2.31
1.58
8.34
1.10
7.46
0.12
2.13
1.87
0.16
5.39
0.11
0.10
1.06
13.83
0.21
0.48
3.75
1.52
0.43
0.17
0.25
0.36
1.04
ND
0.32
3.88
3.63
1.56
0.14
0.15
ND
2.14
0.11
0.07
1.12
0.37
2.35
0.52
1.67
0.57
1.23
ND
2.04
1.09
0.82
0.53
0.73
7.40
0.45
0.31
0.06
0.65
1.14
3.48
3.31
1.44
0.11
0.42
0.10
0.42
0.46
1.58
0.76
0.69
0.70
0.96
2.32
ND
0.50
0.47
0.14
0.15
0.10
0.36
ND
0.41
0.17
0.07
145.00
107.93
13212
7/3/98
7/11/98
1.95
1.05
9.41
0.89
7.99
0.09
2.96
1.71
0.10
7.24
0.20
0.23
0.83
18.72
0.40
0.69
4.99
1.05
0.79
0.38
0.83
0.51
1.63
0.05
0.51
5.69
5.25
2.55
0.15
0.26
ND
3.70
0.22
0.11
1.46
0.44
3.14
0.66
2.07
0.74
1.69
0.21
1.64
1.56
1.01
0.58
0.61
8.08
0.59
0.39
0.08
0.84
1.42
5.00
1.45
1.71
0.11
0.53
0.07
0.16
0.41
1.28
0.72
0.52
0.55
1.31
1.83
ND
0.46
0.38
0.14
0.14
ND
0.39
ND
ND
ND
0.05
176.29
127.53
13248
7/6/98
7/11/98
1.75
1.92
5.65
1.08
5.49
0.11
1.68
2.67
0.18
7.54
0.28
0.30
1.70
19.24
0.60
0.80
4.70
0.84
1.00
0.45
1.02
0.48
1.24
0.03
0.55
6.32
5.12
2.40
0.27
0.25
ND
3.72
0.31
0.14
1.56
0.49
2.98
0.50
2.07
0.76
1.60
0.25
2.07
1.33
0.76
0.58
0.73
9.10
0.50
0.33
0.08
0.65
1.77
6.51
1.19
2.19
0.16
0.45
0.09
0.22
0.49
1.63
0.86
0.73
0.63
0.88
2.35
ND
0.40
0.40
0.11
0.16
0.04
0.33
ND
0.31
ND
0.07
182.84
128.14
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13325
7/7/98
7/11/98
1.76
2.13
4.24
0.94
4.18
0.10
1.31
1.87
0.13
5.47
0.25
0.24
0.95
15.51
0.41
0.88
3.87
0.58
0.83
0.37
0.85
0.39
1.01
ND
0.44
5.18
4.22
2.08
0.17
0.24
ND
2.92
0.25
0.11
1.25
0.40
2.48
0.40
1.77
0.62
1.23
0.25
1.65
1.14
0.68
0.50
0.64
7.48
0.42
0.28
0.10
0.55
1.44
5.18
1.13
1.77
0.17
0.39
0.05
0.15
0.39
1.36
0.72
0.59
0.53
0.90
1.95
ND
0.35
0.33
0.10
0.13
ND
0.25
ND
0.24
ND
0.03
138.14
103.85
13327
7/8/98
7/16/98
1.52
2.65
4.23
1.71
5.05
0.26
3.41
2.70
0.31
24.62
1.77
1.94
1.29
55.97
3.20
4.84
20.97
1.01
6.17
3.19
8.16
2.64
2.32
0.40
3.18
44.66
23.16
14.95
1.44
0.90
ND
18.34
1.59
0.85
7.14
2.32
9.55
1.44
5.17
2.01
6.63
0.42
7.39
5.50
2.17
2.01
2.50
29.69
1.59
1.52
0.18
2.10
5.29
19.20
0.91
6.38
0.25
1.30
0.32
0.40
1.43
4.80
2.51
2.21
2.01
0.69
6.46
ND
0.78
1.10
0.31
0.36
0.04
0.25
ND
ND
ND
ND
481.96
415.74
13367
7/9/98
8/7/98
2.71
1.32
5.78
1.47
4.60
0.06
2.84
2.29
0.24
16.09
1.51
1.76
0.79
38.56
2.24
3.14
14.39
1.26
4.45
2.45
5.69
2.25
1.46
0.20
2.18
27.81
14.56
9.38
1.08
0.53
ND
11.52
0.89
0.47
4.60
1.92
6.10
1.28
3.60
1.64
3.92
0.12
4.98
3.64
1.44
1.25
1.84
18.37
1.23
1.28
0.06
1.68
3.57
11.99
1.25
4.10
0.14
1.10
0.69
0.24
1.21
3.40
2.10
1.62
1.48
1.30
4.69
ND
0.80
1.15
0.57
0.60
ND
0.75
0.48
0.22
ND
0.09
335.23
288.48
13373
7/10/98
7/16/98
1.44
2.19
4.14
1.55
6.32
0.19
2.22
2.12
0.29
4.08
0.19
0.18
0.42
15.03
0.32
0.59
2.86
1.84
0.48
0.21
0.57
0.34
0.92
ND
0.28
3.46
3.50
2.04
0.12
0.13
ND
5.19
0.10
0.06
1.57
0.34
2.88
2.26
1.81
0.59
2.45
0.09
1.55
2.79
1.83
0.53
0.58
8.81
0.49
0.41
0.07
0.67
1.44
4.54
1.05
1.58
0.08
0.34
0.06
0.72
0.29
1.11
0.53
0.56
0.55
1.40
1.55
ND
0.37
0.26
0.09
0.11
ND
0.19
ND
0.07
0.02
ND
144.91
109.99
13370
7/13/98
7/16/98
1.86
1.29
33.98
0.92
38.32
0.16
9.35
1.64
ND
30.74
1.08
1.21
1.65
49.63
2.09
3.16
21.52
0.59
3.82
1.93
4.95
1.93
1.61
0.30
2.62
30.25
18.84
11.21
0.88
0.64
ND
15.69
0.99
0.52
6.22
1.62
6.24
3.13
5.22
1.96
5.53
0.94
4.89
5.60
4.03
1.59
1.70
18.64
1.65
1.25
0.30
2.37
3.20
11.93
2.59
3.80
0.21
1.22
0.18
0.34
0.92
2.98
1.62
1.38
1.10
1.32
4.21
ND
0.57
0.66
0.22
0.25
ND
0.45
ND
ND
ND
ND
482.34
407.42
13526
7/14/98
8/7/98
5.93
1.16
20.07
1.34
17.80
ND
6.22
5.46
0.13
11.97
0.44
0.60
1.30
26.33
0.71
0.13
7.66
0.86
1.02
0.99
1.52
1.03
2.48
ND
0.99
3.16
6.05
3.25
0.07
0.51
ND
6.98
0.23
ND
2.40
1.01
4.37
1.14
1.99
1.23
2.04
0.02
2.07
2.20
1.56
0.62
0.85
8.58
0.90
0.71
0.10
2.38
1.86
6.17
1.84
2.07
0.22
0.90
0.54
ND
0.92
1.75
1.22
0.86
0.72
2.54
2.62
ND
0.87
0.73
0.58
0.60
ND
0.87
1.38
0.29
ND
0.08
241.80
200.21
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13525
7/15/98
8/8/98
4.59
2.64
11.05
2.16
10.14
0.15
9.53
3.06
0.36
20.52
1.92
2.17
1.36
69.60
3.68
4.80
24.01
1.21
6.46
3.47
8.22
2.95
1.82
0.36
3.28
39.55
20.30
13.06
1.24
0.72
ND
17.52
1.13
0.68
6.49
2.31
8.51
25.20
4.94
2.21
5.70
ND
6.98
5.12
2.19
1.83
2.39
34.27
1.93
1.59
0.07
2.49
5.29
18.32
1.80
6.55
0.40
1.89
0.79
0.23
1.81
5.52
3.20
3.23
2.24
0.88
8.05
ND
1.89
1.95
0.71
0.70
0.10
1.71
0.27
1.02
ND
0.33
564.13
476.78
13586
7/16/98
8/7/98
5.77
3.25
28.09
2.16
23.12
0.22
6.42
2.98
0.30
20.62
2.23
1.79
1.51
62.31
3.13
3.44
22.23
1.31
5.67
3.17
6.87
2.19
2.10
0.31
2.74
35.16
19.15
12.61
1.35
1.03
ND
18.78
1.36
0.97
7.15
2.67
11.66
2.29
6.83
2.97
7.34
ND
9.38
7.79
3.12
2.61
3.66
44.78
2.90
2.59
0.14
4.34
8.77
30.43
1.62
10.42
0.43
3.57
1.55
1.06
3.11
8.45
5.32
4.76
3.42
1.90
12.67
ND
3.65
3.02
1.98
1.80
0.20
3.46
0.31
1.17
ND
0.31
645.14
539.96
13614
7/17/98
8/8/98
4.15
1.36
22.70
1.31
19.63
0.10
7.63
1.83
0.09
21.00
1.46
1.48
0.68
46.56
2.22
2.66
18.54
0.69
4.42
2.34
5.26
1.88
2.64
0.12
2.14
25.93
14.79
10.01
0.97
0.70
ND
15.98
1.10
0.61
5.57
2.08
9.51
2.03
5.34
2.30
5.58
ND
6.01
6.32
2.88
1.77
2.51
31.45
1.96
1.83
0.07
2.87
5.99
22.17
1.92
7.19
0.21
1.83
0.70
0.15
1.75
5.48
3.18
3.16
2.28
2.47
7.90
ND
1.25
1.84
0.73
1.05
0.11
1.26
1.21
0.79
0.05
0.17
476.87
407.85
13615
7/20/98
8/8/98
3.06
1.38
11.70
1.39
11.48
0.02
3.15
2.60
0.25
7.44
0.53
0.71
0.03
19.03
0.64
0.60
5.47
0.81
1.16
0.71
0.99
0.69
0.79
0.01
0.63
6.39
3.87
2.60
0.20
0.21
ND
3.56
0.19
0.14
1.68
0.91
3.07
4.04
1.55
1.00
1.55
0.12
2.09
1.55
1.10
0.54
0.89
8.58
0.51
0.68
0.20
1.04
1.81
5.99
1.44
2.23
0.14
0.76
0.58
0.16
0.76
1.87
1.34
1.14
0.83
1.76
2.75
ND
0.80
0.69
0.50
0.37
ND
1.01
0.56
0.37
0.03
0.36
192.16
151.75
13752
7/21/98
8/20/98
2.12
1.41
7.88
1.18
6.34
0.09
2.09
1.78
0.21
5.02
0.44
0.52
0.17
16.34
0.58
0.56
4.24
0.99
1.08
0.63
0.93
0.65
0.88
0.09
0.55
4.19
3.05
2.20
0.22
0.26
ND
2.93
0.20
0.09
1.33
0.78
2.76
2.13
1.62
1.05
1.41
0.14
1.93
1.26
0.89
0.45
0.78
7.77
0.34
0.61
0.06
0.89
1.87
5.80
1.32
2.00
0.09
0.76
0.48
0.43
0.79
1.69
1.14
0.99
0.83
0.99
2.56
ND
0.79
0.62
0.50
0.37
0.09
0.98
ND
0.36
ND
0.13
159.48
121.72
13753
7/22/98
8/20/98
1.52
1.04
5.39
1.02
4.36
ND
1.49
1.47
0.12
4.47
0.39
0.54
0.09
11.09
0.66
0.45
3.36
0.64
0.95
0.63
0.85
0.65
0.50
0.05
0.61
4.49
3.03
1.77
0.26
0.15
ND
2.27
0.16
0.16
4.10
1.70
5.79
1.21
0.76
0.69
1.18
0.11
1.41
1.07
0.71
0.13
0.64
6.20
0.58
0.58
0.08
0.69
1.41
4.55
1.17
1.65
0.16
0.66
0.52
0.21
0.68
1.41
1.05
0.85
0.57
1.04
2.23
ND
0.62
0.64
0.40
0.39
0.06
0.71
0.41
0.25
0.05
0.13
119.65
104.01
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13754
7/23/98
8/20/98
2.83
1.11
4.93
1.26
4.25
0.11
1.38
1.96
0.32
3.45
0.43
0.62
0.11
21.05
0.62
0.49
3.66
0.96
1.10
0.65
0.96
0.58
0.89
ND
0.59
4.66
2.93
2.10
0.26
0.23
ND
3.16
0.16
0.12
1.14
0.71
2.22
0.62
1.36
1.01
2.24
0.10
1.67
1.24
0.92
0.51
0.70
6.82
0.57
0.54
0.13
0.79
1.66
5.43
2.15
1.87
0.13
0.75
0.55
0.46
0.77
1.60
1.20
0.94
0.58
1.71
2.53
ND
0.63
0.61
0.60
0.61
0.06
0.79
0.47
0.26
0.06
0.12
172.52
117.77
13735
7/24/98
8/21/98
2.19
0.80
4.55
1.02
3.94
0.06
1.31
1.61
0.17
3.11
0.41
0.53
ND
12.33
0.64
0.52
3.24
0.61
0.95
0.70
0.81
0.55
0.66
ND
0.49
4.69
3.05
1.97
0.25
0.15
ND
3.17
0.26
0.10
1.20
0.78
2.12
1.14
1.51
0.83
1.21
0.06
1.62
1.16
0.87
0.32
0.68
6.69
0.57
0.61
0.86
0.88
1.83
6.31
1.19
2.08
0.06
0.82
0.47
ND
0.78
1.73
1.10
1.07
0.77
1.17
2.57
ND
0.85
0.65
0.51
0.52
ND
0.80
0.34
0.23
ND
0.04
133.95
103.82
13779
7/27/98
8/21/98
2.74
1.04
3.24
1.50
3.75
0.05
1.22
2.02
0.20
3.22
0.42
0.61
0.16
19.05
0.72
0.52
3.74
2.20
1.04
0.59
0.95
0.86
0.98
ND
0.58
4.95
3.68
2.23
0.26
0.18
ND
2.99
0.20
0.11
1.45
0.77
3.00
0.95
1.50
1.08
2.02
ND
1.93
1.26
0.85
0.55
0.80
8.58
0.61
0.72
ND
0.91
1.61
5.07
2.47
1.91
ND
0.72
0.46
0.23
0.75
1.64
1.12
0.87
0.89
2.03
2.35
ND
0.70
0.68
0.69
0.48
0.12
0.70
0.71
0.19
ND
0.11
158.32
119.49
13892D1
7/28/98
8/28/98
2.63
1.72
3.40
1.19
3.81
0.05
1.09
1.51
0.18
2.93
0.37
0.55
0.14
14.77
0.64
0.50
3.35
2.38
0.89
0.67
0.86
0.68
0.72
0.04
0.56
4.84
3.22
1.92
0.19
0.16
ND
2.60
0.15
0.06
1.13
0.74
2.37
1.00
1.44
0.95
1.32
0.20
1.66
1.10
0.83
0.40
0.71
7.11
0.56
0.54
0.08
0.76
1.45
4.42
1.07
1.64
0.05
0.59
0.46
0.23
0.62
1.40
0.93
0.80
0.85
0.84
2.02
ND
0.62
0.59
0.41
0.38
0.06
0.72
0.09
0.33
ND
0.10
124.50
102.33
13892R1
7/28/98
9/14/98
2.60
1.60
3.40
1.20
4.05
0.03
1.21
1.54
0.15
3.00
0.38
0.54
0.15
16.37
0.66
0.49
3.42
2.52
0.93
0.69
0.93
0.72
0.75
0.03
0.62
5.16
3.54
2.20
0.19
0.17
ND
2.51
0.18
0.13
1.32
0.78
2.33
1.21
1.51
1.03
1.45
0.17
1.80
1.31
0.87
0.40
0.89
7.66
0.52
0.49
0.09
0.76
1.50
4.63
1.10
1.68
0.10
0.65
0.42
0.28
0.60
1.42
0.97
0.80
0.82
0.86
2.06
ND
0.66
0.55
0.44
0.34
0.05
0.73
0.03
0.30
ND
0.09
132.15
107.72
13893D2
7/28/98
8/28/98
2.57
1.77
3.56
1.16
3.92
0.06
1.16
1.53
0.20
3.06
0.45
0.50
0.12
14.20
0.61
0.44
3.43
2.38
0.96
0.61
0.88
0.67
0.72
ND
0.56
4.90
3.51
2.03
0.22
0.18
ND
2.90
0.16
0.11
1.16
0.69
2.39
0.87
1.43
0.82
1.34
0.05
1.72
1.19
0.78
0.41
0.76
7.40
0.61
0.56
0.04
0.75
1.43
4.60
0.93
1.67
0.05
0.65
0.49
0.32
0.62
1.41
0.97
0.85
0.82
0.70
2.12
ND
0.65
0.67
0.35
0.35
ND
0.62
0.07
0.16
ND
0.06
124.23
103.01
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13893R2
7/28/98
9/14/98
2.57
1.65
ND
1.23
4.20
ND
1.19
1.52
0.18
3.10
0.44
0.53
0.13
15.29
0.61
0.53
3.55
2.52
1.02
0.69
0.91
0.77
0.80
ND
0.64
5.60
3.80
2.37
0.18
0.16
ND
2.62
0.19
0.13
1.37
0.82
2.49
1.00
1.52
0.94
1.45
0.15
1.91
1.33
0.90
0.48
0.82
7.82
0.61
0.63
0.04
0.84
1.53
4.66
0.93
1.71
0.06
0.67
0.42
0.25
0.65
1.40
0.96
0.83
0.80
0.85
2.01
ND
0.58
0.65
0.42
0.39
ND
0.63
0.04
0.19
ND
0.06
132.35
104.94
13901
7/29/98
8/18/98
2.50
1.39
3.25
1.29
3.38
ND
1.04
2.15
0.24
3.28
0.48
0.62
ND
25.41
0.72
0.48
3.59
2.75
1.01
0.83
0.93
0.72
0.52
ND
0.53
4.82
3.20
1.95
0.23
0.26
ND
2.67
0.21
0.11
1.34
0.78
2.44
0.85
1.58
1.01
1.39
0.49
1.70
1.22
0.92
0.27
0.74
7.47
0.60
0.52
0.22
0.87
1.83
6.23
1.59
2.10
ND
0.73
0.49
0.36
0.83
1.66
1.15
0.94
0.90
1.71
2.65
ND
0.71
0.81
0.58
0.45
0.04
0.81
ND
0.49
ND
0.27
154.85
122.29
13896
7/30/98
8/18/98
1.78
0.93
2.95
1.03
3.38
ND
1.24
1.68
0.23
3.23
0.41
0.62
ND
14.43
0.68
0.43
3.45
2.74
1.05
0.70
0.95
0.65
0.36
ND
0.40
4.70
3.01
2.11
0.19
0.15
ND
2.88
0.18
ND
1.23
0.76
2.34
0.88
1.61
1.12
1.42
0.08
1.67
1.29
0.91
0.35
0.78
7.62
0.63
0.65
0.14
0.99
2.01
6.43
1.34
2.09
ND
0.92
0.51
0.33
0.75
1.65
1.06
1.00
0.70
1.92
2.56
ND
0.85
0.65
0.63
0.44
ND
0.83
ND
0.29
ND
0.11
135.94
108.07
13911
7/31/98
8/19/98
2.35
1.61
3.83
1.23
3.90
ND
1.45
2.23
0.18
4.90
0.58
0.66
0.11
17.54
0.78
0.88
5.02
2.71
1.42
0.83
1.51
0.87
0.84
0.18
0.85
8.88
5.23
3.17
0.28
0.24
ND
4.48
0.28
ND
2.04
0.97
3.48
7.92
1.39
0.91
1.94
0.13
2.55
1.75
1.06
0.49
1.07
11.02
0.85
0.75
ND
1.01
2.16
6.90
1.00
2.49
ND
0.81
0.59
0.34
0.77
1.79
1.19
0.97
0.91
0.83
2.62
ND
0.69
0.72
0.60
0.45
ND
0.98
ND
1.02
ND
0.31
171.09
146.47
13948
8/3/98
8/19/98
4.31
2.38
17.22
2.14
16.10
0.64
5.65
3.27
0.38
11.81
1.53
0.85
ND
34.91
1.18
1.41
10.88
7.15
2.11
1.29
2.19
1.55
3.71
ND
1.61
16.71
9.77
5.82
0.49
0.34
ND
8.04
0.78
ND
3.22
1.45
7.35
1.39
3.54
1.57
3.57
ND
4.84
3.30
1.90
1.28
1.84
18.92
1.36
1.41
0.18
1.97
3.68
12.26
1.39
4.46
ND
1.34
0.63
0.52
1.27
3.76
2.16
1.81
1.71
1.11
5.21
ND
1.18
1.43
0.81
0.81
ND
1.15
ND
0.53
ND
0.24
337.08
282.79
13970
8/4/98
8/28/98
4.52
3.24
11.63
1.77
11.33
0.14
3.97
2.41
0.29
7.57
0.43
0.54
0.10
26.53
0.73
0.65
6.41
2.06
1.02
0.68
0.86
0.85
1.27
0.07
0.83
7.12
5.43
3.08
0.24
0.17
ND
4.26
0.15
0.17
1.91
0.91
4.61
1.40
2.02
1.08
2.05
0.20
2.58
1.91
1.14
0.66
1.10
12.10
0.90
0.86
0.15
1.37
2.41
7.30
1.20
2.69
0.26
1.10
0.60
0.29
0.79
2.23
1.43
1.23
1.00
0.77
3.07
ND
1.10
0.96
0.62
0.53
0.07
0.85
0.32
0.36
0.16
61.56
278.29
240.41
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13973D1
8/5/98
8/28/98
5.99
4.67
13.02
2.52
14.04
0.26
3.66
2.81
0.38
6.40
0.66
0.77
0.32
28.62
0.84
0.74
7.40
2.04
1.22
0.83
1.15
1.47
0.70
0.06
1.02
9.41
6.16
3.76
0.27
0.36
ND
5.10
0.21
0.13
2.33
1.11
5.12
6.85
2.25
1.15
2.31
ND
3.70
2.17
1.22
0.88
1.48
17.69
1.06
1.01
0.06
1.42
2.87
8.77
1.15
3.30
0.14
1.10
0.55
0.43
1.01
2.70
1.74
1.59
1.39
0.59
3.90
ND
1.26
1.11
0.54
0.52
0.07
1.19
0.10
0.44
0.06
0.23
255.93
215.52
13973R1
8/5/98
9/16/98
5.67
4.64
12.82
2.54
14.64
0.19
3.67
2.70
0.44
6.48
0.57
0.65
0.19
31.25
0.88
0.84
7.52
2.08
1.26
0.78
1.26
1.37
0.89
0.08
1.02
10.09
6.68
3.89
0.30
0.22
ND
4.96
0.23
0.13
2.46
1.12
5.33
7.74
2.38
1.32
2.61
0.78
4.07
2.08
1.36
0.99
1.62
18.57
1.16
0.88
0.07
1.49
3.01
9.14
1.26
3.47
0.34
1.14
0.57
0.41
1.07
2.88
1.79
1.65
1.60
0.89
4.17
ND
1.39
1.09
0.63
0.51
0.08
1.27
0.20
0.57
0.07
0.24
270.21
226.40
13974D2
8/5/98
8/28/98
5.82
4.73
12.85
2.41
13.88
0.26
3.65
2.57
0.49
6.40
0.56
0.63
0.17
29.20
0.91
0.79
7.43
2.02
1.26
0.75
1.27
0.95
0.77
0.06
0.92
9.65
6.24
3.71
0.27
0.24
ND
5.27
0.22
0.10
2.33
1.13
5.16
1.17
2.35
1.29
2.50
ND
3.78
2.16
1.31
1.01
1.54
18.16
1.08
1.00
0.14
1.41
2.95
8.95
1.12
3.36
0.14
1.13
0.52
0.32
1.00
2.94
1.72
1.65
1.32
0.67
4.06
ND
1.20
1.03
0.62
0.60
ND
1.16
ND
0.53
ND
0.20
253.02
211.14
13974R2
8/5/98
10/20/98
4.88
3.47
10.58
2.26
12.30
0.17
3.12
2.32
0.35
5.53
0.45
0.53
0.23
28.83
0.76
0.67
6.39
1.69
1.02
0.65
1.04
1.06
0.61
0.07
0.89
8.43
5.90
3.29
0.23
0.22
ND
4.38
0.25
0.14
2.08
0.96
4.54
1.14
2.08
1.10
2.28
ND
3.31
1.86
1.19
0.80
1.34
15.56
0.92
0.88
0.08
1.29
2.51
7.72
1.27
2.78
0.17
0.95
0.48
0.27
0.85
2.38
1.37
1.26
1.13
0.77
3.29
ND
1.03
0.95
0.50
0.54
0.09
1.03
0.17
0.47
0.02
0.14
226.92
186.26
14051
8/6/98
8/28/98
5.02
5.34
16.13
2.45
20.27
0.20
4.13
3.02
0.59
15.81
1.45
1.73
0.96
53.74
2.90
4.45
21.36
0.90
6.29
3.35
8.31
3.08
1.37
0.39
3.57
42.12
22.50
14.32
1.45
0.82
ND
17.37
1.25
0.81
6.83
2.61
9.33
2.03
5.95
2.73
6.19
ND
8.35
5.32
1.96
2.09
2.97
29.91
1.73
1.37
0.11
2.18
5.33
18.21
1.14
6.31
0.21
1.54
0.62
1.51
1.67
5.22
3.01
2.62
1.99
1.76
7.35
ND
1.18
1.89
0.70
0.65
0.11
0.99
ND
0.41
ND
0.10
515.66
443.59
14053
8/7/98
8/28/98
7.55
18.45
9.30
3.96
11.88
0.27
2.43
3.94
0.81
5.42
0.59
0.65
0.51
23.81
0.69
0.90
7.32
0.94
1.24
0.80
1.30
1.14
0.47
0.06
0.82
8.77
6.42
3.77
0.29
0.26
ND
4.26
0.20
0.15
2.38
1.18
5.72
1.04
2.63
1.23
2.81
ND
4.36
2.71
2.06
1.06
1.67
18.02
1.35
1.15
0.16
1.43
6.88
23.38
2.85
7.33
0.14
1.09
0.60
0.95
1.07
3.46
2.03
2.11
1.53
1.15
5.32
ND
1.40
1.42
0.70
0.61
0.10
1.23
0.20
0.55
ND
0.20
313.23
246.66
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14092
8/10/98
9/21/98
2.54
1.99
3.98
1.44
4.95
ND
1.34
2.25
0.25
3.21
0.43
0.53
0.15
15.03
0.58
0.54
3.54
2.17
0.93
0.64
0.84
0.79
0.58
ND
0.63
5.23
3.62
2.27
0.27
0.18
ND
2.73
0.17
0.15
1.55
0.83
2.75
0.78
1.46
0.95
1.45
ND
2.06
1.20
0.93
0.42
0.84
8.77
0.56
0.63
ND
0.77
1.55
5.03
0.97
1.79
ND
0.66
0.36
0.32
0.62
1.42
0.95
0.81
0.88
0.69
1.99
ND
0.67
0.51
0.35
0.27
ND
0.54
ND
0.18
ND
0.04
140.63
110.47
14176
8/11/98
9/2/98
4.02
3.35
9.76
1.71
12.87
0.15
2.97
2.38
0.27
7.53
0.53
0.64
0.23
24.38
0.70
0.75
8.32
1.17
1.39
0.88
1.33
0.92
0.63
ND
1.07
9.28
5.98
3.94
0.29
0.36
ND
5.26
0.29
0.18
2.48
1.18
4.16
3.80
2.40
1.40
2.61
ND
3.28
2.37
1.35
0.90
1.26
14.79
0.97
0.86
0.09
1.20
2.39
7.24
0.82
2.58
0.11
0.91
0.44
0.38
0.71
2.02
1.24
1.00
0.88
0.54
2.81
ND
0.98
0.72
0.48
0.39
0.06
1.02
0.14
0.70
0.05
0.28
223.11
187.53
14216
8/12/98
9/2/98
10.51
9.75
19.95
4.43
13.47
0.37
4.61
4.68
0.87
8.42
0.85
0.90
0.75
35.52
1.26
1.45
11.31
3.25
2.29
1.30
2.43
1.71
0.74
0.12
1.48
17.06
10.66
6.67
0.50
0.47
ND
7.95
0.46
0.23
4.14
1.83
8.04
1.79
3.76
1.76
4.06
ND
6.91
3.62
2.40
1.61
2.69
27.86
1.60
1.67
0.14
2.05
4.76
15.08
3.19
5.38
0.30
1.85
0.58
2.29
1.31
4.29
2.59
2.64
1.92
1.49
6.28
ND
2.50
1.77
0.73
0.90
0.16
2.30
0.21
0.94
ND
0.33
393.37
326.11
14229
8/13/98
9/2/98
2.96
2.31
11.78
1.23
11.14
0.08
3.46
1.79
0.25
6.71
0.39
0.48
0.14
19.34
0.55
0.44
5.36
1.11
0.89
0.67
0.77
0.87
0.75
ND
0.68
6.04
4.32
2.77
0.20
0.17
ND
3.89
0.17
0.16
1.67
0.86
3.57
1.89
1.90
1.12
1.82
ND
2.12
1.62
1.22
0.55
0.91
8.46
0.72
0.78
ND
1.02
1.55
4.82
0.87
1.71
0.06
0.73
0.41
0.18
0.67
1.44
0.94
0.77
0.67
0.50
2.06
ND
0.66
0.41
0.43
0.42
0.04
0.67
0.13
0.27
ND
0.11
169.34
142.56
14242D1
8/14/98
9/10/98
5.12
4.18
15.52
2.21
15.60
0.18
3.45
2.40
0.38
7.18
0.47
0.62
0.20
24.38
0.72
0.62
7.30
2.06
1.01
0.74
0.93
1.07
0.41
ND
1.00
8.94
5.71
3.76
0.27
0.24
ND
4.66
0.18
0.13
2.46
1.16
4.31
1.19
2.03
1.03
2.36
ND
3.43
1.85
1.24
0.78
1.31
15.51
0.89
0.91
0.05
1.21
2.52
7.77
1.33
2.86
0.15
0.93
0.52
0.29
0.86
2.19
1.36
1.17
1.04
0.77
3.11
ND
1.14
0.74
0.51
0.43
0.05
1.07
0.19
0.37
ND
0.13
228.33
194.86
14242R1
8/14/98
9/11/98
5.00
4.22
15.50
2.25
15.47
0.11
3.48
2.49
0.44
7.14
0.55
0.56
0.20
23.82
0.75
0.73
7.26
2.09
1.04
0.70
0.97
1.02
0.46
ND
1.01
8.79
5.79
3.66
0.26
0.23
ND
4.77
0.25
0.12
2.32
1.03
4.25
1.23
2.12
1.30
2.39
ND
3.27
1.92
1.19
0.77
1.36
15.52
0.87
0.87
0.03
1.17
2.57
7.81
1.20
2.87
0.12
0.93
0.54
0.33
0.86
2.22
1.44
1.23
1.20
0.78
3.09
ND
1.11
0.79
0.52
0.43
0.03
1.07
0.11
0.35
ND
0.15
228.48
194.45
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14245D2
8/14/98
9/2/98
5.17
4.32
15.46
2.22
14.59
0.24
3.43
2.49
0.38
7.02
0.46
0.58
0.17
26.22
0.77
0.56
7.01
1.95
1.03
0.72
0.82
0.97
0.58
ND
0.90
8.54
5.89
3.57
0.26
0.21
ND
4.45
0.16
0.09
2.38
1.07
4.21
1.27
2.17
1.22
2.29
ND
3.13
1.79
1.30
0.76
1.21
14.10
0.81
0.87
0.09
1.16
2.31
6.89
1.41
2.54
0.10
0.87
0.46
0.28
0.89
2.04
1.23
0.92
0.92
0.78
2.80
ND
0.97
0.74
0.55
0.53
0.06
0.91
0.23
0.25
ND
0.08
226.27
189.77
14245R2
8/14/98
9/21/98
5.18
4.12
15.45
2.25
15.20
0.16
3.43
2.45
0.37
7.11
0.48
0.57
0.26
27.68
0.71
0.70
7.19
1.97
1.00
0.70
0.83
1.13
0.55
ND
0.99
8.60
6.22
3.64
0.31
0.23
ND
4.30
0.14
0.09
2.40
1.01
4.26
1.36
2.54
1.32
2.55
ND
3.38
1.84
1.25
0.71
1.28
15.15
0.82
0.83
0.10
1.22
2.48
7.35
1.64
2.77
0.15
0.90
0.44
0.19
0.82
1.98
1.27
1.10
1.10
0.81
2.76
ND
1.07
0.66
0.44
0.32
0.09
0.80
0.03
0.23
ND
0.07
232.63
195.50
14220
8/17/98
9/11/98
3.20
2.64
5.49
1.58
4.75
0.11
1.46
2.36
0.26
4.17
0.43
0.56
0.08
16.93
0.62
0.63
4.33
1.80
1.01
0.70
0.94
0.80
0.39
ND
0.69
5.86
4.11
2.51
0.24
0.19
ND
2.94
0.19
0.13
1.64
0.81
3.11
1.43
1.60
0.98
1.63
ND
2.60
1.34
0.88
0.57
1.00
9.63
0.68
0.65
0.04
0.86
1.84
5.71
1.22
2.10
0.07
0.67
0.43
0.35
0.73
1.69
1.11
0.95
0.84
0.73
2.40
ND
0.77
0.57
0.45
0.37
ND
1.07
ND
0.60
ND
0.13
158.90
126.34
14225
8/18/98
10/19/98
3.19
2.89
11.02
1.45
8.60
0.07
2.40
2.09
0.27
5.62
0.35
0.51
0.17
12.94
0.52
0.58
4.57
2.18
0.90
0.58
0.78
0.66
0.53
0.05
0.61
5.32
3.72
2.28
0.20
0.15
ND
2.88
0.16
0.10
1.54
0.74
2.83
0.90
1.54
0.92
1.48
ND
2.14
1.25
1.00
0.50
0.88
8.69
0.63
0.68
ND
0.87
1.62
5.09
0.95
1.91
0.08
0.65
0.41
0.27
0.66
1.58
1.04
0.92
0.92
0.48
2.35
ND
0.86
0.54
0.36
0.34
0.03
0.85
ND
0.36
ND
0.09
150.81
127.31
14248
8/19/98
9/22/98
7.11
6.00
13.08
3.40
10.26
0.22
4.02
4.15
0.61
12.13
1.12
1.33
0.65
41.02
2.05
2.94
16.57
3.32
4.12
2.26
5.53
2.09
1.65
0.23
2.22
27.68
15.71
10.01
1.10
0.73
ND
14.16
1.19
0.62
5.98
2.48
10.68
1.99
5.24
2.28
5.99
ND
7.83
5.77
2.70
2.15
3.06
37.50
2.25
2.02
0.17
2.96
6.44
22.74
1.54
7.52
0.31
1.75
0.78
0.49
1.77
5.48
3.10
2.78
2.21
0.85
7.69
ND
1.53
1.84
0.82
0.64
0.11
1.26
0.09
0.49
ND
0.10
464.43
392.65
14243
8/20/98
10/19/98
4.23
2.65
10.35
1.86
9.76
0.09
3.60
2.18
0.28
6.18
0.41
0.51
0.18
21.45
0.77
0.50
5.85
1.65
0.91
0.63
0.80
0.94
2.02
ND
0.72
6.81
5.90
3.09
0.30
0.19
ND
4.16
0.20
0.08
1.92
0.95
4.06
3.49
2.06
1.14
2.25
ND
2.63
1.81
1.19
0.68
1.04
15.80
0.74
0.76
0.07
1.22
3.20
10.07
2.40
3.26
0.07
0.75
0.46
0.18
0.80
2.00
1.22
1.05
1.06
1.81
2.76
ND
0.94
0.74
0.57
0.59
0.08
0.95
0.47
0.56
ND
0.18
240.22
177.28
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14354
8/21/98
9/22/98
3.99
3.14
6.57
1.97
6.20
0.18
2.27
2.52
0.34
4.76
0.46
0.55
0.22
21.72
0.71
0.71
5.05
1.78
0.97
0.71
0.90
1.07
2.34
0.03
0.80
6.40
4.62
2.82
0.22
0.19
ND
3.45
0.18
0.14
1.62
0.89
4.12
0.89
2.13
1.15
1.80
ND
2.51
1.85
0.98
0.55
1.02
10.01
0.73
0.76
0.05
0.99
1.93
5.85
0.86
2.17
0.11
0.69
0.40
0.17
0.68
1.65
1.07
0.93
0.80
0.29
2.33
ND
0.68
0.61
0.38
0.29
ND
0.52
ND
0.11
ND
0.08
169.08
142.68
14381D1
8/24/98
9/23/98
4.31
3.41
8.92
1.94
8.75
0.12
4.79
2.37
0.38
7.11
0.53
0.55
0.18
23.12
0.73
0.80
7.97
2.03
1.19
0.72
1.19
0.99
0.69
0.05
1.18
7.72
4.44
2.99
0.32
0.22
ND
3.94
0.19
0.11
1.97
0.98
4.08
15.09
2.12
1.12
1.93
ND
2.84
1.71
1.12
0.76
1.21
15.02
1.21
0.91
0.06
1.41
4.47
14.47
1.83
5.62
0.29
1.54
0.70
0.47
1.89
6.43
3.33
3.54
3.05
0.64
11.70
ND
1.93
2.95
1.64
1.48
0.25
2.70
0.37
1.55
ND
0.27
299.22
230.60
14381R1
8/24/98
9/24/98
5.32
4.42
11.07
2.34
10.84
0.13
5.97
2.90
0.47
8.89
0.78
0.73
0.29
28.29
0.88
0.99
9.90
2.56
1.46
0.98
1.55
1.31
0.88
0.07
1.47
9.51
5.70
3.70
0.36
0.25
ND
4.97
0.27
0.18
2.41
1.17
5.02
18.85
2.57
1.33
2.44
ND
3.64
2.14
1.43
0.90
1.54
19.02
1.28
1.09
0.13
1.81
5.56
18.26
2.25
6.96
0.26
1.92
0.75
0.59
2.38
8.08
4.14
4.43
3.32
0.72
14.49
ND
2.73
3.42
1.92
2.48
0.31
3.09
0.39
1.82
ND
0.24
371.92
286.70
14382D2
8/24/98
9/23/98
4.31
3.56
9.06
1.93
8.60
0.11
4.53
2.29
0.42
7.33
0.45
0.61
0.09
22.59
0.89
0.78
7.58
2.07
1.24
0.82
1.21
1.07
0.61
0.08
1.08
7.63
4.83
3.06
0.28
0.24
ND
3.98
0.25
0.20
2.01
0.98
4.22
13.23
1.92
1.26
2.00
ND
2.96
1.57
1.14
0.67
1.21
14.41
1.01
0.91
0.07
1.53
3.81
11.95
1.15
4.38
0.19
1.45
0.60
0.45
1.18
3.29
1.92
1.86
1.49
0.41
4.89
ND
1.25
1.14
0.50
0.44
0.09
0.77
0.03
0.23
ND
0.04
231.56
198.40
14382R2
8/24/98
9/24/98
5.64
4.58
11.51
2.40
11.11
0.14
5.85
2.88
0.46
9.42
0.77
0.72
0.80
29.11
0.91
1.00
9.96
2.64
1.56
1.00
1.70
1.33
0.92
0.08
1.44
9.87
6.23
3.96
0.34
0.34
ND
5.38
0.39
0.20
2.59
1.16
5.29
17.15
2.84
1.50
2.61
ND
3.86
2.24
1.46
0.96
1.55
18.86
1.29
1.18
0.15
1.86
4.82
15.35
1.08
5.55
0.24
1.82
0.62
0.68
1.40
4.09
2.30
2.20
1.73
0.54
5.95
ND
1.82
1.38
0.62
0.48
0.09
0.88
0.03
0.22
ND
ND
295.49
255.07
14474
8/25/98
9/23/98
3.87
2.62
13.15
1.61
10.63
0.11
3.93
2.20
0.27
5.94
0.42
0.52
0.17
18.08
0.07
0.55
5.86
2.78
0.94
0.61
0.76
1.01
1.18
ND
0.76
6.09
4.83
2.82
0.20
0.15
ND
3.61
0.16
0.14
1.75
0.86
4.19
1.13
1.99
1.04
1.90
0.41
2.61
1.58
1.19
0.55
0.97
10.57
0.79
0.72
ND
1.03
1.92
5.64
2.38
2.08
0.08
0.78
0.45
0.20
0.67
1.65
1.15
0.98
0.93
0.44
2.38
ND
0.79
0.52
0.43
0.33
ND
0.57
0.03
0.21
ND
0.04
183.34
140.78
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1,3,5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1,2,3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14492
8/26/98
VOID
14493
8/27/98
10/19/98
3.61
8.73
2.17
8.50
0.10
2.58
2.49
0.41
7.51
0.80
0.82
0.32
25.61
1.19
1.54
9.02
2.02
2.25
1.35
2.62
1.44
1.11
0.16
1.41
15.18
9.19
5.88
0.53
0.41
ND
7.86
0.53
0.35
3.60
1.49
6.52
1.34
3.20
1.51
3.46
ND
4.59
3.22
1.53
1.04
1.83
23.28
1.13
1.17
0.09
1.57
4.05
13.26
1.25
4.65
0.20
1.07
0.53
0.38
1.17
3.51
2.02
1.84
1.83
0.69
5.03
ND
1.06
1.21
0.64
0.55
0.07
0.89
0.23
0.41
ND
0.12
282.43
239.65
14515
8/28/98
10/15/98
7.12
4.27
8.17
3.19
11.19
0.17
4.23
3.35
0.60
6.02
0.55
0.60
0.25
24.87
0.84
0.93
7.52
1.70
1.28
0.78
1.36
1.42
0.70
0.03
1.02
9.54
6.59
3.93
0.28
0.24
ND
4.81
0.31
0.17
2.50
1.11
5.13
1.15
2.81
1.37
2.55
ND
3.69
1.87
1.35
0.95
1.53
19.82
0.96
0.93
0.15
1.27
2.98
9.24
1.03
3.38
0.16
0.97
0.44
0.44
0.91
2.74
1.73
1.62
1.18
0.64
3.9392
ND
1.27
0.98
0.40
0.53
0.07
1.20
0.24
0.68
0.04
0.17
250.18
204.20
14543
8/31/98
10/15/98
4.74
3.27
12.62
2.22
9.83
0.18
3.60
3.08
0.37
6.52
0.44
0.58
0.15
27.87
0.65
0.76
6.17
1.77
1.01
0.65
0.88
1.13
0.64
0.06
0.73
7.62
5.18
3.21
0.23
0.24
ND
3.96
0.16
0.16
1.98
0.94
4.56
1.24
2.25
1.29
2.34
ND
3.12
1.94
1.28
0.73
1.28
12.76
0.80
0.83
0.07
1.15
2.29
6.92
0.84
2.68
0.16
0.90
0.43
0.25
0.88
2.17
1.34
1.19
1.11
0.45
3.15
ND
1.06
0.70
0.50
0.43
0.07
0.98
0.12
0.40
0.05
0.10
210.92
178.35
14565D1
9/1/98
10/16/98
7.46
4.91
11.51
3.36
11.72
0.19
3.53
4.06
0.79
7.68
0.59
0.67
0.25
25.44
0.85
1.09
7.61
2.48
1.44
0.92
1.52
1.33
1.77
0.08
0.90
10.82
6.76
4.26
0.25
0.24
ND
5.16
0.36
0.21
2.55
1.18
6.45
1.78
3.06
1.51
3.00
ND
4.50
2.41
1.33
1.13
1.79
0.97
1.06
0.03
1.24
3.02
9.18
1.11
3.48
0.11
0.90
0.42
0.28
0.97
2.75
1.56
1.52
1.34
0.38
4.21
ND
0.91
0.96
0.61
0.50
0.08
0.95
0.09
0.45
0.04
0.10
253.87
217.12
14565R1
9/1/98
10/22/98
7.43
5.01
11.66
3.45
11.96
0.28
3.57
4.21
0.72
7.77
0.61
0.70
0.31
25.99
0.96
1.16
7.77
2.51
1.45
0.91
1.56
1.30
1.72
0.08
0.99
12.06
7.15
4.29
0.31
0.24
ND
5.29
0.34
0.20
2.54
1.24
6.52
1.91
3.02
1.45
2.98
ND
4.57
2.50
1.42
1.06
1.85
17.37
1.03
1.12
0.03
1.35
3.09
9.35
1.18
3.61
0.15
0.95
0.52
0.27
0.99
2.87
1.65
1.71
1.43
0.47
4.35
ND
0.93
1.07
0.66
0.49
0.07
1.03
0.20
0.51
0.06
0.22
261.11
223.76
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14566D2
9/1/98
10/16/98
7.51
4.89
11.46
3.27
11.71
0.25
3.46
3.84
0.72
7.52
0.60
0.67
0.27
25.47
0.86
1.04
7.16
2.43
1.33
0.88
1.45
1.32
1.77
0.06
0.95
10.54
6.54
4.06
0.27
0.22
ND
4.83
0.23
0.18
2.37
1.16
6.45
1.18
2.91
1.35
2.89
ND
4.30
2.37
1.30
1.14
1.75
16.37
1.01
0.97
0.06
1.16
2.87
8.50
0.90
3.35
0.09
0.85
0.49
0.25
0.91
2.71
1.59
1.47
1.31
0.39
3.86
ND
0.75
0.93
0.51
0.50
0.07
0.84
0.09
0.39
0.02
0.13
242.34
210.28
14566R2
9/1/98
10/22/98
7.59
5.01
11.75
3.49
11.91
0.14
3.54
4.10
0.73
7.66
0.58
0.70
0.27
26.22
0.96
1.08
7.39
2.50
1.40
0.89
1.50
1.37
1.78
0.05
0.91
11.69
6.83
4.17
0.32
0.24
ND
4.99
0.26
0.19
2.47
1.21
6.57
1.34
3.19
1.57
2.98
ND
4.50
2.48
1.36
1.15
1.82
16.86
1.11
1.11
0.06
1.22
2.92
8.77
1.11
3.48
0.18
0.90
0.53
0.22
0.96
2.77
1.57
1.40
1.24
0.45
4.09
ND
0.94
1.04
0.59
0.50
0.09
0.89
0.19
0.43
0.08
0.20
252.80
218.77
14670
9/2/98
10/2/98
8.41
6.21
13.37
3.92
12.12
0.29
3.93
4.45
0.67
7.66
0.58
0.73
ND
25.28
2.22
0.97
8.08
1.60
1.36
0.85
1.38
1.33
1.38
0.03
1.07
9.50
6.96
4.32
0.30
0.24
ND
5.07
0.26
0.19
2.61
1.18
5.42
1.30
2.77
1.36
2.79
ND
4.20
2.19
1.43
1.06
1.72
16.63
1.33
1.21
0.10
1.56
2.76
8.68
1.06
3.21
0.12
0.99
0.44
0.28
0.79
2.28
1.34
1.32
1.06
0.48
3.40
ND
1.15
0.79
0.37
0.44
0.04
1.51
0.17
1.23
ND
0.27
257.37
217.71
14672
9/3/98
10/3/98
5.87
4.27
15.50
2.87
12.33
0.23
3.82
3.08
0.48
7.65
0.44
0.56
0.16
28.13
0.84
0.66
7.80
2.26
0.96
0.62
0.82
1.12
1.78
ND
1.05
8.49
6.54
3.95
0.24
0.23
ND
4.76
0.15
0.13
2.45
1.11
4.36
4.37
2.74
1.39
2.53
ND
3.67
2.02
1.21
0.91
1.42
13.39
0.91
0.93
0.04
1.18
2.33
7.18
1.03
2.72
0.12
0.87
0.44
0.41
0.76
1.94
1.12
1.13
0.95
0.54
2.76
ND
0.99
0.55
0.37
0.31
ND
0.79
0.19
0.35
ND
0.13
234.03
200.46
14700
9/4/98
10/4/98
6.39
5.74
12.68
3.07
14.73
0.19
3.97
3.84
0.55
14.46
1.15
1.24
0.86
47.29
2.16
2.66
17.62
1.65
3.91
2.13
4.66
2.33
1.62
0.28
2.74
28.07
18.51
11.91
1.08
0.71
ND
15.50
1.01
0.62
7.20
2.56
9.02
2.56
7.24
3.02
7.14
ND
10.66
6.42
3.19
2.80
4.22
34.85
2.47
2.37
0.14
2.72
5.97
20.75
0.65
7.71
0.33
1.93
0.71
0.44
1.68
5.55
2.85
3.23
2.34
0.51
8.16
ND
1.68
1.60
0.80
0.64
0.14
1.41
0.17
0.58
ND
0.18
484.16
413.90
14764
9/7/98
VOID
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14704
9/8/98
10/9/98
4.35
3.31
8.91
2.06
6.60
0.12
2.34
3.33
0.38
5.20
0.48
0.53
0.16
16.54
0.59
0.68
4.54
2.09
0.97
0.62
0.82
0.94
1.17
0.04
0.75
5.92
4.04
2.59
0.19
0.24
ND
3.23
0.21
0.13
1.59
0.81
3.61
0.85
2.00
1.08
1.79
ND
2.53
1.31
1.10
0.61
0.98
9.71
0.72
0.74
0.05
0.97
2.24
7.16
1.14
2.31
0.12
0.69
0.34
0.22
0.61
1.60
0.94
0.91
0.93
0.34
2.40
ND
0.72
0.51
0.42
0.29
0.06
0.65
0.09
0.32
ND
0.05
166.91
139.58
14773D1
9/9/98
10/12/98
2.44
1.86
5.41
0.98
4.80
ND
4.57
1.44
0.09
3.27
0.31
0.40
0.06
28.50
0.37
0.39
3.49
0.88
0.59
0.46
0.51
0.76
0.13
ND
0.58
3.12
2.87
1.63
0.11
0.13
ND
2.64
0.07
0.16
1.17
0.65
2.67
4.46
1.55
0.99
1.79
ND
1.58
1.90
1.37
0.42
0.59
16.04
0.69
0.64
0.06
0.82
1.61
4.41
1.68
1.61
0.15
0.57
0.43
0.08
0.56
1.16
0.87
0.68
0.62
0.87
1.68
ND
0.79
0.42
0.45
0.39
0.04
1.09
0.31
0.35
0.04
0.07
164.63
131.36
14773R1
9/9/98
10/24/98
2.46
1.70
5.45
1.01
4.89
ND
4.54
1.32
0.11
3.23
0.32
0.36
0.08
28.68
0.34
0.36
3.38
0.85
0.54
0.41
0.50
0.66
1.14
ND
0.47
2.90
2.92
1.56
0.14
0.12
ND
2.51
0.08
0.07
1.11
0.60
2.59
4.39
1.52
1.00
1.68
ND
1.42
1.75
1.35
0.47
0.55
15.45
0.55
0.55
0.08
0.79
1.59
4.21
1.69
1.52
0.12
0.51
0.38
0.07
0.52
1.12
0.82
0.62
0.59
0.87
1.69
ND
0.63
0.37
0.39
0.26
0.06
1.00
0.26
0.35
ND
0.05
161.99
128.63
14774D2
9/9/98
10/12/98
2.45
1.97
5.56
1.00
5.13
ND
4.13
1.49
0.12
3.51
0.30
0.39
0.09
25.00
0.49
0.47
3.74
0.85
0.57
0.54
0.60
0.65
1.13
ND
0.56
3.60
2.87
1.83
0.13
0.12
ND
2.67
0.10
0.07
1.12
0.65
2.85
3.98
1.52
0.88
1.72
ND
1.56
1.74
1.27
0.46
0.73
14.30
0.58
0.49
0.08
0.80
1.61
4.42
1.04
1.60
0.14
0.61
0.42
0.07
0.56
1.21
0.84
0.64
0.66
0.77
1.65
ND
0.68
0.44
0.41
0.37
ND
0.74
0.35
0.22
ND
0.04
153.00
126.32
14774R2
9/9/98
10/24/98
2.35
1.73
5.36
0.97
4.96
ND
4.09
1.32
0.11
3.49
0.30
0.43
0.08
25.53
0.39
0.38
3.53
0.91
0.63
0.50
0.57
0.78
1.18
ND
0.55
3.55
3.06
1.75
0.14
0.12
ND
2.58
0.09
0.06
1.07
0.67
2.81
4.04
1.96
1.08
1.73
ND
1.53
1.67
1.22
0.51
0.65
14.10
0.51
0.63
0.04
0.82
1.57
4.36
1.14
1.61
0.14
0.58
0.41
0.10
0.53
1.21
0.90
0.69
0.63
0.83
1.69
ND
0.54
0.35
0.43
0.37
ND
0.69
0.29
0.24
ND
0.06
152.19
125.90
14782
9/10/98
10/12/98
2.92
2.07
3.63
1.13
2.80
0.08
1.05
2.15
0.20
4.83
0.66
0.70
0.28
19.96
1.12
1.20
6.61
0.70
1.89
1.16
2.25
0.98
0.84
0.11
1.05
12.13
7.07
4.56
0.49
0.38
ND
6.41
0.46
0.29
2.79
1.18
5.35
1.59
3.01
1.38
2.67
ND
3.35
2.61
1.17
0.85
1.31
14.55
0.87
0.88
0.13
1.19
2.87
9.74
1.04
3.31
0.17
0.85
0.47
0.09
0.85
2.46
1.49
1.21
1.03
0.54
3.42
ND
0.63
0.66
0.50
0.43
0.07
0.53
0.13
0.29
ND
0.02
198.47
169.83
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14794
9/11/98
12/7/98
2.65
1.84
4.83
1.29
4.03
ND
1.30
2.02
0.19
2.71
0.44
0.50
ND
15.97
0.51
0.40
2.53
0.60
0.66
0.54
0.41
0.84
0.62
ND
0.54
3.03
3.01
1.53
0.14
0.13
ND
2.00
0.07
0.04
1.10
0.70
2.53
0.81
1.62
0.97
1.13
ND
1.43
1.01
0.70
0.24
0.72
5.82
0.54
0.46
0.05
0.68
1.37
3.84
1.22
1.53
ND
0.58
0.52
0.64
0.66
1.35
1.00
0.80
0.74
0.58
1.54
ND
0.43
0.38
0.41
0.64
0.10
0.60
0.23
0.20
ND
0.08
120.63
95.26
14795
9/14/98
10/20/98
3.82
2.43
14.55
1.92
12.23
0.08
3.05
2.86
0.36
7.06
0.48
0.54
0.20
14.92
0.65
0.68
5.45
1.05
1.03
0.65
1.01
0.87
0.56
0.05
0.74
5.46
4.01
2.47
0.20
0.16
ND
3.15
0.19
0.09
1.61
0.88
3.50
1.14
1.93
1.01
1.64
ND
2.41
1.42
1.07
0.57
1.02
9.74
0.73
0.55
0.05
0.86
1.86
5.58
1.02
2.14
0.10
0.65
0.48
0.80
0.71
2.08
1.16
0.94
0.98
0.51
2.68
ND
0.70
0.71
0.48
0.44
0.06
0.67
0.10
0.33
0.02
0.13
174.50
148.45
14803
9/15/98
10/17/98
3.46
2.08
5.68
1.60
5.98
0.08
2.24
2.05
0.31
4.27
0.33
0.50
0.11
11.72
0.47
0.52
3.59
0.93
0.81
0.57
0.80
0.81
0.34
ND
0.61
4.44
3.28
2.03
0.20
0.15
ND
2.44
0.14
0.07
1.37
0.65
3.17
0.80
1.69
0.88
1.34
ND
1.89
1.10
0.79
0.48
0.79
7.71
0.60
0.62
0.05
0.71
1.55
4.84
0.88
1.81
ND
0.52
0.38
0.41
0.58
1.59
1.03
0.89
0.78
0.41
2.20
ND
0.48
0.56
0.43
0.29
0.02
0.56
0.10
0.22
ND
0.08
128.72
107.86
14827 14904D1
9/16/98 9/17/98
VOID 10/20/98
3.28
2.27
3.66
1.56
3.59
0.06
1.48
2.27
0.29
6.26
0.72
0.93
0.37
23.91
1.32
1.92
13.44
1.21
2.83
1.58
3.53
1.44
1.12
0.14
1.43
16.31
9.46
6.22
0.72
0.47
ND
8.72
0.71
0.46
3.61
1.56
6.66
15.08
3.28
1.41
3.55
ND
4.42
3.61
1.58
1.19
1.85
21.73
1.14
1.20
0.08
1.59
4.09
14.07
0.89
4.80
0.13
1.06
0.54
0.35
1.13
3.41
2.02
1.64
1.39
0.27
4.59
ND
0.90
1.04
0.52
0.50
0.08
0.92
0.10
0.28
ND
0.05
272.21
241.98
14904R1
9/17/98
10/26/98
3.34
2.25
3.57
1.60
3.56
0.06
1.43
2.33
0.34
6.27
0.72
0.88
0.37
24.24
1.29
1.85
13.37
1.17
2.78
1.52
3.47
1.41
1.17
0.14
1.49
16.38
9.52
6.10
0.74
0.43
ND
8.68
0.71
0.44
3.62
1.52
6.16
15.33
3.36
1.47
3.50
ND
4.39
3.56
1.56
1.17
1.76
21.59
1.24
1.24
0.06
1.59
4.02
13.87
0.96
4.75
0.14
1.06
0.46
0.38
1.08
3.45
2.00
1.72
1.44
0.32
4.91
ND
0.90
1.27
0.85
0.74
0.06
1.06
0.04
0.29
ND
0.06
273.96
242.58
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14905D2
9/17/98
10/21/98
3.41
2.30
3.64
1.63
3.62
0.11
1.48
2.26
0.31
6.20
0.80
0.87
0.39
25.88
1.21
1.84
14.87
1.21
2.72
1.53
3.40
1.24
1.08
0.14
1.50
16.02
9.46
6.07
0.63
0.43
ND
8.57
0.70
0.44
3.63
1.40
6.86
20.05
3.83
1.61
3.49
ND
4.21
3.56
1.57
1.12
1.71
22.14
1.13
1.13
0.04
1.58
4.15
14.11
1.59
4.89
0.20
1.08
0.52
0.41
1.17
3.43
2.05
1.63
1.35
0.70
4.61
ND
1.15
1.10
0.54
0.49
0.04
1.35
0.39
0.42
ND
0.04
289.27
252.43
14905R2
9/17/98
10/26/98
3.34
2.27
3.61
1.70
3.65
0.11
1.52
2.25
0.31
6.25
0.72
0.88
0.38
25.89
1.35
1.81
14.79
1.16
2.65
1.51
3.36
1.28
1.05
0.14
1.47
15.86
9.39
6.02
0.63
0.43
ND
8.88
0.85
0.44
3.71
1.53
6.07
19.97
3.65
1.48
3.47
ND
4.23
3.48
1.54
1.14
1.83
21.95
1.14
1.13
0.09
1.57
4.07
13.88
1.58
4.79
0.12
1.09
0.52
0.37
1.13
3.40
1.94
1.72
1.34
0.71
4.74
ND
1.14
1.20
0.73
0.73
0.06
1.33
0.16
0.44
ND
0.06
291.03
251.16
14902
9/18/98
10/15/98
7.82
5.51
8.25
3.69
6.91
0.32
2.92
4.38
0.79
5.79
0.69
0.80
0.28
27.09
0.95
1.21
7.23
1.05
1.75
1.02
1.78
1.15
0.67
0.09
1.00
11.17
6.61
4.19
0.36
0.30
ND
4.78
0.34
0.21
2.61
1.36
6.48
1.21
2.53
1.48
2.75
ND
5.56
2.32
1.52
1.24
2.18
20.32
1.22
1.22
0.15
1.48
3.48
11.08
1.31
4.21
0.20
1.33
0.55
1.04
1.09
3.55
2.00
2.01
1.42
0.81
5.29
ND
2.00
1.34
0.73
0.61
0.12
1.43
0.16
0.51
0.04
0.16
275.43
223.20
14972
9/21/98
10/21/98
4.43
3.03
16.59
2.12
12.66
0.08
3.65
2.85
0.39
6.88
0.41
0.48
0.15
19.23
0.61
0.63
5.78
1.50
0.95
0.64
0.84
0.97
0.76
ND
0.78
6.10
4.45
2.70
0.19
0.18
ND
3.36
0.14
0.11
1.85
0.81
4.06
0.96
1.69
0.98
1.86
ND
2.69
1.52
1.10
0.68
1.10
11.79
0.72
0.68
0.05
1.07
2.21
6.80
1.13
2.56
0.09
0.93
0.48
0.44
0.93
2.28
1.48
1.19
1.14
0.60
3.37
ND
1.11
0.92
0.60
0.53
0.06
1.07
0.13
0.40
ND
0.10
202.27
167.77
14973
9/23/98
10/21/98
3.11
1.99
5.93
1.40
5.94
0.06
1.53
2.25
0.23
4.58
0.47
0.56
0.20
19.10
0.81
0.80
5.41
0.77
1.27
0.80
1.38
1.03
0.68
ND
0.71
7.45
4.73
3.03
0.23
0.21
ND
3.90
0.27
0.19
1.84
0.90
4.15
20.39
1.77
0.98
1.94
ND
2.70
1.88
1.05
0.70
1.12
14.16
0.77
0.66
0.10
1.12
2.88
9.31
1.61
3.24
0.14
0.92
0.57
0.23
0.89
2.32
1.42
1.26
1.05
0.74
3.18
ND
1.50
0.71
0.42
0.46
0.10
2.13
0.30
0.91
0.05
0.23
208.60
173.84
14998
9/24/98
10/21/98
3.30
2.29
11.19
1.43
10.67
0.11
3.83
2.26
0.24
13.17
1.12
1.16
0.61
38.34
2.02
2.73
15.44
1.00
4.13
2.28
5.19
1.82
1.69
0.25
2.33
27.55
15.78
10.14
1.18
0.79
ND
14.98
1.13
0.71
5.98
2.24
10.64
2.24
5.34
2.12
5.71
ND
6.59
6.06
2.64
1.86
2.50
31.70
1.73
1.83
0.16
2.75
6.02
21.98
1.09
7.09
0.29
1.61
0.65
0.17
1.66
5.03
2.97
2.36
1.94
0.51
6.89
ND
0.84
1.61
0.69
0.70
0.10
0.77
0.44
0.41
0.07
0.24
413.00
347.88
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15022D1
9/25/98
10/24/98
3.75
2.39
9.03
1.46
8.79
0.07
2.93
1.70
0.26
6.49
0.36
0.41
1.32
16.85
0.52
0.48
5.17
0.93
0.65
0.50
0.45
0.74
0.47
ND
0.66
4.76
3.56
2.39
0.14
0.14
ND
3.62
0.12
0.08
1.56
0.73
3.16
6.54
1.76
0.98
1.54
ND
2.33
1.28
0.98
0.49
0.90
10.16
0.63
0.61
0.10
1.04
1.81
5.33
1.09
1.98
0.25
0.82
0.41
ND
0.61
1.53
1.06
0.94
0.83
0.55
2.27
ND
0.86
0.50
0.39
0.31
0.02
0.87
0.35
0.38
ND
0.09
172.61
139.20
15022R1
9/25/98
10/27/98
3.65
2.28
8.89
1.56
8.67
0.06
2.89
1.62
0.26
6.45
0.32
0.43
ND
16.96
0.61
0.47
5.09
0.95
0.67
0.50
0.45
0.77
0.44
ND
0.67
4.77
3.41
2.39
0.13
0.15
ND
3.73
0.18
0.11
1.57
0.71
3.09
6.42
1.67
0.93
1.51
ND
2.30
1.30
1.00
0.49
0.90
10.06
0.67
0.71
0.08
1.01
1.77
5.16
1.00
1.91
0.16
0.84
0.40
ND
0.54
1.41
0.89
0.77
0.65
0.51
2.11
ND
0.79
0.47
0.39
0.34
0.03
0.83
0.09
0.25
ND
0.07
168.22
135.28
15023D2
9/25/98
10/24/98
3.69
2.34
8.97
1.50
8.65
0.15
2.87
1.72
0.24
6.50
0.33
0.43
0.51
16.82
0.44
0.44
5.22
1.00
0.69
0.52
0.51
0.80
0.49
ND
0.64
4.92
3.58
2.45
0.17
0.20
ND
3.62
0.15
0.09
1.61
0.72
3.18
5.85
1.74
0.90
1.59
ND
2.38
1.31
1.03
0.43
0.93
10.18
0.56
0.64
0.07
1.03
1.76
5.58
0.76
2.00
0.15
0.79
0.41
0.07
0.64
1.48
0.98
0.83
0.87
0.45
2.31
ND
0.79
0.50
0.35
0.28
0.09
0.75
0.07
0.28
ND
0.05
164.15
137.03
15023R2
9/25/98
10/27/98
3.63
2.32
9.01
1.58
8.63
0.04
2.82
1.71
0.27
6.49
0.33
0.44
ND
16.26
0.53
0.45
5.10
0.98
0.72
0.56
0.47
0.81
0.49
ND
0.60
4.89
3.55
2.45
0.16
0.23
ND
3.52
0.13
0.09
1.55
0.77
3.20
5.83
1.72
0.89
1.61
ND
2.45
1.37
1.00
0.59
0.94
10.09
0.65
0.63
0.07
1.03
1.79
5.43
0.87
2.00
0.12
0.80
0.40
0.09
0.56
1.47
0.93
0.84
0.63
0.44
2.19
ND
0.78
0.49
0.42
0.37
0.06
0.75
0.13
0.22
ND
0.07
163.50
135.49
15041D1
9/28/98
10/27/98
8.36
4.75
16.01
3.91
12.80
0.23
4.52
4.38
0.81
10.49
0.67
0.73
0.36
30.02
1.01
1.26
8.63
1.85
1.72
1.01
1.69
1.41
1.27
0.06
0.98
11.54
7.36
4.52
0.30
0.27
ND
5.15
0.31
0.21
2.80
1.32
6.71
1.18
3.02
1.42
3.01
ND
4.86
2.39
1.33
1.14
1.99
18.33
1.13
1.19
0.11
1.48
3.56
11.44
1.35
4.25
0.17
0.97
0.57
1.21
1.10
3.45
1.92
1.82
1.79
0.93
5.14
ND
1.24
1.30
0.71
0.58
0.13
1.22
0.13
0.50
ND
0.27
292.76
247.75
15041R1
9/28/98
10/28/98
8.67
4.87
16.03
3.91
12.94
0.27
4.60
4.82
0.63
10.04
0.65
0.74
0.37
30.52
1.12
1.32
8.69
1.92
1.75
1.02
1.72
1.49
1.23
0.15
1.12
11.80
7.47
4.71
0.33
0.45
ND
5.44
0.32
0.21
2.88
1.40
6.82
1.25
2.78
1.45
3.01
ND
5.03
2.50
1.42
1.05
1.98
18.60
1.28
1.20
0.20
1.52
3.58
11.39
1.35
4.33
0.33
1.00
0.56
1.27
1.16
3.52
1.97
1.92
1.63
1.00
5.51
ND
1.28
1.26
0.69
0.66
0.29
1.24
0.18
0.75
0.11
0.41
300.22
253.10
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15042D2
9/28/98
10/27/98
8.41
4.90
15.88
4.00
12.70
0.28
4.53
4.37
0.75
10.36
0.68
0.73
0.34
31.49
1.15
1.21
8.39
1.85
1.70
1.02
1.68
1.38
1.30
0.11
1.00
11.67
7.45
4.52
0.34
0.33
ND
4.98
0.30
0.18
2.79
1.36
6.82
1.80
3.07
1.42
2.89
ND
4.88
2.40
1.48
1.00
1.92
18.11
1.10
1.16
0.11
1.46
3.52
11.17
1.41
4.16
0.17
1.05
0.57
1.14
1.14
3.40
1.96
1.88
1.69
0.93
5.21
ND
1.30
1.44
0.68
0.62
0.14
1.21
0.14
0.42
ND
0.14
294.45
249.22
15042R2
9/28/98
10/28/98
8.74
5.04
16.17
4.11
12.88
0.25
4.57
4.62
0.87
10.62
0.65
0.73
0.35
32.31
1.15
1.29
8.62
1.93
1.72
1.03
1.74
1.42
1.30
0.08
1.17
11.94
7.59
4.57
0.37
0.33
ND
5.09
0.30
0.21
2.75
1.21
7.01
1.84
3.26
1.56
3.04
ND
4.89
2.46
1.40
1.08
1.95
18.40
1.14
1.23
0.09
1.51
3.58
11.17
1.38
4.30
0.23
1.00
0.52
1.12
1.21
3.51
1.97
1.96
1.44
0.94
5.21
ND
1.27
1.52
0.69
0.58
0.17
1.24
0.20
0.61
0.09
0.15
304.99
254.63
15081
9/29/98
10/27/98
13.06
7.98
18.67
6.12
12.22
0.46
6.51
6.77
1.32
24.52
1.59
1.50
0.71
54.50
1.92
2.60
16.16
3.08
3.85
2.03
4.03
2.07
1.40
0.24
1.81
26.17
13.49
8.32
0.77
0.51
ND
8.68
0.76
0.40
4.79
2.17
10.10
1.76
4.51
2.27
5.05
ND
9.01
4.08
2.28
2.04
3.64
33.99
2.44
2.19
0.17
2.74
5.81
19.23
1.92
6.83
0.29
1.64
0.74
1.52
1.69
5.50
3.01
3.10
2.30
1.04
8.25
ND
2.31
2.14
0.90
0.78
0.18
1.72
0.19
0.84
ND
0.23
497.97
419.58
15062D1
9/30/98
10/28/98
6.64
4.85
16.06
3.09
11.23
0.25
3.34
3.32
0.54
9.27
0.77
0.77
0.36
27.91
1.13
1.37
9.26
1.62
1.83
1.10
1.87
1.40
0.86
0.11
1.27
13.67
8.31
5.23
0.40
0.28
ND
6.71
0.50
0.23
3.20
1.31
6.62
1.93
3.41
1.50
3.42
ND
4.94
3.09
1.79
1.24
1.91
26.35
1.30
1.30
0.15
1.67
3.77
12.35
1.90
4.46
0.15
1.30
0.58
0.48
1.22
3.57
2.12
2.05
1.51
0.50
5.21
ND
1.59
1.38
0.62
0.55
0.12
1.22
0.15
0.55
ND
0.16
307.25
242.14
15062R1
9/30/98
10/28/98
6.57
4.86
15.72
3.05
11.08
0.19
3.34
3.17
0.58
9.23
0.59
0.66
0.34
27.86
1.06
1.32
9.19
1.59
1.84
1.06
1.84
1.24
0.82
0.12
1.27
13.36
8.31
5.27
0.43
0.41
ND
6.30
0.40
0.22
3.14
1.32
6.47
1.99
3.43
1.49
3.36
ND
4.86
3.05
1.69
1.22
1.87
25.87
1.28
1.28
0.08
1.62
3.67
12.12
2.11
4.45
0.26
1.31
0.52
0.64
1.27
3.60
2.09
2.04
1.46
0.56
5.22
ND
1.51
1.26
0.72
0.65
0.08
1.22
0.17
0.58
0.05
0.13
302.26
254.99
15063D2
9/30/98
10/28/98
6.73
4.99
16.28
3.11
11.24
0.20
3.25
3.30
0.54
9.36
0.65
0.72
0.36
29.63
1.11
1.33
9.35
1.63
1.95
1.12
1.96
1.43
0.99
0.13
1.28
13.97
8.64
5.39
0.46
0.36
ND
6.57
0.41
0.27
3.21
1.30
6.76
1.34
3.25
1.50
3.44
ND
5.36
3.14
1.68
1.29
1.94
22.42
1.34
1.27
0.08
1.64
3.84
12.63
2.42
4.57
0.15
1.35
0.52
0.41
1.32
3.69
2.27
2.13
1.81
0.65
5.60
ND
1.51
1.38
0.75
0.53
0.09
1.38
0.34
0.62
ND
0.11
307.30
243.45
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: CAMS 5
All concentrations reported in |
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15063R2
9/30/98
10/29/98
6.80
4.92
15.80
3.04
11.10
0.19
3.26
3.31
0.58
9.19
0.62
0.75
0.33
30.01
1.14
1.30
9.15
1.57
1.88
1.12
1.92
1.18
0.85
0.11
1.26
13.63
8.61
5.32
0.45
0.37
ND
6.55
0.45
0.28
3.18
1.34
6.64
1.29
3.18
1.49
3.34
ND
5.30
3.05
1.65
1.23
1.93
22.26
1.40
1.31
0.08
1.60
3.78
12.52
2.32
4.49
0.21
1.30
0.53
0.47
1.25
3.63
2.30
2.15
1.40
0.75
5.62
ND
1.46
1.45
0.85
0.75
0.12
1.37
0.35
0.65
ND
0.16
307.93
257.23
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13014
6/22/98
7/9/98
1.98
1.22
2.92
1.03
4.01
0.10
0.99
1.81
0.16
5.75
0.09
0.12
0.92
16.27
0.14
0.36
1.90
1.51
0.30
0.11
0.28
0.17
0.39
0.03
0.16
2.35
1.77
0.77
0.06
0.11
ND
1.06
0.07
0.03
0.55
0.18
1.56
0.25
1.11
0.17
0.71
0.07
1.03
0.60
0.45
0.29
0.44
3.53
0.17
0.15
0.14
0.34
0.63
1.95
0.77
0.77
0.11
0.23
ND
0.26
0.20
0.90
0.39
0.23
0.22
0.35
0.89
ND
0.23
0.16
0.05
0.06
ND
0.23
2.31
ND
ND
0.27
112.47
71.87
13017
6/24/98
7/10/98
2.19
2.09
4.12
1.54
4.57
0.15
3.74
2.60
0.19
20.06
1.62
1.70
1.97
55.55
2.51
4.16
18.56
1.55
4.62
2.39
6.57
2.27
1.20
0.29
2.24
34.90
17.42
11.47
0.97
0.66
ND
12.82
1.01
0.56
5.28
1.56
5.36
8.71
4.98
1.89
4.95
ND
4.96
3.63
1.73
1.24
1.57
15.33
1.09
0.81
0.13
1.34
2.67
9.52
1.49
3.45
0.17
0.76
0.19
0.31
0.86
2.80
1.47
1.39
1.32
0.77
3.96
ND
1.28
1.04
0.78
0.44
0.51
17.14
ND
7.34
ND
ND
462.29
352.47
13055
6/25/98
7/10/98
2.74
1.94
5.21
1.76
8.55
0.20
1.85
2.32
0.32
5.07
0.18
0.18
0.25
11.35
0.23
0.54
3.34
1.34
0.52
0.21
0.53
0.36
0.48
0.02
0.31
3.57
2.96
1.50
0.13
0.17
ND
2.05
0.09
0.07
1.11
0.35
2.52
0.47
1.96
0.61
1.16
ND
2.00
0.99
0.82
0.48
0.74
6.75
0.41
0.30
0.07
0.57
1.27
4.04
0.74
1.47
0.08
0.35
0.06
0.35
0.28
1.15
0.53
0.53
0.49
0.38
1.47
ND
0.32
0.26
0.08
0.09
ND
0.13
ND
0.17
ND
ND
132.73
95.92
13089
6/26/98
7/10/98
4.81
12.59
8.34
2.48
15.85
0.37
3.62
2.87
0.50
5.20
0.23
0.23
0.18
19.02
0.42
0.68
5.19
1.40
0.72
0.33
0.73
0.97
0.43
0.07
0.65
6.74
6.84
3.83
0.18
0.21
ND
3.86
0.15
0.09
1.99
0.67
4.41
1.18
2.62
1.03
2.64
ND
3.28
4.36
3.41
1.07
1.19
13.68
1.03
0.66
0.08
1.20
4.13
15.14
4.90
4.31
0.22
0.80
0.16
0.35
0.62
2.14
1.08
1.15
1.08
0.24
3.13
ND
1.06
0.70
0.17
0.12
0.04
0.32
ND
3.81
ND
ND
238.78
199.91
13090
6/29/98
7/10/98
6.08
3.31
6.09
2.78
9.32
0.31
4.36
2.78
0.39
7.26
0.19
0.18
1.20
18.82
0.34
0.49
5.10
1.37
0.51
0.23
0.52
0.56
1.11
ND
0.49
5.15
5.61
2.10
0.14
0.19
ND
2.92
0.15
0.06
1.57
0.48
3.69
0.93
2.22
0.78
1.64
ND
2.48
1.81
1.52
0.68
0.93
8.84
0.50
0.41
0.11
0.79
1.71
5.38
1.33
1.95
0.09
0.44
0.23
0.27
0.43
1.51
0.92
0.59
0.58
0.74
1.80
ND
0.66
0.33
0.13
0.09
ND
0.25
ND
ND
ND
0.04
211.31
138.96
13205
6/30/98
7/10/98
3.03
2.67
5.91
2.52
6.56
0.29
1.48
2.69
0.42
3.79
0.22
0.22
0.28
15.09
0.33
0.66
3.80
1.27
0.68
0.30
0.76
0.46
0.71
0.06
0.35
4.73
4.15
1.96
0.16
0.21
ND
2.45
0.22
0.09
1.30
0.47
3.15
0.48
1.84
0.68
1.52
ND
2.69
1.45
1.02
0.64
0.99
8.65
0.48
0.36
0.07
0.58
1.83
6.20
0.65
2.22
0.12
0.40
0.09
0.31
0.36
1.48
0.70
0.70
0.67
0.28
1.96
ND
0.41
0.34
0.10
0.12
ND
0.13
ND
ND
ND
ND
149.07
113.94
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13210
7/1/98
7/11/98
4.10
3.84
4.69
3.04
12.80
0.43
2.32
3.51
0.22
4.58
0.42
0.44
0.96
26.46
0.65
0.96
6.08
1.38
1.11
0.50
1.15
0.76
1.47
0.03
0.71
7.90
7.13
3.71
0.21
0.29
ND
4.88
0.20
0.12
2.49
0.82
4.41
1.72
3.80
1.42
3.58
ND
4.05
3.95
2.74
1.13
1.40
17.28
0.96
0.66
0.12
1.11
2.42
7.74
1.24
2.86
0.15
0.69
0.15
0.66
0.61
2.23
1.09
1.12
1.00
0.58
3.05
ND
0.85
0.99
0.20
0.21
0.07
0.53
ND
ND
ND
ND
262.76
187.12
13203D1
7/2/98
7/8/98
6.04
13.32
6.20
3.49
10.07
0.55
2.67
4.38
0.26
6.07
0.41
0.39
1.05
25.49
0.49
0.98
8.23
2.29
1.23
0.58
1.49
0.62
1.60
0.09
0.65
9.35
6.37
3.77
0.32
0.32
ND
4.54
0.26
0.17
2.44
0.73
5.48
1.00
2.60
0.92
2.71
ND
4.61
2.30
1.61
1.24
1.85
20.00
1.07
0.82
0.08
1.39
6.97
25.22
5.23
7.68
0.10
1.06
0.25
0.51
0.80
3.28
1.66
1.64
1.55
0.54
4.64
ND
1.70
1.19
0.25
0.27
0.14
0.84
ND
ND
ND
0.12
304.52
240.23
13203R1
7/2/98
7/9/98
5.72
12.32
8.97
3.25
9.47
0.49
2.39
3.90
0.67
7.67
0.42
0.37
0.84
22.40
0.66
0.98
7.15
2.12
1.09
0.53
1.33
0.74
1.54
0.04
0.70
8.59
5.87
3.35
0.30
0.25
ND
4.20
0.32
0.16
2.25
0.81
5.28
0.95
2.80
1.11
2.53
ND
4.43
2.29
1.25
1.11
1.75
17.44
0.99
0.71
0.11
1.32
6.19
22.54
5.02
6.79
0.17
0.95
0.26
0.66
0.84
4.28
1.84
1.53
1.50
0.66
4.29
ND
1.36
0.77
0.27
0.22
0.07
0.77
ND
0.62
ND
0.21
296.85
227.75
13204D2
7/2/98
7/9/98
0.99
12.28
7.45
3.22
9.34
0.42
2.42
3.87
0.43
5.39
0.38
0.36
0.81
21.57
0.67
0.99
7.22
1.87
1.15
0.52
1.20
0.72
1.27
0.04
0.69
8.20
6.31
3.44
0.31
0.25
ND
4.14
0.35
0.15
2.21
0.82
5.23
0.90
2.76
1.13
2.47
ND
4.39
2.31
1.48
1.11
1.65
17.75
1.03
0.73
0.12
1.35
6.22
22.57
4.97
6.91
0.29
0.97
0.23
0.59
0.81
2.88
1.43
1.55
1.50
0.38
4.12
ND
1.41
0.97
0.26
0.23
0.07
0.89
ND
ND
ND
0.05
288.50
215.15
13204R2
7/2/98
7/9/98
6.42
11.46
7.87
3.04
8.75
0.43
2.27
3.77
0.55
4.98
0.35
0.35
0.86
19.78
0.48
0.74
6.61
1.95
1.05
0.48
1.13
0.65
1.07
0.04
0.63
7.62
5.70
3.02
0.26
0.23
ND
3.79
0.32
0.13
1.99
0.70
4.95
0.84
2.54
1.08
2.30
ND
4.02
2.15
1.50
0.99
1.50
16.11
0.92
0.67
0.12
1.29
5.69
20.64
4.55
6.33
0.28
0.88
0.21
0.55
0.78
2.87
1.38
1.43
1.34
0.43
3.83
ND
1.42
0.92
0.23
0.23
0.10
0.81
ND
0.89
ND
0.28
278.25
206.51
13214
7/3/98
7/11/98
4.02
6.90
8.92
2.80
13.87
0.42
4.77
3.06
0.43
10.83
0.25
0.27
0.96
25.85
0.49
0.81
7.62
2.14
0.91
0.40
0.77
0.87
2.17
0.05
0.73
7.89
7.18
3.87
0.22
0.29
ND
5.43
0.26
0.11
2.37
0.71
5.18
1.05
2.69
1.06
2.55
0.21
3.44
2.24
1.81
0.99
1.28
13.90
0.98
0.67
0.14
1.32
2.39
7.67
3.51
2.83
0.20
1.05
0.17
0.54
0.71
2.47
1.25
1.35
1.37
0.42
3.48
ND
1.44
0.80
0.24
0.21
0.03
0.68
ND
0.35
ND
ND
250.83
201.33
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13323
7/6/98
7/11/98
0.45
5.02
5.20
2.20
8.61
0.29
1.74
2.71
0.36
6.11
0.22
0.22
0.76
17.12
0.35
0.64
4.57
1.04
0.65
0.28
0.69
0.47
1.13
0.03
0.41
4.77
4.71
2.17
0.16
0.22
ND
2.51
0.17
0.08
1.29
0.51
3.21
0.53
1.92
0.75
1.41
0.11
2.61
1.20
1.03
0.70
0.94
9.70
0.57
0.39
0.09
0.64
2.04
6.94
1.23
2.40
0.14
0.46
0.10
0.45
0.42
1.57
0.76
0.78
0.84
0.57
2.15
ND
0.54
0.40
0.14
0.11
ND
0.31
ND
0.29
ND
ND
168.75
126.31
13322
7/7/98
VOID
13321
7/8/98
7/16/98
3.17
0.96
2.58
0.82
3.74
0.09
0.97
4.73
0.21
3.08
0.19
0.21
0.11
9.51
0.37
0.42
3.28
0.60
0.69
0.34
1.27
0.31
1.04
ND
0.41
0.74
3.78
2.06
0.13
0.19
ND
2.90
0.20
0.11
1.20
0.41
2.05
0.55
1.80
0.55
1.15
0.07
1.49
0.98
0.64
0.44
0.59
7.33
0.40
0.30
0.04
0.63
1.38
5.17
0.30
1.66
0.10
0.33
ND
ND
0.29
1.12
0.55
0.48
0.40
ND
1.39
ND
0.21
0.21
0.05
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
108.32
83.54
13366
7/9/98
7/16/98
2.43
2.68
3.39
2.30
8.93
ND
1.49
2.31
0.39
4.07
0.21
0.24
0.20
15.65
0.44
0.72
4.01
1.85
0.68
0.31
0.73
0.48
1.24
ND
0.43
4.74
4.31
2.17
0.21
0.14
ND
2.55
0.19
0.09
1.33
0.43
3.13
0.76
2.41
1.06
2.33
0.44
2.09
2.49
1.75
0.62
0.85
8.18
0.55
0.42
0.07
0.75
1.47
4.74
0.44
1.79
0.14
0.42
ND
0.59
0.35
1.38
0.66
0.68
0.74
1.15
1.81
ND
0.34
0.44
0.07
0.10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
143.06
116.54
13374
7/10/98
7/16/98
2.41
1.89
5.47
1.23
4.94
0.16
3.12
1.95
0.18
16.84
1.25
1.38
1.45
45.48
2.24
3.50
15.12
1.31
4.27
2.12
5.52
1.89
1.59
0.31
2.39
31.50
17.44
10.52
0.99
0.58
ND
12.98
1.07
0.58
4.97
1.58
6.59
1.17
3.64
1.38
4.34
0.70
4.73
3.79
1.57
1.41
1.72
20.52
1.10
0.80
0.15
1.41
3.58
12.99
1.48
4.27
0.19
0.97
0.21
0.35
1.01
3.24
1.77
1.48
1.45
1.23
4.34
ND
1.00
0.74
0.24
0.37
ND
0.54
ND
0.19
ND
ND
367.49
306.87
13522
7/13/98
8/19/98
3.89
1.77
6.96
1.88
7.05
ND
1.90
2.14
0.23
3.62
0.44
0.55
0.61
22.25
0.62
0.35
3.31
2.01
0.61
0.50
0.50
0.69
1.52
ND
0.44
3.69
2.65
1.82
0.12
0.10
ND
2.19
ND
ND
1.02
0.82
2.77
0.81
1.25
0.88
1.37
ND
2.20
1.14
0.77
0.59
0.98
6.82
0.54
0.70
ND
0.83
1.30
3.75
1.63
1.47
ND
0.59
0.41
0.29
0.57
1.44
0.88
0.74
0.71
1.33
1.86
ND
0.67
0.58
0.55
0.36
ND
0.71
0.14
0.72
ND
0.27
160.87
118.87
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13585
7/14/98
8/19/98
5.67
3.92
15.77
2.28
16.17
0.17
4.98
2.50
0.33
8.98
0.37
0.62
0.60
23.54
0.51
0.61
6.85
1.45
0.82
0.46
0.60
0.94
3.00
ND
0.83
7.89
5.18
3.09
0.19
0.14
ND
4.95
0.15
ND
1.95
0.89
4.76
1.19
1.61
1.05
2.26
ND
2.48
2.35
1.72
0.79
1.06
13.06
0.95
0.96
0.11
1.30
3.75
12.20
0.95
3.80
0.16
1.01
0.52
0.36
0.75
2.10
1.43
1.34
1.04
0.60
3.14
ND
1.11
0.73
0.41
0.40
ND
0.91
0.06
0.32
ND
0.12
238.11
199.24
13582
7/15/98
8/7/98
8.18
4.91
10.69
3.51
10.60
0.63
2.29
3.73
0.63
4.68
0.55
0.64
0.43
14.63
0.76
0.71
10.74
1.58
1.07
0.66
0.87
0.99
0.81
ND
0.63
7.54
4.29
3.31
0.26
0.26
ND
4.08
0.15
ND
2.19
1.00
5.08
1.00
2.15
1.35
2.42
ND
4.07
1.83
1.35
0.89
1.49
14.09
1.04
1.14
ND
1.50
4.06
13.11
3.43
4.41
0.18
1.35
0.64
0.38
1.10
3.10
1.79
1.59
1.45
2.94
4.43
ND
1.55
1.20
0.88
0.70
ND
1.58
0.71
0.91
ND
0.30
293.72
199.17
13583
7/16/98
8/7/98
19.52
12.81
29.77
8.60
29.44
0.83
6.70
15.72
1.85
17.16
1.55
1.70
2.67
66.96
2.38
2.16
20.62
3.17
3.71
4.89
6.17
2.71
2.58
0.26
2.14
15.82
15.44
9.75
0.72
0.76
ND
11.27
0.67
0.60
5.50
2.50
12.25
1.97
5.99
2.90
6.51
ND
11.50
5.75
3.32
2.81
4.24
42.09
2.61
2.58
0.15
4.45
8.32
27.48
3.21
9.95
0.69
2.90
0.99
ND
2.59
9.38
4.80
5.30
3.57
0.57
13.68
ND
3.88
3.34
0.89
0.97
0.43
3.39
0.36
1.53
ND
0.57
656.60
547.03
13592D1
7/17/98
8/19/98
6.28
2.88
22.04
2.25
23.34
0.13
8.14
2.27
0.31
12.28
0.39
0.57
0.10
30.97
0.60
0.47
8.28
1.22
0.71
0.60
0.54
1.19
2.73
ND
0.86
5.30
5.82
3.48
0.15
0.14
ND
8.70
0.06
ND
2.29
0.96
4.54
7.96
2.37
1.28
2.44
ND
2.66
2.68
2.25
0.78
1.08
17.44
1.28
1.24
0.11
1.68
2.42
7.55
1.98
2.94
0.30
1.64
0.68
0.21
0.99
2.30
1.56
1.74
1.08
0.68
3.66
ND
2.41
1.10
0.48
0.48
ND
1.86
0.19
0.54
ND
0.11
282.34
242.74
13592R1
7/17/98
8/21/98
5.49
2.58
17.89
2.05
22.09
0.14
7.68
1.97
0.38
11.67
0.43
0.54
0.08
29.41
0.55
0.37
7.91
1.11
0.72
0.47
0.57
1.16
2.58
ND
0.79
5.10
5.57
3.27
0.17
0.13
ND
8.08
0.05
ND
2.13
0.82
4.12
7.64
2.15
1.19
2.25
ND
2.67
2.62
2.09
0.81
0.96
16.41
1.23
1.12
0.05
1.60
2.34
7.24
1.71
2.76
0.27
1.63
0.61
0.51
0.98
2.28
1.67
1.56
1.07
0.91
3.53
ND
2.18
0.71
0.67
0.47
ND
1.78
0.25
0.53
ND
0.16
267.84
226.64
13593D2
7/17/98
8/20/98
5.87
2.62
19.57
2.08
25.88
0.13
8.35
1.99
0.23
15.96
0.44
0.53
0.19
25.34
0.60
0.42
7.35
1.56
0.80
0.54
0.50
1.16
3.10
ND
0.71
5.15
5.62
3.24
0.15
0.12
ND
7.45
0.06
ND
2.08
0.94
4.24
6.51
2.33
1.45
2.31
ND
2.68
2.53
2.12
0.59
1.11
15.87
1.38
1.10
0.11
2.12
4.57
12.95
2.57
3.89
0.26
1.72
0.59
0.85
0.89
2.18
1.53
1.35
0.99
1.31
3.23
ND
2.13
0.68
0.74
0.65
0.03
1.87
0.34
0.83
ND
0.14
328.18
243.45
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13593R2
7/17/98
8/21/98
5.86
2.51
19.36
2.17
25.86
0.15
8.13
2.02
0.24
15.80
0.39
0.52
0.17
25.51
0.54
0.41
7.30
1.58
0.86
0.53
0.47
1.28
2.98
ND
0.74
4.71
5.57
3.30
0.12
0.09
ND
7.53
0.05
ND
2.15
1.00
4.32
6.49
2.04
1.32
2.20
ND
2.78
2.52
2.02
0.84
1.11
15.82
1.31
1.06
0.07
2.17
4.57
13.00
2.30
3.89
0.16
1.78
0.57
0.97
0.89
2.22
1.54
1.43
1.06
1.82
3.32
ND
2.21
1.04
0.73
0.52
0.08
1.85
0.41
0.82
ND
0.17
325.92
243.29
13612
7/20/98
8/8/98
6.16
3.97
12.08
2.79
14.89
0.22
3.20
3.30
0.53
7.23
0.70
0.62
0.10
20.07
0.63
0.59
5.57
1.67
1.10
0.69
0.93
0.91
0.85
0.02
0.61
6.88
4.60
2.76
0.23
0.14
ND
3.22
0.17
0.14
1.95
0.92
3.79
1.08
2.04
1.29
1.91
0.05
2.94
1.52
1.31
0.64
1.17
9.99
0.96
0.74
0.28
1.17
2.80
8.80
1.39
3.17
0.39
0.87
0.59
0.53
0.92
2.26
1.35
1.31
1.16
1.30
3.13
ND
0.94
0.85
0.56
0.43
0.06
1.01
0.54
0.44
0.02
0.21
216.65
176.37
13728
7/21/98
8/20/98
5.14
9.54
6.33
2.88
9.17
0.18
2.24
3.14
0.61
5.08
0.78
0.59
0.13
17.79
0.70
0.65
5.79
1.72
1.49
0.77
1.03
0.99
0.90
0.08
0.69
6.20
4.31
2.58
0.25
0.17
ND
3.14
0.17
0.11
1.62
0.93
3.94
0.81
1.97
1.24
1.82
ND
2.88
1.52
1.12
0.62
1.12
12.16
1.00
1.06
ND
1.26
5.91
20.73
1.81
6.20
0.20
1.09
0.55
0.51
0.97
2.65
1.62
1.62
1.31
0.70
4.15
ND
1.48
0.98
0.44
0.42
0.05
1.38
0.11
0.60
ND
0.18
226.67
186.06
13732
7/22/98
8/20/98
4.05
2.44
6.07
2.16
7.32
0.16
4.25
3.29
0.38
5.17
0.78
0.62
2.21
26.64
0.91
0.48
4.76
1.62
0.98
0.60
0.93
0.64
0.79
0.13
0.82
4.30
3.92
2.74
0.17
0.10
ND
4.07
0.16
0.09
1.71
0.87
3.44
84.57
1.83
1.15
1.47
ND
1.76
1.27
0.93
0.52
0.89
17.47
0.55
0.85
0.09
1.78
2.51
6.37
2.41
2.47
0.28
1.27
0.56
0.59
0.88
2.00
1.40
1.43
0.91
1.17
3.25
ND
4.05
0.69
0.44
0.36
0.24
7.05
ND
2.06
ND
0.27
303.57
257.58
13764
7/23/98
8/20/98
3.84
1.72
3.92
1.87
3.77
0.10
1.24
2.16
0.42
2.52
0.46
0.65
ND
13.38
0.57
0.45
3.03
1.46
0.88
0.59
0.81
0.69
0.72
0.03
0.48
3.60
2.32
1.57
0.15
0.16
ND
1.87
0.13
0.04
1.07
0.67
2.79
0.74
1.61
1.02
1.53
ND
1.63
1.47
0.94
0.38
0.64
5.73
0.65
0.57
0.14
0.81
1.17
3.33
1.21
1.37
ND
0.62
0.48
0.56
0.59
1.35
0.93
0.80
0.74
1.58
2.12
ND
0.63
0.65
0.48
0.36
ND
0.60
0.10
0.24
ND
0.13
126.98
98.04
13761
7/24/98
8/20/98
4.37
2.49
5.16
2.06
5.15
ND
1.47
2.31
0.51
2.73
0.43
0.64
0.15
14.47
0.43
0.43
3.27
1.50
0.71
0.61
0.73
0.75
0.58
0.06
0.40
3.68
2.56
1.78
0.19
0.07
ND
2.47
0.08
0.05
1.16
0.67
2.40
1.18
1.92
1.17
2.01
ND
1.91
1.66
0.98
0.30
0.82
6.06
0.73
0.61
0.08
0.91
1.43
3.91
1.13
1.70
0.04
0.84
0.49
0.89
0.75
1.54
1.02
0.90
0.87
1.41
2.35
ND
0.71
0.65
0.56
0.40
ND
0.73
0.06
0.20
ND
0.09
136.13
109.60
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13778
7/27/98
8/21/98
3.02
1.69
3.06
1.49
4.89
0.12
1.59
1.77
0.29
2.21
0.38
0.57
0.16
12.05
0.48
0.30
2.76
1.26
0.80
0.57
0.63
0.63
0.58
ND
0.48
3.62
2.97
1.65
0.15
0.10
ND
1.97
0.13
ND
1.05
0.75
1.91
1.22
2.63
1.22
2.27
ND
2.03
2.29
1.37
0.52
0.78
6.84
0.69
0.71
ND
0.79
1.33
3.80
1.05
1.51
ND
0.60
0.49
0.37
0.62
1.26
0.85
0.80
0.60
1.12
1.76
ND
0.66
0.49
0.55
0.31
0.69
0.63
0.10
0.22
ND
0.12
130.17
99.37
13894D1
7/28/98
8/18/98
4.04
1.73
4.89
1.77
11.42
ND
2.08
1.94
0.28
2.38
0.37
0.55
ND
11.29
0.49
0.27
2.69
1.19
0.67
0.59
0.52
0.67
0.92
ND
0.49
2.98
2.18
1.69
0.12
0.14
ND
1.82
0.10
ND
1.02
0.69
2.05
0.74
1.26
0.96
1.77
0.03
1.71
1.76
1.16
0.31
0.77
6.34
0.68
0.65
ND
0.97
1.56
4.51
0.86
1.57
ND
0.62
0.50
0.47
0.69
1.47
1.18
0.97
0.69
1.10
2.19
ND
0.73
0.68
0.52
0.46
ND
0.80
ND
0.32
ND
0.13
129.21
105.16
13894R1
7/28/98
8/19/98
3.97
1.32
5.00
1.73
11.20
ND
2.06
1.92
0.31
2.18
0.44
0.63
ND
12.05
0.45
0.32
2.73
1.13
0.66
0.59
0.46
0.71
0.67
ND
0.54
3.15
2.93
1.61
0.12
0.10
ND
1.86
0.09
ND
1.04
0.72
2.20
0.74
1.96
1.09
1.67
0.03
1.56
1.66
1.03
0.34
0.76
6.16
0.63
0.67
ND
0.88
1.51
4.15
0.76
1.61
ND
0.66
0.45
0.48
0.63
1.45
0.93
0.87
0.60
1.04
2.15
ND
0.71
0.84
0.45
0.40
ND
0.71
ND
0.30
ND
0.15
126.11
104.85
13895D2
7/28/98
8/18/98
3.37
2.29
4.12
1.72
10.43
ND
2.00
1.76
0.21
2.21
0.51
0.51
ND
12.74
0.40
0.33
2.56
1.12
0.68
0.55
0.46
0.57
0.71
ND
0.45
2.82
2.28
1.55
0.13
0.12
ND
1.71
0.09
ND
1.01
0.63
2.04
1.56
1.68
0.96
1.58
0.08
1.37
1.64
1.03
0.34
0.68
5.97
0.62
0.67
ND
0.86
1.53
4.23
1.01
1.65
ND
0.62
0.38
0.37
0.70
1.41
0.96
0.90
0.72
1.24
2.14
ND
0.65
0.51
0.50
0.41
ND
0.71
ND
0.20
ND
0.10
127.10
102.07
13895R2
7/28/98
8/19/98
3.60
1.70
4.28
1.77
11.74
ND
2.19
1.95
0.29
2.52
0.41
0.53
ND
13.64
0.36
0.33
2.93
1.21
0.70
0.53
0.65
0.68
0.72
ND
0.47
3.10
2.76
1.75
0.18
0.13
ND
2.04
0.08
ND
1.14
0.75
2.25
1.68
1.84
1.00
1.81
0.05
1.64
1.75
1.23
0.43
0.74
6.61
0.64
0.68
ND
0.89
1.63
4.66
1.01
1.74
ND
0.60
0.45
0.50
0.60
1.47
0.95
0.87
0.72
1.19
2.26
ND
0.71
0.55
0.46
0.42
ND
0.67
ND
0.20
ND
0.10
134.08
110.09
13903
7/29/98
8/18/98
2.91
1.30
2.78
1.49
4.05
ND
0.95
1.76
0.22
1.92
0.35
0.53
ND
14.54
0.45
0.36
3.01
1.15
0.63
0.51
0.51
0.58
0.42
ND
0.41
2.91
1.97
1.39
0.15
0.07
ND
1.49
ND
ND
1.11
0.64
1.91
0.79
0.87
0.79
1.54
ND
1.34
1.39
0.74
0.32
0.62
4.72
0.54
0.52
ND
0.83
1.14
3.00
1.24
1.26
ND
0.58
0.44
0.40
0.56
1.19
0.83
0.81
0.75
1.46
1.82
ND
0.61
0.48
0.58
0.32
ND
0.68
ND
0.22
ND
0.11
118.62
85.95
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13942
7/31/98
8/18/98
4.23
1.74
5.43
1.98
6.19
ND
1.56
2.45
0.31
4.45
0.42
0.53
0.11
12.41
0.48
0.39
3.07
1.94
0.76
0.59
0.69
0.78
0.68
ND
0.54
3.48
2.95
1.68
0.12
0.14
ND
1.92
0.10
ND
1.11
0.71
2.52
0.89
1.39
1.03
1.20
ND
1.85
1.18
0.90
0.46
0.79
5.89
0.66
0.67
ND
0.93
1.41
3.74
1.11
1.55
ND
0.68
0.57
0.42
0.64
1.55
1.00
0.91
0.71
1.13
2.29
ND
0.71
0.65
0.54
0.41
ND
0.75
ND
0.28
ND
0.11
136.51
105.49
13959
8/3/98
8/19/98
6.00
17.26
14.86
3.06
15.83
0.53
5.17
3.24
0.61
8.89
0.59
0.62
ND
25.00
0.77
0.73
7.79
2.52
1.11
0.71
0.99
1.22
2.62
ND
0.65
6.70
5.84
3.66
0.24
0.19
ND
4.72
0.44
ND
2.13
1.06
5.13
1.11
1.82
1.09
2.46
ND
3.37
2.55
1.80
0.91
1.30
15.22
1.27
1.02
ND
1.77
5.38
17.87
2.50
5.71
0.17
1.28
0.64
0.54
0.91
2.73
1.75
1.52
1.28
0.38
3.84
ND
1.46
1.11
0.58
0.51
ND
1.45
ND
0.59
ND
0.17
283.93
238.97
14058
8/4/98
8/28/98
5.70
4.40
14.19
2.18
14.76
0.20
4.68
2.08
0.34
7.80
0.40
0.52
0.30
24.50
0.66
0.53
6.71
0.83
0.83
0.61
0.70
1.36
1.69
0.08
0.92
7.13
7.60
4.13
0.19
0.16
ND
4.38
0.12
ND
2.00
0.88
4.44
1.55
2.54
1.26
3.02
ND
2.91
5.87
3.95
1.13
1.13
15.02
1.44
1.24
0.05
1.66
2.41
7.18
0.94
2.61
0.11
1.11
0.61
0.16
0.78
2.00
1.34
1.27
1.03
0.47
3.12
ND
1.27
1.11
0.54
0.45
0.05
1.08
0.07
0.43
ND
0.13
250.54
201.07
13979D1
8/5/98
8/19/98
2.26
5.53
4.11
4.55
47.83
0.62
5.41
4.56
1.00
8.07
0.94
0.85
0.16
35.93
1.11
1.02
10.69
1.31
1.49
0.99
1.42
1.77
0.81
ND
1.29
11.84
8.62
5.08
0.30
0.31
ND
6.43
0.46
0.18
3.08
1.38
6.83
2.19
5.78
2.36
6.85
ND
5.59
7.72
3.48
1.81
2.07
23.21
1.56
1.56
0.09
1.96
4.21
12.66
2.15
4.66
0.28
1.47
0.75
1.22
1.25
3.92
2.25
2.18
1.63
0.83
5.54
ND
1.62
1.83
0.59
0.65
ND
1.52
ND
0.70
ND
0.28
376.53
306.67
13979R1
8/5/98
8/20/98
9.92
5.85
16.20
4.16
43.03
0.25
5.03
4.13
0.80
7.23
0.67
0.79
0.13
32.78
0.87
0.97
9.56
1.18
1.35
0.91
1.36
1.12
0.72
ND
0.96
10.67
7.56
4.50
0.28
0.23
ND
6.06
0.22
0.13
2.70
1.29
6.03
1.90
5.41
2.39
6.15
ND
4.84
6.85
3.04
1.62
1.77
20.59
1.34
1.30
0.08
1.56
3.87
11.42
1.93
4.21
0.19
1.25
0.54
0.89
1.15
3.51
1.98
2.03
1.61
0.72
5.10
ND
1.50
1.49
0.68
0.62
ND
1.49
0.11
0.59
ND
0.25
345.76
295.56
13980D2
8/5/98
8/19/98
8.95
5.67
13.49
3.93
41.32
0.56
4.58
3.93
0.83
7.12
0.88
0.82
0.22
32.30
1.10
1.03
9.25
1.18
1.32
0.87
1.23
1.20
0.75
ND
0.77
10.91
7.22
4.46
0.26
0.32
ND
5.57
0.47
0.14
2.69
1.17
6.04
1.90
5.55
2.07
5.90
ND
4.76
6.42
3.00
1.50
1.72
19.86
1.32
1.44
0.10
1.68
3.77
10.93
1.98
4.02
0.08
1.36
0.65
0.86
1.16
3.46
2.08
1.98
1.54
0.74
4.87
ND
1.52
1.68
0.61
0.58
ND
1.66
0.07
0.97
ND
0.31
335.04
286.68
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
13980R2
8/5/98
8/20/98
11.02
6.19
17.65
4.60
47.02
0.41
5.20
4.33
0.83
7.90
0.68
0.85
0.19
35.43
1.01
1.13
10.39
1.30
1.54
0.97
1.52
1.57
0.94
ND
1.02
11.80
8.50
4.97
0.38
0.31
ND
6.79
0.37
0.17
2.96
1.42
6.85
2.21
5.75
2.56
6.88
ND
5.60
7.23
3.37
1.79
1.93
22.70
1.48
1.43
0.07
1.84
4.23
12.39
2.09
4.55
0.20
1.43
0.61
1.04
1.20
3.87
2.22
2.23
1.60
0.85
5.42
ND
1.63
1.45
0.58
0.45
ND
1.76
0.24
1.29
ND
0.29
379.30
307.04
14055
8/6/98
8/28/98
5.67
4.45
42.52
3.12
45.32
0.19
10.35
3.99
0.58
23.21
0.71
0.89
ND
34.04
1.39
0.96
14.63
1.71
1.81
1.26
1.76
1.32
0.96
ND
1.40
10.63
9.05
5.43
0.39
0.34
ND
7.93
0.32
0.12
3.98
1.49
6.18
3.02
3.71
1.77
3.64
ND
4.44
3.83
3.65
0.97
1.76
18.25
1.73
1.49
0.08
2.47
3.54
10.70
1.78
4.10
0.12
1.61
0.81
0.90
1.40
3.55
2.25
2.07
1.63
1.09
5.38
ND
1.61
1.37
1.09
0.88
0.14
1.75
0.22
0.55
ND
0.67
407.49
348.11
14056
8/7/98
8/28/98
1.64
1.59
3.08
0.92
3.26
ND
1.38
1.24
0.13
6.09
0.68
0.78
0.37
23.06
1.29
1.72
8.58
0.52
2.42
1.42
3.00
1.38
0.71
0.14
1.53
17.47
9.59
6.14
0.58
0.36
ND
7.24
0.51
0.29
2.94
1.21
4.09
0.75
1.82
1.06
2.44
ND
3.09
2.00
0.92
0.71
1.18
10.60
0.78
0.73
ND
1.00
2.04
6.80
0.83
2.35
0.06
0.69
0.47
0.10
0.76
1.96
1.20
1.03
0.78
0.64
2.83
ND
0.48
0.77
0.51
0.43
ND
0.49
0.13
0.18
0.02
0.08
211.78
170.07
14091
8/10/98
9/21/98
3.24
2.42
3.70
1.65
5.97
ND
2.60
1.83
0.26
2.56
0.51
0.48
0.12
11.33
0.55
0.32
2.96
1.16
0.67
0.53
0.70
0.72
0.53
ND
0.53
3.70
2.81
1.85
0.12
0.13
ND
1.84
0.09
0.08
1.22
0.72
2.66
1.02
3.11
1.46
3.40
ND
2.16
3.01
1.76
0.51
0.81
7.56
0.64
0.64
ND
0.75
1.18
3.44
0.82
1.38
ND
0.60
0.42
0.24
0.52
1.16
0.81
0.77
0.75
0.82
1.69
ND
0.59
0.39
0.37
0.28
ND
0.54
ND
0.21
ND
0.09
137.65
104.39
14231
8/13/98
9/2/98
5.06
4.44
13.24
2.17
12.47
0.17
3.94
2.57
0.43
7.59
0.58
0.67
0.14
22.74
0.62
0.62
6.65
0.68
1.03
0.74
0.84
0.99
1.04
ND
0.75
7.76
5.12
3.12
0.18
0.21
ND
3.59
0.13
0.13
1.93
0.87
4.20
1.21
2.30
1.34
2.35
ND
2.86
1.99
1.51
0.71
1.15
10.32
0.88
0.84
0.09
1.12
1.90
5.50
1.52
2.05
0.10
0.73
0.43
0.48
0.67
1.64
1.06
0.94
0.78
0.86
2.42
ND
0.79
0.64
0.55
0.54
0.04
0.69
0.17
0.40
ND
0.18
206.50
171.18
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14246D1
8/14/98
9/10/98
5.79
4.69
13.04
2.72
17.90
0.15
3.98
2.60
0.50
5.63
0.54
0.56
0.18
23.49
0.70
0.57
6.15
0.83
0.94
0.64
0.79
0.98
0.41
ND
0.75
7.32
4.92
3.32
0.25
0.22
ND
6.85
0.15
0.12
2.51
0.92
3.98
2.17
2.94
1.34
3.13
ND
3.32
2.70
1.82
0.89
1.26
16.32
1.02
0.97
0.04
1.39
2.42
7.29
1.26
2.71
0.16
1.02
0.44
0.71
0.81
2.28
1.35
1.39
1.05
0.82
3.35
ND
1.39
0.65
0.49
0.37
0.04
1.14
0.12
0.45
ND
0.17
234.38
196.29
14246R1
8/14/98
9/11/98
5.83
4.85
13.26
2.76
18.24
0.22
4.04
2.76
0.55
5.82
0.55
0.56
0.12
23.44
0.63
0.65
6.37
0.94
0.98
0.64
0.76
1.13
0.52
0.11
0.76
7.40
5.11
3.44
0.19
0.27
ND
6.96
0.15
0.13
2.58
1.07
3.87
2.19
2.52
1.37
3.22
ND
3.38
2.73
1.84
0.93
1.31
16.63
1.09
1.01
0.05
1.38
2.53
7.58
1.09
2.82
0.15
1.03
0.48
0.82
0.87
2.19
1.38
1.37
1.04
0.84
3.36
ND
1.35
0.66
0.53
0.42
0.06
1.15
0.08
0.47
0.02
0.14
238.62
199.70
14247D2
8/14/98
9/10/98
5.89
4.66
13.09
2.62
17.99
0.16
3.97
2.68
0.54
5.79
0.50
0.60
0.20
22.09
0.67
0.66
6.22
0.86
1.00
0.69
0.82
1.03
0.49
ND
0.82
7.38
4.86
3.39
0.19
0.25
ND
6.74
0.17
0.20
2.54
1.00
3.92
2.13
2.68
1.29
3.18
ND
3.36
2.63
1.79
0.85
1.27
16.40
1.08
1.00
0.06
1.34
2.44
7.30
1.09
2.71
0.13
0.99
0.44
0.64
0.84
2.30
1.38
1.35
1.17
0.52
3.22
ND
1.28
0.94
0.50
0.46
0.03
1.64
0.10
0.82
ND
0.23
234.68
196.32
14247R2
8/14/98
9/11/98
5.81
4.80
13.06
2.67
17.95
0.14
3.95
2.65
0.53
5.74
0.51
0.58
0.20
21.92
0.64
0.63
6.25
0.87
1.00
0.63
0.78
0.94
0.41
ND
0.88
7.35
4.76
3.36
0.21
0.21
ND
6.11
0.16
0.12
2.53
0.97
3.94
2.26
3.10
1.56
3.35
ND
3.40
2.62
1.81
0.89
1.33
16.41
1.05
1.06
0.05
1.32
2.50
7.37
0.93
2.76
0.15
0.95
0.53
0.69
0.89
2.29
1.41
1.31
1.24
0.51
3.31
ND
1.32
0.80
0.54
0.50
0.07
1.68
0.11
0.83
ND
0.15
234.92
196.32
14218
8/17/98
9/11/98
5.01
3.74
6.20
2.46
6.25
0.23
1.63
2.70
0.51
5.16
0.48
0.55
0.16
16.27
0.52
0.58
4.78
0.93
0.99
0.69
0.90
1.10
0.47
ND
0.71
5.82
4.16
2.59
0.26
0.15
ND
2.88
0.15
0.12
1.78
0.86
3.62
0.91
1.87
1.07
1.96
ND
3.05
1.57
0.99
0.66
1.30
9.40
0.75
0.84
0.04
0.89
2.05
6.18
1.23
2.32
0.10
0.64
0.45
0.54
0.74
1.82
1.08
1.01
0.96
0.88
2.59
ND
0.78
0.69
0.51
0.44
ND
0.79
0.11
0.30
ND
0.13
178.84
137.06
14226
8/18/98
9/21/98
5.31
4.19
9.50
2.79
10.18
0.16
2.51
2.87
0.52
12.16
0.50
0.66
0.19
16.49
0.59
0.74
6.72
1.00
1.06
0.72
0.94
1.04
0.63
ND
0.68
6.24
4.45
2.85
0.22
0.20
ND
3.42
0.17
0.12
2.10
0.92
4.06
1.53
2.35
1.28
2.19
ND
2.93
1.74
1.31
0.66
1.22
12.40
0.90
0.74
0.07
1.03
2.84
9.09
1.11
3.12
0.07
0.75
0.47
0.58
0.73
1.88
1.13
1.07
0.93
0.44
2.74
ND
0.82
0.69
0.42
0.31
ND
0.70
0.03
0.22
ND
ND
200.50
167.35
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14241
8/19/98
9/11/98
8.24
5.76
9.75
3.30
18.52
0.20
4.00
2.84
0.58
5.01
0.59
0.67
1.39
22.65
0.70
0.83
6.74
1.04
1.18
0.75
1.19
1.18
2.46
0.07
0.93
8.73
5.70
3.54
0.23
0.20
ND
6.13
0.22
0.11
2.36
1.16
5.67
1.41
2.65
1.57
2.84
ND
3.88
3.08
2.37
1.03
1.62
28.68
1.52
1.35
0.14
1.98
4.70
16.24
1.22
5.26
0.43
1.76
0.64
0.62
1.22
3.57
2.14
2.43
1.67
0.48
5.64
ND
2.88
1.39
0.76
0.53
0.10
1.76
0.09
0.67
0.04
0.16
307.52
245.14
14240
8/20/98
9/22/98
5.94
3.93
14.97
2.44
15.30
0.19
4.53
2.05
0.31
7.60
0.44
0.58
0.15
24.97
0.64
0.60
6.50
0.88
0.86
0.62
0.63
1.18
2.47
ND
0.77
8.88
5.26
3.15
0.22
0.13
ND
3.71
0.15
0.08
2.01
0.92
4.51
1.22
2.61
1.30
2.35
ND
2.76
2.64
2.64
0.96
1.03
20.56
1.54
1.30
0.08
1.85
3.68
12.79
0.90
3.80
0.23
1.56
0.45
0.24
0.88
2.03
1.38
1.53
0.97
0.39
3.18
ND
2.27
0.88
0.37
0.46
0.07
1.22
0.13
0.33
ND
0.12
254.57
210.28
14351
8/21/98
9/22/98
3.75
3.07
8.38
1.74
9.93
0.13
3.02
1.77
0.26
4.88
0.43
0.56
0.17
22.56
0.73
0.56
4.94
0.87
0.73
0.58
0.61
0.97
2.58
ND
0.62
4.83
4.04
2.52
0.19
0.23
ND
3.43
0.13
0.06
1.60
0.79
3.38
18.05
1.76
1.20
1.75
ND
2.04
1.73
1.53
0.48
0.86
11.07
0.89
0.77
0.10
1.14
3.91
14.78
1.65
3.88
0.26
1.93
0.50
0.34
1.15
2.67
1.80
2.07
1.09
0.89
4.31
ND
3.02
1.15
0.63
0.44
0.10
1.83
0.20
0.68
0.10
0.28
238.17
188.06
14519D1
8/27/98
10/16/98
5.01
3.43
8.38
2.13
15.57
0.17
2.60
2.31
0.39
4.43
0.41
0.47
0.15
23.15
0.52
0.59
4.25
0.81
0.81
0.54
0.97
0.86
0.78
0.04
0.62
5.40
4.38
2.35
0.19
0.15
ND
2.86
0.17
0.11
1.66
0.82
3.34
1.02
2.37
1.29
2.65
ND
2.62
2.05
1.52
0.66
0.92
15.61
0.80
0.80
0.07
1.06
1.98
5.50
1.13
2.14
0.16
0.74
0.43
0.23
0.64
1.62
1.01
0.88
0.82
0.70
2.33
ND
0.80
0.52
0.41
0.33
0.07
0.87
0.24
0.46
ND
0.16
192.31
158.47
14519R1
8/27/98
10/19/98
4.96
3.39
8.31
2.23
15.81
0.16
2.61
2.41
0.38
4.65
0.42
0.56
0.13
24.37
0.54
0.62
4.53
0.83
0.91
0.58
1.05
0.95
0.73
0.08
0.62
5.81
4.54
2.47
0.21
0.18
ND
2.83
0.08
0.12
1.69
0.78
3.44
0.93
2.26
1.24
2.71
ND
2.59
2.11
1.60
0.78
1.07
15.84
0.99
0.83
0.07
1.05
1.96
5.68
1.23
2.17
0.13
0.79
0.43
0.20
0.63
1.58
0.99
0.92
0.77
0.70
2.38
ND
0.80
0.61
0.43
0.36
0.07
0.91
0.31
0.47
ND
0.16
197.10
162.72
14525D2
8/27/98
10/16/98
4.95
3.42
8.31
2.13
15.54
0.14
2.55
2.29
0.35
4.49
0.44
0.50
0.13
17.42
0.47
0.55
4.32
0.84
0.80
0.56
0.75
0.77
0.48
0.05
0.54
5.33
3.68
2.42
0.19
0.16
ND
2.73
0.14
0.07
1.53
0.75
3.40
1.01
2.62
1.28
2.59
ND
2.55
2.13
1.58
0.68
1.04
15.92
0.82
0.68
0.04
1.07
1.96
5.67
0.79
2.17
0.11
0.74
0.42
0.20
0.64
1.63
1.02
0.99
0.72
0.56
2.35
ND
0.91
0.69
0.40
0.41
0.07
0.86
0.16
0.41
0.05
0.08
180.88
151.20
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14525R2
8/27/98
10/19/98
4.86
3.49
8.48
2.09
15.75
0.14
2.59
2.31
0.41
4.47
0.44
0.54
0.15
17.52
0.54
0.63
4.22
0.88
0.85
0.58
0.94
0.84
0.55
0.04
0.59
5.33
3.68
2.40
0.20
0.15
ND
2.70
0.11
0.11
1.63
0.89
3.39
1.03
2.28
1.15
2.54
ND
2.56
2.20
1.54
0.81
1.00
15.90
0.81
0.80
0.04
1.05
2.00
5.65
1.00
2.21
0.19
0.70
0.46
0.34
0.62
1.64
1.01
1.03
0.75
0.63
2.40
ND
0.76
0.62
0.45
0.37
0.05
0.84
0.46
0.38
ND
0.12
183.16
152.91
14524
8/28/98
10/16/98
7.27
4.82
7.93
3.46
15.85
0.15
4.63
3.37
0.58
5.26
0.53
0.61
0.21
26.10
0.69
0.83
6.05
1.31
1.19
0.74
1.26
1.10
0.96
0.08
0.88
7.89
5.60
3.54
0.27
0.20
ND
4.39
0.19
0.10
2.34
0.95
4.57
1.23
2.35
1.23
2.67
ND
3.57
2.20
1.92
1.01
1.37
22.54
1.20
1.11
0.09
1.55
2.87
8.51
1.52
3.20
0.24
1.40
0.58
0.45
0.86
2.42
1.57
1.63
0.98
0.90
3.72
ND
2.28
0.75
0.64
0.49
0.13
1.50
0.12
0.66
ND
0.18
256.47
207.55
14552
8/31/98
10/15/98
4.10
9.48
8.27
2.51
13.75
0.16
4.16
3.59
0.40
5.88
0.38
0.50
ND
39.33
0.51
0.67
6.05
1.20
0.81
0.56
1.00
1.20
1.07
ND
0.81
5.36
4.78
3.33
0.14
0.14
ND
3.59
0.14
0.12
2.10
0.85
4.18
65.14
2.18
1.08
2.37
ND
2.79
1.97
2.05
0.73
1.18
20.07
0.96
0.94
0.16
1.47
3.74
10.50
3.02
3.69
0.21
1.08
0.62
1.53
0.97
2.46
1.38
1.35
0.99
1.01
3.43
ND
2.21
0.99
0.37
0.40
0.11
3.80
0.27
9.49
0.06
2.67
396.45
290.53
14581D1
9/2/98
10/2/98
11.60
12.24
17.02
5.36
23.99
0.41
6.07
5.24
1.06
9.67
0.77
0.87
0.84
41.12
1.12
1.38
10.93
1.30
1.84
1.03
1.96
1.76
1.72
0.09
1.38
12.18
10.02
6.05
0.41
0.31
ND
6.99
0.34
0.23
3.90
1.54
6.51
3.48
3.64
1.98
4.10
ND
6.04
3.02
1.92
1.41
2.29
22.61
1.41
1.35
0.11
1.71
3.41
10.66
2.00
4.06
0.28
1.47
0.56
0.85
1.05
3.19
1.84
2.07
1.39
1.21
4.93
ND
1.86
1.26
0.74
0.60
0.09
1.45
0.39
0.64
ND
0.28
380.58
310.58
14581R1
9/2/98
10/22/98
11.28
11.61
16.57
5.09
23.29
0.40
5.87
5.20
0.95
9.54
0.72
0.83
1.14
48.94
1.07
1.54
10.78
1.47
2.03
1.12
2.40
1.76
2.04
0.14
1.38
16.82
11.11
6.21
0.49
0.41
ND
7.68
0.41
0.28
4.17
1.72
8.17
3.58
3.97
2.06
4.42
ND
6.95
3.61
2.20
1.77
2.63
29.32
1.66
1.58
0.15
2.13
4.78
14.59
2.91
5.40
0.33
1.95
0.62
1.04
1.49
4.83
2.66
3.02
2.08
2.13
7.60
ND
2.87
1.92
1.04
0.84
0.15
2.30
0.69
1.15
0.04
0.43
454.38
357.52
14582D2
9/2/98
10/2/98
11.49
12.30
16.83
5.30
23.81
0.43
6.36
5.14
1.05
9.93
0.81
0.89
0.91
41.58
1.03
1.48
11.15
1.32
1.86
1.02
2.06
1.96
1.80
0.06
1.47
12.38
9.95
6.13
0.40
0.44
ND
7.52
0.35
0.25
4.01
1.54
6.88
4.41
4.31
2.02
4.03
ND
6.23
2.83
1.98
1.48
2.31
24.41
1.45
1.41
0.20
1.70
3.63
10.98
2.01
4.20
0.41
1.54
0.55
0.88
1.16
3.25
1.88
2.18
1.45
1.32
5.31
ND
2.01
1.38
0.60
0.47
0.18
1.69
0.28
0.80
0.08
0.32
384.29
319.23
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14582R2
9/2/98
10/22/98
11.39
11.85
16.76
5.21
23.50
0.48
6.29
5.40
1.02
9.80
1.03
0.94
0.90
45.79
1.17
1.70
11.01
1.63
2.14
1.26
2.62
1.91
2.02
0.13
1.49
15.85
10.80
6.34
0.46
0.48
ND
7.84
0.43
0.25
4.30
1.79
8.41
4.45
4.03
1.98
4.55
ND
7.35
3.74
2.35
1.71
2.77
31.27
1.73
1.72
0.27
2.19
4.86
14.86
2.76
5.64
0.54
2.07
0.74
1.05
1.64
4.95
2.76
3.15
2.14
1.87
7.86
ND
3.07
1.50
1.08
0.85
0.27
2.60
0.63
1.25
0.12
0.55
449.44
363.28
14688
9/3/98
10/2/98
11.53
21.87
13.30
5.44
15.88
0.41
4.11
5.71
1.00
9.59
0.76
0.86
0.30
36.00
1.19
1.27
11.62
1.21
1.64
0.96
1.72
1.68
1.72
0.12
1.27
11.97
8.80
5.52
0.37
0.30
ND
6.55
0.34
0.15
3.43
1.43
6.73
2.10
3.88
1.77
3.83
ND
5.41
3.20
1.75
1.47
2.09
23.34
1.37
1.39
0.09
1.62
7.40
25.44
1.65
7.75
0.21
1.36
0.57
0.93
0.98
2.99
1.61
1.86
1.09
0.63
3.73
ND
2.73
0.89
0.44
0.41
0.15
4.38
ND
0.91
ND
0.08
386.99
318.28
14771D1
9/4/98
10/4/98
6.98
5.16
11.25
3.19
20.91
0.19
4.17
3.33
0.52
6.30
0.54
0.64
0.13
27.12
0.70
0.76
7.72
0.93
1.25
0.72
1.10
1.22
0.77
0.07
1.07
8.16
6.41
4.58
0.20
0.22
ND
7.37
0.23
0.12
3.23
1.05
4.04
1.95
3.69
1.58
3.98
ND
3.97
4.79
3.17
0.89
1.39
16.69
1.08
1.00
0.07
1.21
2.22
6.68
0.75
2.59
0.15
0.89
0.49
0.30
0.63
1.77
0.99
1.14
1.01
0.62
2.74
ND
0.90
0.60
0.32
0.29
0.04
0.89
0.15
0.48
0.02
0.20
248.33
214.63
14771R1
9/4/98
10/22/98
7.08
5.03
11.23
3.24
20.96
0.25
4.21
3.31
0.61
6.33
0.52
0.60
0.24
30.81
0.78
0.95
7.76
1.07
1.46
0.83
1.37
1.28
0.73
0.08
1.01
9.78
7.14
4.96
0.31
0.24
ND
8.08
0.26
0.19
3.54
1.31
5.11
2.34
3.97
1.65
4.56
ND
4.66
5.66
3.56
1.23
1.68
22.25
1.28
1.17
0.10
1.53
3.02
9.21
1.15
3.45
0.18
1.19
0.46
0.31
0.94
2.62
1.52
1.54
1.56
1.09
3.93
ND
1.34
0.78
0.49
0.39
0.10
1.31
0.27
0.77
0.06
0.35
292.01
235.10
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14772D2
9/4/98
10/5/98
7.08
5.30
11.44
3.05
20.83
0.16
4.12
3.33
0.56
6.30
0.54
0.58
0.19
27.77
0.63
0.76
7.61
0.90
1.21
0.70
0.99
1.24
0.72
0.07
1.03
7.94
6.43
4.56
0.18
0.18
ND
7.24
0.21
0.13
3.22
1.06
4.12
2.93
3.40
1.52
4.09
ND
4.00
4.77
3.11
1.08
1.37
16.67
1.05
1.03
0.11
1.18
2.15
6.37
0.61
2.55
0.17
0.87
0.41
0.29
0.68
1.78
1.05
1.11
1.11
0.67
2.67
ND
0.93
0.77
0.35
0.30
0.05
0.90
0.09
0.49
ND
0.15
249.93
215.19
14772R2
9/4/98
10/22/98
6.97
5.10
11.19
3.20
20.91
0.23
4.18
3.42
0.59
6.34
0.52
0.64
0.32
32.22
0.75
1.01
7.64
1.09
1.47
0.89
1.38
1.24
0.78
0.06
1.00
10.14
7.01
4.97
0.32
0.22
ND
8.07
0.23
0.15
0.33
1.30
5.11
3.45
4.81
1.99
4.70
ND
4.56
5.52
3.64
1.21
1.69
22.23
1.25
1.27
0.09
1.54
3.08
9.10
1.31
3.46
0.19
1.19
0.53
0.43
0.91
2.68
1.55
1.62
1.28
1.14
3.95
ND
1.43
1.11
0.57
0.45
0.05
1.37
0.35
0.85
0.09
0.34
301.10
247.96
14765
9/8/98
10/9/98
7.90
6.44
9.15
3.88
14.46
0.31
2.77
4.26
0.73
5.83
0.57
0.60
0.29
25.50
0.74
0.93
6.46
1.27
1.29
0.79
1.42
1.21
1.51
0.08
0.89
7.99
5.98
3.67
0.34
0.24
ND
4.54
0.29
0.13
2.44
1.09
5.61
1.22
2.58
1.28
2.72
ND
3.95
2.12
1.49
0.94
1.54
18.32
1.08
1.11
0.14
1.37
7.95
29.42
1.28
8.12
0.15
0.94
0.44
0.39
0.78
2.32
1.26
1.30
1.06
0.66
3.43
ND
1.08
0.84
0.52
0.41
0.06
1.08
0.13
0.47
ND
0.10
290.00
235.63
14766D1
9/9/98
10/10/98
2.46
1.98
6.48
0.93
6.98
0.04
2.07
1.23
0.12
3.60
0.21
0.38
0.13
12.77
0.31
0.19
2.75
0.55
0.46
0.35
0.22
0.65
1.23
ND
0.41
1.95
2.07
1.27
0.06
0.08
ND
1.65
ND
ND
0.84
0.48
1.88
0.77
0.92
0.70
0.93
ND
0.98
1.03
1.07
0.30
0.43
7.17
0.61
0.52
0.08
0.75
0.91
2.49
0.46
0.86
0.06
0.59
0.28
0.07
0.35
0.62
0.50
0.49
0.37
0.19
0.99
ND
0.68
0.34
0.27
0.10
0.04
0.42
0.02
0.12
ND
0.03
100.62
84.25
14766R1
9/9/98
10/26/98
2.69
2.04
7.05
1.07
7.37
0.11
2.17
1.27
0.12
3.80
0.28
0.38
0.14
15.44
0.28
0.31
2.95
0.53
0.42
0.36
0.36
0.67
1.52
0.02
0.40
2.28
2.37
1.33
0.09
0.07
ND
1.67
0.07
0.04
0.79
0.55
2.31
0.89
1.06
0.74
1.07
ND
1.08
1.23
1.20
0.30
0.51
9.31
0.75
0.70
0.05
0.92
1.22
3.50
0.63
1.24
0.08
0.80
0.49
0.07
0.56
1.00
0.84
0.75
0.69
0.38
1.58
ND
0.95
0.54
0.47
0.42
0.04
0.73
0.12
0.21
ND
0.08
121.48
93.48
14767D2
9/9/98
10/10/98
3.74
2.98
8.42
1.59
10.37
0.11
3.14
1.81
0.23
5.44
0.40
0.58
0.10
19.17
0.56
0.38
4.13
0.78
0.63
0.54
0.52
0.93
2.29
ND
0.56
3.24
3.27
1.95
0.13
0.16
ND
2.57
ND
ND
1.26
0.81
3.31
0.94
1.52
1.09
1.52
ND
1.60
1.73
1.66
0.53
0.70
12.88
1.01
0.86
0.11
1.32
1.58
4.57
0.98
1.61
0.19
1.09
0.48
0.18
0.62
1.11
0.86
0.80
0.63
0.45
1.96
ND
1.26
0.60
0.47
0.34
0.10
0.94
0.21
0.27
0.05
0.06
171.48
135.00
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14767R2
9/9/98
10/26/98
2.76
2.03
7.05
1.10
7.28
0.05
2.20
1.31
0.14
3.77
0.29
0.40
0.05
16.67
0.30
0.33
2.90
0.57
0.44
0.38
0.31
0.69
1.60
0.04
0.39
2.24
2.47
1.42
0.11
0.12
ND
1.67
0.07
0.05
0.76
0.54
2.36
0.59
0.85
0.67
1.00
ND
1.09
1.24
1.22
0.37
0.50
9.12
0.72
0.68
0.06
0.89
1.20
3.47
0.78
1.21
0.11
0.81
0.36
0.12
0.50
0.91
0.69
0.68
0.47
0.48
1.46
ND
0.98
0.50
0.42
0.29
0.05
0.68
0.16
0.26
0.06
0.13
125.11
93.54
14788
9/10/98
10/12/98
2.99
2.32
4.57
1.25
4.62
ND
1.16
1.76
0.17
2.45
0.30
0.38
0.08
15.11
0.33
0.34
3.03
0.43
0.48
0.39
0.31
0.63
0.16
0.02
0.41
2.70
2.21
1.57
0.11
0.14
ND
2.03
ND
0.07
1.12
0.67
2.65
2.28
0.90
0.69
1.01
ND
1.43
0.80
0.69
0.26
0.61
7.63
0.68
0.51
0.07
1.02
1.59
4.26
1.36
1.74
0.22
2.30
0.49
ND
0.99
2.09
1.53
1.88
0.90
0.98
3.51
ND
2.75
0.93
0.46
0.46
0.11
1.22
0.08
0.24
ND
0.06
148.18
98.80
14799
9/11/98
10/21/98
1.88
1.47
4.15
0.88
4.46
ND
1.33
1.50
0.14
2.32
0.23
0.35
0.06
10.11
0.33
0.22
2.07
0.39
0.45
0.37
0.56
0.51
0.32
ND
0.35
1.90
1.52
1.07
0.09
0.08
ND
1.30
0.03
ND
0.70
0.48
1.93
0.67
0.88
0.72
0.80
0.41
1.01
0.68
0.66
0.29
0.44
4.77
0.41
0.41
ND
0.62
1.05
2.60
1.07
1.27
0.19
2.03
0.50
0.08
1.11
2.51
1.72
2.04
1.08
0.60
4.02
ND
2.59
1.19
0.51
0.48
0.10
1.46
0.23
0.27
ND
0.04
114.88
85.07
14824
9/14/98
10/17/98
4.44
13.57
11.11
2.14
12.83
0.16
2.74
2.88
0.41
6.67
0.47
0.51
0.15
19.19
0.48
0.61
5.38
0.78
0.87
0.61
0.86
0.77
0.58
ND
0.73
4.44
3.75
2.33
0.19
0.14
ND
3.08
0.18
0.09
1.65
0.74
3.35
0.95
1.53
0.89
1.60
ND
2.22
1.27
1.00
0.58
1.01
8.89
0.68
0.68
0.04
0.85
2.94
9.70
1.13
3.10
0.09
0.59
0.36
0.75
0.64
1.71
1.00
0.93
0.81
0.52
2.36
ND
0.69
0.77
0.46
0.42
0.03
1.11
0.15
0.64
ND
0.15
207.95
162.14
14968
9/15/98
10/20/98
5.42
4.29
8.54
2.36
10.50
0.16
2.96
2.97
0.51
5.61
0.50
0.57
0.19
17.92
0.59
0.74
4.64
1.10
1.05
0.66
0.99
0.90
0.62
0.07
0.65
5.69
4.12
2.50
0.25
0.19
ND
2.86
0.15
0.10
1.66
0.93
3.90
1.02
1.77
1.06
1.81
ND
3.16
1.61
1.12
0.71
1.29
11.21
0.83
0.82
0.05
1.04
2.03
6.01
1.19
2.36
0.11
0.79
0.41
0.48
0.69
2.01
1.18
1.17
1.05
0.69
2.99
ND
1.01
0.76
0.48
0.43
0.08
0.99
0.13
0.62
0.02
0.19
192.15
152.21
14987D1
9/17/98
10/20/98
3.06
2.32
4.10
1.38
4.87
0.09
1.41
1.53
0.22
2.53
0.32
0.44
0.08
16.63
0.45
0.28
2.66
0.72
0.65
0.44
0.41
0.71
0.60
ND
0.46
3.05
2.81
1.54
0.11
0.10
ND
1.79
0.07
0.05
1.06
0.58
2.40
0.97
1.43
0.94
1.45
ND
1.59
1.19
0.88
0.29
0.69
9.92
0.74
0.69
0.07
1.14
2.67
8.86
0.89
2.57
0.17
1.48
0.43
0.13
0.86
1.97
1.36
1.38
0.93
0.23
3.09
ND
1.82
0.65
0.34
0.38
0.06
0.99
ND
0.29
ND
0.07
149.41
113.53
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14987R1
9/17/98
10/26/98
3.08
2.37
4.09
1.34
4.83
0.10
1.39
1.64
0.21
2.57
0.29
0.40
0.06
17.16
0.47
0.30
2.58
0.64
0.52
0.44
0.38
0.56
0.61
ND
0.43
2.99
2.82
1.53
0.09
0.08
ND
1.84
0.08
0.07
0.98
0.59
2.34
0.97
1.66
0.95
1.49
ND
1.56
1.14
0.86
0.25
0.68
9.72
0.71
0.58
0.07
1.15
2.57
8.53
0.90
2.49
0.14
1.47
0.33
0.16
0.96
2.18
1.60
1.54
1.32
0.23
3.75
ND
1.76
1.28
1.26
1.00
0.07
1.22
ND
0.28
0.03
0.06
150.08
116.85
14988D2
9/17/98
10/20/98
3.10
2.24
4.03
1.37
4.88
0.03
1.41
1.68
0.33
2.67
0.30
0.43
0.04
15.38
0.44
0.39
2.62
0.77
0.60
0.46
0.39
0.64
0.73
0.04
0.40
3.05
2.57
1.58
0.11
0.09
ND
1.81
0.07
0.06
1.00
0.58
2.53
1.34
1.48
0.96
1.48
ND
1.66
1.21
0.91
0.38
0.71
10.11
0.79
0.56
0.07
1.16
2.77
9.42
0.69
2.72
0.15
1.53
0.46
0.35
0.92
2.16
1.43
1.50
1.01
0.54
3.56
ND
1.88
0.86
0.56
0.39
0.07
1.04
ND
0.30
ND
0.05
148.02
115.97
14988R2
9/17/98
10/26/98
3.13
2.43
4.14
1.40
4.90
0.06
1.38
1.66
0.21
2.56
0.33
0.39
0.04
16.09
0.42
0.36
2.59
0.73
0.63
0.48
0.45
0.58
0.73
0.05
0.40
3.04
2.58
1.59
0.11
0.07
ND
1.80
0.10
0.06
1.01
0.63
2.53
1.37
1.65
0.87
1.49
ND
1.67
1.25
0.92
0.35
0.69
9.94
0.79
0.70
0.06
1.14
2.58
9.30
0.86
2.61
0.24
1.47
0.31
0.50
0.87
2.22
1.47
1.62
1.14
0.35
3.75
ND
1.81
1.13
0.89
0.70
0.07
1.13
ND
0.27
0.02
0.05
150.01
117.94
14974
9/18/98
10/15/98
14.16
10.49
19.33
6.47
24.75
0.48
6.29
6.49
1.42
9.57
0.97
1.04
0.36
37.01
1.13
1.86
11.34
1.51
2.77
1.46
2.98
1.64
0.90
0.12
1.50
17.01
10.48
6.71
0.61
0.47
ND
7.38
0.54
0.32
4.37
2.05
9.52
2.33
4.42
2.37
4.91
ND
8.38
4.05
2.79
2.00
3.34
37.77
1.92
1.92
0.15
2.45
5.93
18.58
1.93
6.95
0.39
1.92
0.74
3.22
1.87
6.08
3.20
3.36
3.11
1.76
9.08
ND
3.11
2.77
1.00
0.85
0.24
2.21
0.26
1.16
0.11
0.28
472.64
384.43
14977
9/22/98
10/21/98
6.18
9.02
13.48
2.89
11.97
0.28
3.55
3.49
0.56
6.66
0.55
0.53
0.21
23.53
0.61
0.73
5.63
0.69
1.01
0.63
0.95
0.93
0.89
ND
0.78
6.34
4.92
3.00
0.18
0.18
ND
3.55
0.19
0.14
2.08
0.91
4.82
1.16
2.14
1.20
2.26
ND
3.03
2.22
1.81
0.91
1.21
12.97
1.00
1.10
ND
1.19
3.54
11.62
1.74
3.92
0.14
0.89
0.45
0.22
0.82
2.28
1.37
1.39
1.01
0.52
3.55
ND
1.06
0.89
0.46
0.39
0.06
0.90
0.05
0.45
ND
0.15
233.66
192.13
14997
9/23/98
10/23/98
3.55
2.57
6.82
1.54
7.27
ND
1.65
1.96
0.31
3.84
0.38
0.39
0.12
13.95
0.44
0.50
3.19
0.85
0.66
0.47
0.55
0.73
0.46
ND
0.59
3.25
2.81
1.76
0.15
0.16
ND
1.94
0.07
0.07
1.14
0.66
2.76
1.17
1.45
0.95
1.28
ND
1.93
1.05
1.02
0.45
0.82
6.87
0.57
0.60
0.09
0.80
1.38
3.82
0.82
1.58
0.10
0.67
0.37
0.09
0.60
1.47
0.93
0.88
0.88
0.35
2.32
ND
0.85
0.72
0.42
0.25
0.04
0.78
0.07
0.32
ND
0.19
135.64
106.53
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14992
9/24/98
10/23/98
4.34
6.62
12.79
1.85
12.03
0.11
3.59
2.04
0.27
6.73
0.36
0.41
0.12
22.26
0.47
0.37
4.73
0.47
0.64
0.45
0.49
0.88
0.88
ND
0.59
3.61
3.73
2.17
0.14
0.12
ND
2.82
0.08
0.11
1.41
0.79
3.97
0.97
1.61
1.01
1.65
ND
1.90
1.53
1.23
0.54
0.78
8.33
0.75
0.76
0.05
1.07
1.72
5.07
0.91
1.92
0.06
0.79
0.44
0.18
0.53
1.39
0.92
0.79
0.81
0.19
1.98
ND
0.65
0.52
0.36
0.30
ND
0.62
0.03
0.22
ND
0.05
173.36
145.03
15016D1
9/25/98
10/24/98
4.32
2.85
8.32
1.77
8.39
0.14
2.81
1.95
0.33
5.34
0.36
0.44
0.12
15.75
0.43
0.40
3.87
0.54
0.62
0.47
0.39
0.75
0.41
ND
0.49
3.89
2.76
1.84
0.12
0.22
ND
2.12
0.08
0.09
1.21
0.64
3.02
2.38
1.92
0.93
1.82
ND
1.91
1.86
1.30
0.51
0.79
7.21
0.67
0.57
ND
1.00
1.36
3.82
0.64
1.57
0.06
0.69
0.37
0.20
0.53
1.26
0.87
0.75
0.66
0.29
1.89
ND
0.52
0.44
0.38
0.28
0.02
0.60
ND
0.22
0.01
0.04
137.99
117.61
15016R1
9/25/98
10/27/98
4.24
2.79
8.22
1.80
8.38
0.06
2.80
2.01
0.33
5.36
0.35
0.45
0.14
15.51
0.41
0.43
3.85
0.53
0.62
0.50
0.41
0.72
0.38
ND
0.53
3.83
2.67
1.87
0.12
0.18
ND
2.18
0.09
0.13
1.26
0.68
3.07
2.46
1.90
0.99
1.85
ND
1.88
1.91
1.35
0.41
0.78
7.42
0.70
0.70
ND
0.99
1.41
3.89
0.61
1.52
0.03
0.71
0.31
0.12
0.45
1.21
0.71
0.68
0.62
0.25
1.82
ND
0.62
0.67
0.48
0.39
0.03
0.56
ND
0.25
0.03
0.03
145.19
117.63
15017D2
9/25/98
10/24/98
4.49
2.90
8.52
1.85
8.53
0.11
2.89
1.98
0.38
5.49
0.28
0.44
0.13
16.93
0.42
0.51
3.96
0.53
0.68
0.44
0.40
0.72
0.34
ND
0.52
3.90
3.00
1.93
0.13
0.19
ND
2.15
0.09
0.11
1.31
0.62
3.11
1.12
2.02
1.00
1.85
ND
2.00
1.91
1.30
0.50
0.77
7.34
0.73
0.57
0.05
1.05
1.39
3.90
0.67
1.57
0.11
0.69
0.38
0.14
0.53
1.32
0.86
0.82
0.72
0.28
1.86
ND
0.54
0.51
0.39
0.30
0.03
0.63
ND
0.25
0.01
0.04
141.68
120.16
15017R2
9/25/98
10/27/98
4.25
2.90
8.25
1.89
8.29
0.13
2.84
2.00
0.33
5.38
0.31
0.42
0.10
16.74
0.48
0.48
3.90
0.57
0.66
0.51
0.39
0.69
0.35
ND
0.58
3.85
2.95
1.85
0.12
0.20
ND
2.29
0.14
0.09
1.27
0.61
3.08
1.14
1.93
0.93
1.84
ND
1.96
1.88
1.30
0.49
0.79
7.20
0.65
0.67
0.06
0.96
1.33
3.83
0.68
1.45
0.06
0.73
0.33
0.12
0.43
1.12
0.71
0.69
0.57
0.27
1.82
ND
0.65
0.58
0.46
0.34
0.02
0.55
ND
0.18
0.02
0.03
139.42
117.68
15036
9/28/98
10/27/98
20.51
19.08
32.00
9.43
24.44
0.75
7.68
10.03
2.04
19.32
1.38
1.47
0.50
60.88
1.92
3.03
18.87
2.06
4.48
2.34
4.74
2.62
2.19
0.28
2.33
27.93
17.38
10.81
0.95
0.76
ND
11.87
1.08
0.56
6.65
2.83
14.75
2.50
6.73
2.95
7.56
ND
11.72
6.20
3.64
2.98
4.58
50.54
3.20
3.19
0.24
4.35
10.08
33.71
2.72
11.84
0.46
2.78
1.00
2.44
2.52
8.72
4.58
4.97
3.64
1.72
13.56
ND
3.55
3.61
1.35
1.08
0.29
2.58
0.45
1.61
0.09
0.45
705.84
548.09
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: DLTX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15056
9/29/98
10/27/98
19.23
13.49
23.95
9.01
49.47
0.69
8.81
10.52
1.49
29.48
1.76
2.05
0.79
82.67
2.48
3.42
23.60
0.83
5.64
2.84
5.63
2.59
2.19
0.28
2.27
30.62
17.11
11.69
0.97
0.78
ND
15.40
0.90
0.57
7.53
2.70
13.04
5.06
10.65
4.23
11.17
ND
11.30
9.91
5.99
3.10
4.12
54.78
2.94
2.90
0.20
3.49
7.69
25.47
3.25
9.48
0.49
3.23
1.07
3.37
2.73
8.51
4.72
5.46
3.51
1.79
13.25
ND
5.33
3.23
1.34
1.09
0.24
3.47
0.51
2.09
0.13
0.56
784.54
648.32
15059
9/30/98
10/28/98
10.24
10.01
12.06
4.93
15.26
0.34
10.52
5.40
0.93
11.00
0.72
0.79
0.35
50.49
1.02
1.33
19.13
1.05
1.91
1.08
1.92
1.46
0.90
0.13
1.57
12.34
9.42
6.54
0.39
0.37
ND
8.90
0.34
0.22
5.12
1.60
7.04
5.74
4.04
1.90
4.97
ND
6.09
5.20
3.65
1.68
2.26
940.16
1.80
1.72
0.16
3.23
6.28
20.79
4.14
6.86
0.37
2.31
0.84
0.89
1.37
4.18
2.46
2.69
1.65
0.77
6.22
ND
3.33
1.51
0.75
0.63
0.10
3.16
0.30
1.52
0.10
0.24
1267.42
1145.75
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14674
8/25/98
9/23/98
4.64
4.19
8.45
2.53
14.01
ND
5.05
3.92
0.37
9.65
0.54
0.63
0.27
51.10
0.88
0.88
6.32
0.72
1.00
0.74
0.84
0.94
0.58
0.09
0.83
2.42
4.51
3.05
0.36
0.36
ND
4.11
0.20
0.10
2.28
1.63
3.78
2.46
2.19
2.49
2.66
ND
4.01
1.95
3.18
7.28
113.85
188.03
1.95
2.26
0.46
1.47
3.62
9.39
9.50
10.89
11.49
1.29
0.51
0.19
0.86
1.77
1.15
1.68
0.64
0.10
2.62
ND
2.57
0.73
0.52
0.67
0.19
5.06
0.37
9.72
ND
1.17
2206.87
552.87
14675
8/27/98
10/16/98
1.70
1.73
4.71
0.97
12.81
ND
1.05
1.88
0.10
2.69
0.22
0.34
ND
12.31
0.36
0.24
1.68
0.37
0.42
0.34
0.23
0.50
0.15
ND
0.31
0.79
1.40
1.02
0.12
0.11
ND
1.16
ND
ND
0.62
0.72
1.81
0.72
1.10
1.19
1.30
0.68
1.09
1.13
0.60
4.34
72.02
102.54
1.32
1.64
0.41
0.90
2.18
5.52
7.88
7.44
8.66
1.54
0.32
0.31
0.55
1.07
0.88
1.57
0.55
2.33
1.99
ND
1.88
0.48
0.54
0.48
0.05
1.30
0.30
0.37
ND
0.09
944.38
292.12
14686
8/29/98
10/15/98
2.96
2.53
11.58
1.53
28.64
ND
3.56
1.62
0.28
10.11
0.39
0.44
0.09
17.34
0.51
0.49
4.65
0.49
0.63
0.50
0.37
0.71
0.26
ND
0.65
2.05
3.12
2.03
0.12
0.16
ND
2.36
0.07
0.07
1.51
1.17
2.92
1.55
1.27
1.75
1.33
ND
2.66
1.05
0.92
2.27
32.46
50.09
1.14
1.10
0.29
0.91
4.16
9.80
5.07
5.86
5.08
0.91
0.36
0.09
0.72
1.78
1.11
1.78
0.76
2.16
3.01
ND
1.34
0.50
0.43
0.57
0.16
1.11
0.70
0.46
0.04
0.12
558.42
252.76
14665
9/1/98
10/2/98
8.41
8.04
12.35
4.08
24.91
0.25
11.73
3.35
0.80
12.77
0.81
1.04
1.35
47.27
1.10
1.56
12.79
0.95
1.79
1.07
1.64
1.10
0.42
0.04
1.29
3.12
7.08
5.16
0.39
0.28
ND
11.64
0.33
0.24
4.70
2.56
6.93
110.41
2.77
3.80
3.31
ND
5.31
2.55
2.84
2.20
21.59
50.24
1.38
1.22
0.18
1.53
4.70
10.52
4.23
5.25
3.33
1.84
0.44
0.34
0.95
2.67
1.51
2.14
0.94
1.01
2.79
ND
3.56
0.87
0.41
0.49
0.22
2.40
0.43
4.41
ND
1.42
633.12
469.57
14697
9/2/98
11/12/98
3.89
3.30
11.32
1.89
15.21
0.12
2.55
2.23
0.32
6.42
0.30
0.38
0.07
22.63
0.48
0.44
4.24
0.56
0.63
0.42
0.25
0.63
0.35
ND
0.62
1.30
3.51
2.03
0.14
0.16
ND
2.35
0.11
0.09
1.66
1.16
3.91
1.21
1.41
1.84
1.63
ND
2.89
1.28
0.96
1.84
23.87
38.18
0.94
0.97
0.25
0.92
2.54
6.92
5.21
4.18
3.51
0.64
0.48
0.09
0.67
1.67
0.95
1.06
0.70
3.32
2.50
ND
1.01
0.68
0.46
0.66
ND
0.82
1.07
0.32
ND
0.11
399.35
213.41
14693
9/3/98
10/3/98
5.58
5.22
6.83
2.72
12.88
0.17
2.28
2.47
0.52
4.79
0.41
0.50
0.17
17.82
0.50
0.62
4.59
0.48
0.77
0.52
0.37
0.77
0.24
ND
0.72
1.75
3.52
2.53
0.21
0.16
ND
2.72
0.13
0.09
1.93
1.40
4.16
1.33
1.74
2.26
1.84
ND
3.33
1.43
1.04
1.50
17.03
30.08
0.89
0.92
0.11
0.87
2.47
6.68
2.02
3.62
2.44
0.57
0.31
0.26
0.58
1.42
0.78
1.05
0.59
0.31
2.16
ND
0.74
0.48
0.33
0.31
ND
0.47
0.26
0.15
ND
0.04
299.86
183.00
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14791
9/4/98
10/17/98
3.78
17.42
12.71
7.93
104.04
0.51
7.62
4.37
1.42
27.41
1.32
1.39
1.49
41.41
1.84
2.72
16.88
1.12
3.18
1.87
3.68
1.52
0.95
0.19
1.89
4.51
11.44
7.48
0.72
0.49
ND
9.14
0.78
0.44
5.71
4.61
12.44
5.12
4.14
7.11
4.54
ND
9.44
3.75
2.48
2.67
17.62
53.10
1.82
1.95
0.26
1.54
7.29
20.97
6.33
8.47
2.79
1.27
0.60
0.80
1.48
4.56
2.36
2.87
1.70
1.25
7.27
ND
1.88
1.63
0.57
0.65
0.22
1.71
0.21
0.73
ND
0.10
687.83
519.70
14790
9/5/98
10/4/98
2.65
2.34
6.75
1.45
11.61
ND
1.54
1.96
0.19
3.48
0.32
0.38
ND
12.15
0.34
0.31
3.11
0.39
0.44
0.34
0.26
0.50
0.34
ND
0.49
1.21
2.49
1.90
0.07
0.11
ND
1.79
0.06
0.06
1.01
0.81
1.93
1.00
1.14
1.28
0.94
ND
1.84
0.82
0.64
1.83
26.51
40.98
0.83
0.94
0.17
0.62
1.64
4.44
3.77
3.37
3.34
0.54
0.27
0.22
0.45
0.85
0.53
0.74
0.39
1.74
1.27
ND
0.72
0.27
0.27
0.30
ND
0.61
0.45
0.19
ND
0.08
315.69
168.75
14792D1
9/8/98
10/9/98
10.26
9.92
19.42
5.51
191.96
0.23
6.26
3.15
1.03
19.44
0.84
0.82
0.42
19.88
0.94
1.37
7.54
0.89
1.77
1.07
1.88
1.07
0.69
0.19
0.89
2.33
6.24
4.64
0.44
0.30
ND
5.62
0.43
1.17
3.66
2.79
9.06
2.11
3.08
4.42
3.42
ND
6.54
2.85
2.02
1.77
11.65
39.82
1.34
1.44
0.17
1.24
4.95
14.18
2.18
5.55
1.88
0.90
0.35
0.52
0.98
2.93
1.49
1.87
1.15
0.80
4.64
ND
1.24
0.90
0.48
0.49
0.06
1.06
0.11
0.54
ND
0.06
569.52
475.27
14792R1
9/8/98
10/24/98
9.16
8.47
17.88
4.95
169.25
0.25
5.54
2.74
0.94
17.06
0.72
0.78
0.20
17.87
0.77
1.18
6.66
0.82
1.52
0.96
1.62
0.94
0.38
0.07
0.96
2.53
6.03
3.97
0.38
0.24
ND
4.97
0.43
1.08
3.28
2.62
8.01
2.08
2.56
3.85
2.89
ND
5.72
2.59
1.72
1.60
10.20
35.46
1.23
1.07
0.14
1.23
4.46
13.64
2.34
5.62
1.83
0.89
0.42
0.40
1.09
3.09
1.67
1.97
1.30
0.93
5.00
ND
1.18
1.08
0.49
0.57
0.17
1.13
0.04
0.55
ND
0.13
513.83
427.59
14793D2
9/8/98
10/9/98
10.35
9.71
18.00
5.25
185.32
0.27
6.06
3.19
1.04
19.02
0.75
0.84
0.18
19.32
0.77
1.06
7.40
0.79
1.55
0.92
1.42
1.05
0.47
0.09
0.98
2.35
5.95
4.42
0.34
0.27
ND
5.12
0.37
1.09
3.46
2.53
7.31
2.24
2.53
3.89
2.93
ND
5.69
2.52
1.70
1.60
10.38
33.48
1.22
1.06
0.12
1.16
4.08
11.59
1.96
4.79
1.59
0.82
0.38
0.41
0.86
2.45
1.32
1.67
1.06
0.77
3.99
ND
1.09
0.90
0.52
0.48
0.10
0.94
0.08
0.35
0.03
0.06
523.44
441.82
14793R2
9/8/98
10/24/98
9.24
8.43
17.97
4.87
170.09
0.20
5.53
2.81
0.99
17.09
0.65
0.75
0.24
19.00
0.81
1.21
6.69
0.88
1.57
0.98
1.70
1.01
0.45
0.09
0.94
2.51
6.09
3.99
0.35
0.23
ND
5.00
0.45
1.06
3.28
2.48
7.97
1.90
2.71
3.90
2.97
ND
5.74
2.61
1.74
1.72
10.91
36.66
1.24
1.09
0.16
1.32
4.61
13.93
2.46
5.82
1.92
0.88
0.41
0.49
1.09
3.16
1.68
2.00
1.27
0.90
5.16
ND
1.25
1.14
0.55
0.52
0.07
1.09
0.11
0.42
ND
0.09
524.23
433.30
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
14830
9/9/98
10/10/98
9.55
8.97
25.01
4.80
242.48
0.29
5.54
2.93
0.80
22.67
0.55
0.70
1.28
13.00
0.99
1.22
8.18
0.75
1.49
0.92
1.26
1.07
0.41
0.08
1.05
2.60
6.44
4.35
0.45
0.26
ND
5.17
0.34
0.41
3.27
2.35
7.25
1.72
2.81
3.70
2.80
0.92
5.07
2.28
1.57
1.68
12.53
37.72
1.13
1.30
0.18
1.19
4.88
14.39
2.34
5.50
1.95
0.89
0.35
0.45
0.72
2.11
1.18
1.47
0.86
0.52
3.17
ND
1.31
0.76
0.26
0.31
0.05
1.24
ND
0.28
ND
ND
4856.83
501.50
14808
9/10/98
10/14/98
3.56
3.45
10.81
1.63
18.38
ND
2.69
1.77
0.26
7.36
0.39
0.49
0.10
17.62
0.64
0.53
5.18
0.72
0.74
0.52
0.51
0.65
0.15
ND
0.63
1.24
2.94
2.09
0.12
0.13
ND
2.68
0.15
0.08
1.65
1.16
3.24
3.86
1.25
1.77
1.50
ND
2.49
1.24
1.08
1.43
18.15
34.10
0.93
0.96
0.16
1.04
2.88
6.34
3.23
3.57
2.68
1.79
0.42
0.37
0.69
1.54
1.02
1.45
0.75
1.61
2.40
ND
2.22
0.77
0.41
0.43
0.16
1.46
0.53
0.30
ND
0.05
920.76
201.28
14829
9/11/98
10/12/98
4.25
4.23
9.19
2.17
18.32
0.07
3.49
2.07
0.36
6.87
0.35
0.47
1.20
35.56
0.35
0.61
5.07
0.78
0.68
0.53
0.50
0.72
0.47
ND
0.78
1.49
3.55
2.37
0.18
0.12
ND
3.29
0.11
0.53
1.98
1.21
4.29
16.67
2.20
2.16
2.69
0.94
2.75
2.14
4.21
1.38
13.68
37.64
1.27
1.32
0.12
1.45
2.97
7.99
4.78
3.86
2.20
2.06
0.56
0.35
0.93
2.17
1.52
2.23
0.86
2.84
4.25
ND
4.20
1.19
0.43
0.54
0.16
4.33
0.54
1.84
ND
0.23
552.09
261.85
15013
9/12/98
10/13/98
6.79
6.26
24.00
3.22
86.46
0.22
4.91
2.23
0.55
17.39
0.42
0.62
0.62
25.67
1.02
1.12
10.15
0.60
1.16
0.74
0.50
0.84
0.35
0.09
0.94
2.55
6.92
5.01
0.32
0.31
ND
6.58
0.24
0.36
3.35
2.37
6.38
2.16
2.38
3.72
2.69
ND
4.85
2.09
1.66
1.62
12.79
39.26
1.03
1.17
0.18
1.09
6.13
18.41
3.17
6.82
1.93
1.24
0.59
0.98
1.06
2.63
1.56
1.78
1.06
1.48
3.94
ND
1.89
0.78
0.56
0.49
0.13
1.58
0.32
0.55
ND
0.19
531.22
367.19
15011
9/14/98
10/17/98
4.89
11.65
10.07
5.54
48.99
0.28
5.82
3.42
1.05
18.85
1.16
1.33
0.92
32.59
1.52
2.28
13.23
0.88
2.58
1.56
3.06
1.18
0.64
0.12
1.44
3.56
8.33
5.54
0.54
0.34
ND
6.59
0.57
0.35
4.30
3.60
9.01
2.07
2.86
4.91
3.12
ND
6.51
2.75
1.79
2.23
20.32
46.60
1.38
1.26
0.19
1.22
4.91
13.87
7.21
6.25
2.80
0.90
0.49
0.42
1.04
3.01
1.63
1.96
1.17
1.09
4.81
ND
1.47
1.25
0.57
0.59
0.11
0.98
0.18
0.43
ND
0.06
532.90
372.19
15012
9/15/98
10/17/98
1.28
1.14
6.61
0.68
7.34
ND
1.41
1.30
0.11
3.42
0.32
0.33
26.14
8.83
0.29
0.13
1.83
0.34
0.37
0.28
0.14
0.47
0.11
ND
0.36
0.71
1.22
0.91
ND
ND
ND
1.03
0.03
ND
0.69
0.55
1.39
0.91
0.93
0.80
0.64
ND
1.06
0.50
0.58
1.29
20.76
30.12
0.66
0.73
ND
0.59
1.11
2.98
3.53
2.67
2.82
0.44
0.37
ND
0.39
0.71
0.55
0.63
0.36
1.80
1.00
ND
0.61
0.26
0.40
0.41
ND
0.52
0.49
0.16
ND
0.11
255.78
151.64
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15014D1
9/18/98
10/26/98
11.00
8.98
24.01
5.09
54.59
0.38
6.58
3.30
1.17
18.70
0.77
0.98
2.20
0.00 @
1.17
1.72
13.00
0.86
2.02
1.19
1.71
1.24
0.75
0.16
1.43
4.58
9.94
6.50
0.49
0.42
ND
7.69
0.49
0.33
4.89
3.02
10.53
2.89
4.20
4.68
4.86
1.56
6.51
3.72
2.57
1.75
7.92
34.04
1.55
1.65
0.42
2.15
4.91
13.66
1.76
5.22
1.67
1.23
0.42
0.53
0.84
2.54
1.46
1.70
0.97
0.79
4.20
ND
1.26
0.95
0.46
0.51
0.07
0.89
0.09
0.36
ND
0.05
19201.33
338.87
15014R1
9/18/98
12/7/98
12.77
10.92
27.55
6.08
64.54
0.50
7.67
3.68
1.36
21.94
0.97
1.05
2.43
0.00 @
1.28
2.08
15.26
0.85
2.31
1.28
1.87
1.30
0.44
0.14
1.71
5.29
12.23
7.63
0.65
0.48
ND
9.26
0.80
0.40
5.80
3.57
12.61
3.30
4.90
5.35
5.85
ND
7.64
3.88
3.03
2.11
9.26
40.81
1.79
1.47
0.51
2.44
5.85
16.48
2.00
6.00
1.86
1.40
0.34
0.62
1.08
2.97
1.73
1.96
1.50
0.69
4.58
ND
1.55
1.13
0.38
0.42
0.14
1.05
0.12
0.45
0.08
0.05
23241.52
395.50
15015D2
9/18/98
10/21/98
11.18
8.95
24.32
5.17
55.81
0.31
7.63
3.33
1.17
21.32
0.81
0.93
0.57
0.00 @
1.17
1.78
14.62
0.91
2.03
1.20
1.68
1.27
0.57
0.06
1.50
4.72
9.67
6.42
0.54
0.42
ND
7.98
0.46
0.28
5.00
3.10
11.01
5.85
3.58
4.45
4.61
ND
6.61
3.90
2.74
1.80
8.22
36.72
1.62
1.39
0.39
2.22
4.92
14.29
1.48
5.20
1.44
1.21
0.32
0.78
0.95
2.83
1.61
1.85
1.05
0.51
4.48
ND
1.30
0.96
0.32
0.45
0.09
0.96
0.04
0.38
ND
0.05
19026.46
349.46
15015R2
9/18/98
10/27/98
10.93
8.92
23.70
5.15
55.19
0.32
7.62
3.37
1.16
21.01
0.76
1.00
0.48
0.00 @
1.17
1.72
14.33
0.85
2.12
1.26
1.57
1.20
0.63
0.13
1.49
4.53
9.32
6.42
0.50
0.43
ND
7.73
0.49
0.31
4.90
3.06
10.69
5.81
3.45
4.40
4.44
ND
6.48
3.89
2.64
1.79
8.06
35.96
1.58
1.71
0.32
2.23
4.57
13.55
1.27
4.90
1.46
1.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
2.38
1.38
1.61
0.97
0.37
3.81
ND
1.26
0.93
0.34
0.36
0.11
0.82
ND
0.34
ND
0.03
19799.96
340.70
15028
9/22/98
10/21/98
6.26
5.28
5.64
2.84
45.03
0.26
1.82
2.41
0.65
6.23
0.43
0.51
1.01
14.37
0.57
0.76
5.53
0.68
1.00
0.61
0.93
0.66
0.29
ND
0.69
2.31
4.21
2.73
0.27
0.21
ND
3.33
0.22
0.17
2.31
1.32
4.88
1.63
3.01
2.39
3.11
ND
3.02
2.83
1.50
1.56
16.34
30.06
1.05
1.08
0.09
1.01
3.28
8.50
2.60
4.21
2.22
0.68
0.41
2.12
0.87
2.62
1.35
1.65
1.05
1.02
3.81
ND
0.83
0.70
0.49
0.57
ND
0.79
0.37
0.34
ND
0.16
1814.45
235.73
15094
9/23/98
10/21/98
8.45
6.89
11.60
3.87
40.83
0.27
4.07
2.72
0.73
11.51
0.53
0.69
0.56
25.18
0.76
0.99
7.43
0.73
1.25
0.73
1.42
0.79
0.47
0.09
0.95
2.50
5.03
3.24
0.26
0.19
ND
4.09
0.24
0.15
2.70
1.77
5.66
57.98
2.62
2.95
2.57
ND
3.62
2.13
1.72
1.51
13.72
33.66
0.97
0.95
0.13
1.04
3.87
10.58
3.56
4.74
2.05
0.81
0.40
1.11
0.82
2.41
1.29
1.67
1.04
1.33
4.38
ND
1.46
0.88
0.57
0.45
0.07
1.60
0.60
1.43
0.07
0.50
684.61
332.57
A large non-target peak prevents quantitation of this compound.
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1-pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1-pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15088D1
9/24/98
10/22/98
2.16
1.77
3.38
1.11
8.95
ND
0.86
1.25
0.18
2.18
0.32
0.36
0.05
10.89
0.33
0.29
1.83
0.41
0.46
0.34
0.18
0.41
0.17
ND
0.33
1.03
1.87
1.08
0.06
0.08
ND
1.27
0.05
0.07
0.96
0.70
1.80
1.07
1.07
1.04
1.02
ND
1.14
0.83
0.62
0.58
6.15
11.48
0.43
0.48
0.04
0.48
1.20
2.86
1.61
1.46
0.87
0.40
0.32
0.21
0.44
0.86
0.57
0.60
0.39
0.94
1.31
ND
0.46
0.30
0.30
0.30
ND
0.46
0.40
0.13
ND
0.05
174.98
90.06
15088R1
9/24/98
10/27/98
2.29
1.78
3.43
1.04
8.80
ND
0.93
1.06
0.16
2.22
0.33
0.39
ND
10.83
0.38
0.26
1.81
0.43
0.50
0.34
0.15
0.38
0.11
ND
0.33
1.09
1.80
1.07
0.09
0.07
ND
1.28
0.06
0.05
0.99
0.67
1.70
1.07
1.03
0.98
1.01
ND
1.16
0.87
0.64
0.53
6.10
11.42
0.48
0.47
ND
0.45
1.14
2.77
1.47
1.51
0.86
0.40
0.27
0.22
0.36
0.72
0.47
0.53
0.37
0.67
1.23
ND
0.42
0.44
0.39
0.36
ND
0.37
0.07
0.08
ND
0.03
170.44
84.78
15089D2
9/24/98
10/22/98
2.21
1.80
3.45
1.10
9.15
0.06
0.93
1.26
0.22
2.27
0.30
0.36
ND
9.54
0.34
0.35
1.89
0.43
0.47
0.39
0.24
0.48
0.10
ND
0.33
1.06
1.82
1.14
0.09
0.09
ND
1.28
0.08
0.06
0.97
0.65
1.81
1.81
1.33
1.12
1.09
ND
1.13
0.92
0.68
0.60
6.16
11.56
0.47
0.48
0.05
0.51
1.25
2.98
1.55
1.63
0.93
0.45
0.36
0.20
0.46
0.92
0.65
0.66
0.52
0.83
1.41
ND
0.50
0.32
0.40
0.40
ND
0.73
0.48
0.43
ND
0.12
181.39
92.82
15089R2
9/24/98
10/27/98
2.18
1.78
3.47
1.16
8.80
0.06
0.94
1.14
0.19
2.33
0.32
0.42
ND
8.45
0.32
0.25
1.87
0.43
0.47
0.41
0.24
0.46
0.16
ND
0.41
1.11
1.79
1.14
0.10
0.10
ND
1.30
0.08
0.06
0.99
0.70
1.74
1.63
0.96
0.97
0.99
ND
1.11
0.84
0.59
0.55
5.72
10.76
0.45
0.51
0.06
0.46
1.15
2.70
1.29
1.47
0.81
0.36
0.28
0.35
0.35
0.74
0.42
0.50
0.34
0.65
1.26
ND
0.47
0.33
0.35
0.25
0.08
0.58
0.15
0.31
ND
0.06
164.87
82.73
15093D1
9/28/98
10/27/98
13.71
11.02
31.30
8.67
51.02
0.49
7.10
4.26
1.45
23.74
1.15
1.25
1.94
42.92
1.58
2.64
21.30
1.16
3.67
1.94
4.21
1.55
1.11
0.22
2.31
8.87
14.46
9.16
0.89
0.57
ND
11.87
0.94
0.59
7.90
4.21
14.18
4.67
5.25
5.93
6.02
ND
8.85
5.62
3.91
2.38
9.85
47.04
1.97
2.17
0.22
2.21
7.26
22.31
2.63
8.29
1.61
1.63
0.68
1.73
1.73
5.03
2.74
3.21
1.88
1.30
8.23
ND
2.42
1.99
0.81
0.74
0.25
1.69
0.20
0.74
ND
0.28
682.56
500.81
15093R1
9/28/98
10/28/98
14.02
11.53
32.23
8.86
52.50
0.49
7.22
4.28
1.46
24.32
1.17
1.29
1.90
44.75
1.63
2.73
21.93
1.25
3.77
2.01
4.33
1.67
1.08
0.22
2.37
9.20
14.96
9.46
0.92
0.61
ND
12.25
0.96
0.64
8.14
4.37
14.47
4.80
5.30
6.11
6.17
ND
9.15
5.87
4.00
2.45
10.17
48.59
2.07
2.21
0.26
2.33
7.63
23.14
2.73
8.58
1.67
1.68
0.63
1.79
1.78
5.27
2.81
3.31
1.97
1.23
8.71
ND
2.51
2.03
0.89
0.94
0.34
1.96
0.25
0.75
ND
0.20
710.03
517.28
-------
SNMOC 1998 REPORT
SITE CODE: JUMX
All concentrations reported in ppbC
Sample No.:
Sampling Date:
Analysis Date:
Compound
Ethylene
Acetylene
Ethane
Propylene
Propane
Propyne
Isobutane
lsobutene/1 -Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
trans-2-Butene
cis-2-Butene
3-Methyl-1-butene
Isopentane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-1-butene
n-Pentane
Isoprene
trans-2-Pentene
cis-2-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-butene
2,2-Dimethylbutane
Cyclopentene
4-Methyl-1 -pentene
Cyclopentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
2-Methyl-1 -pentene
1-Hexene
2-Ethyl-1-butene
n-Hexane
trans-2-Hexene
cis-2-Hexene
Methylcyclopentane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Cyclohexane
2-Methylhexane
2,3-Dimethylpentane
3-Methylhexane
1-Heptene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
n-Heptane
Methylcyclohexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Toluene
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Ethyl benzene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
Isopropylbenzene
a-Pinene
n-Propylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 , 3, 5-Trimethyl benzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1 , 2, 4-Trimethyl benzene
1-Decene
n-Decane
1 , 2, 3-Trimethyl benzene
m-Diethylbenzene
p-Diethyl benzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
1-Dodecene
n-Dodecane
1-Tridecene
n-Tridecane
TNMOC (w/ unknowns)
TNMOC (speciated)
15095D2
9/28/98
10/27/98
13.64
10.96
31.22
8.61
50.69
0.44
7.05
4.19
1.45
23.51
1.09
1.28
2.33
41.04
1.73
2.60
21.18
1.18
3.71
1.99
4.29
1.59
1.00
0.20
2.30
8.86
14.37
9.16
0.95
0.53
ND
12.17
1.05
0.61
7.76
4.12
14.17
4.67
5.43
6.40
5.98
ND
8.78
5.62
3.97
2.51
8.60
45.18
2.06
2.14
0.25
2.22
7.22
22.25
2.25
8.21
1.30
1.69
0.57
1.70
1.73
5.13
2.66
3.25
1.99
1.16
8.35
ND
2.45
2.00
0.87
0.88
0.25
1.77
0.20
0.76
ND
0.17
645.66
495.61
15095R2
9/28/98
10/28/98
14.11
11.38
32.46
8.88
52.35
0.53
7.25
4.37
1.51
24.42
1.15
1.33
2.70
42.81
1.62
2.76
21.90
1.24
3.78
2.00
4.45
1.67
0.99
0.20
2.35
9.09
14.78
9.40
0.97
0.53
ND
12.52
1.11
0.60
7.96
4.21
14.54
4.41
5.31
6.13
6.13
ND
9.10
5.81
4.03
2.39
8.86
46.56
2.02
2.12
0.22
2.30
7.25
23.12
2.44
8.54
1.31
1.68
0.71
1.77
1.80
5.37
2.89
3.40
2.05
1.24
8.81
ND
2.45
2.06
0.87
0.83
0.30
1.76
0.23
0.82
0.04
0.20
665.22
511.25
15091
9/29/98
10/27/98
11.01
9.29
18.40
4.89
43.64
0.40
4.86
3.73
1.12
15.20
0.91
0.90
2.73
16.80
1.13
1.84
13.61
0.95
2.07
1.21
2.26
1.14
0.63
0.12
1.40
4.75
8.96
5.88
0.51
0.35
ND
7.55
0.51
0.30
4.67
2.67
9.26
3.03
3.27
3.92
3.78
ND
5.68
3.59
2.42
2.09
14.19
43.80
1.47
1.56
0.20
1.64
5.16
15.09
2.64
6.13
2.00
1.37
0.39
0.75
1.17
3.31
1.82
2.26
1.31
0.94
5.34
ND
1.72
1.10
0.51
0.50
0.21
1.40
0.15
0.47
ND
0.12
5375.30
352.16
-------
1998SNMOC-NWNJ
Toxics Option Report ( June 1998 - September 1998 )
SAMPLE SITE #
SAMPLE DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
ACETYLENE
PROPYLENE
CHLOROMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,3-BUTADIENE
BROMOMETHANE
CHLOROETHANE
ACETONITRILE
ACRYLONITRILE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
trans - 1,2 - DICHLOROETHYLENE
1,1 - DICHLOROETHANE
METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER
METHYL ETHYL KETONE
CHLOROPRENE
BROMOCHLOROMETHANE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYL TERT BUTYL ETHER
1,2 -DICHLOROETHANE
1,1,1 - TRICHLOROETHANE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
TERT-AMLY METHYL ETHER
1,2 - DICHLOROPROPANE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
METHYL METHACRYLATE
cis - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE
trans - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
1,1,2 - TRICHLOROETHANE
TOLUENE
DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE
N-OCTANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
CHLOROBENZENE
ETHYLBENZENE
m,p - XYLENE
BROMOFORM
STYRENE
1,1,2,2 - TETRACHLOROETHANE
o - XYLENE
m - DICHLOROBENZENE
p - DICHLOROBENZENE
o - DICHLOROBENZENE
NWNJ 13179
6/29/98
7/23/98
L8GW005
ppbv
1.76
1.92
0.52
ND
0.09
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.50
ND
ND
1.28
0.79
ND
ND
0.03 U
ND
ND
1.01
0.50
0.08 IU
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.87
ND
0.17
0.04 U
ND
0.35
0.88
ND
0.17
ND
0.47
ND
0.04 U
ND
NWNJ 13899
7/29/98
8/13/98
L8HK027
ppbv
4.92
2.68
0.57
0.00
0.24
0.01 U
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.00
2.31
1.06
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.68
1.07
0.11
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06 U
ND
0.00
0.18
0.00
0.00
2.95
0.00
0.23
0.10 U
0.00
0.50
1.41
0.00
0.18
0.00
0.72
0.00
0.07 U
0.02 U
NWNJ 14059
8/6/98
9/21/98
L8IS2001
ppbv
5.02
7.04
0.79
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.00
ND
ND
3.81
1.88
ND
ND
0.10
ND
ND
0.62
0.69
0.08 U
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.37
ND
ND
0.31
ND
ND
4.32
ND
ND
0.28
ND
0.64
1.87
ND
ND
ND
0.87
ND
0.11
ND
NWNJ 14468
8/24/98
9/23/98
L8IV023
ppbv
3.71
3.66
0.57
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.73
1.09
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.62
0.68
0.06 U
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.00
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.31
0.85
ND
ND
ND
0.53
ND
ND
ND
U = Under Detection Limit
ND = Not Detected
Nwnj_98.xls
-------
1998SNMOC-NWNJ
Toxics Option Report ( June 1998 - September 1998 )
SAMPLE SITE #
SAMPLE DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
ACETYLENE
PROPYLENE
CHLOROMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,3-BUTADIENE
BROMOMETHANE
CHLOROETHANE
ACETONITRILE
ACRYLONITRILE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
trans - 1,2 - DICHLOROETHYLENE
1,1 - DICHLOROETHANE
METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER
METHYL ETHYL KETONE
CHLOROPRENE
BROMOCHLOROMETHANE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYL TERT BUTYL ETHER
1,2 - DICHLOROETHANE
1,1,1 - TRICHLOROETHANE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
TERT-AMLY METHYL ETHER
1,2 - DICHLOROPROPANE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
METHYL METHACRYLATE
cis - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE
trans - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
1,1,2 - TRICHLOROETHANE
TOLUENE
DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE
N-OCTANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
CHLOROBENZENE
ETHYLBENZENE
m,p - XYLENE
BROMOFORM
STYRENE
1,1,2,2 - TETRACHLOROETHANE
o - XYLENE
m- DICHLOROBENZENE
p- DICHLOROBENZENE
o - DICHLOROBENZENE
NWNJ 14487D1
8/25/98
10/15/98
L8JM019
ppbv
3.66
3.88
0.58
ND
0.18
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.27
ND
ND
2.11
1.15
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.42
1.04
0.11
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.14
ND
ND
3.02
ND
0.12
0.43
ND
0.45
1.34
ND
0.16
ND
0.63
ND
0.12
ND
NWNJ 14487R1
8/25/98
12/1/98
L8LA009
ppbv
3.82
3.66
0.59
ND
0.21
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.26
ND
ND
1.94
1.49
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.39
0.99
0.11
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.14
ND
ND
2.90
ND
0.16
0.42
ND
0.45
1.30
ND
0.17
ND
0.63
ND
0.11
ND
NWNJ 14488D2
8/25/98
10/15/98
L8JM019
ppbv
3.74
3.92
0.63
ND
0.17
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.27
ND
ND
2.19
1.02
ND
ND
0.04 U
ND
ND
0.44
1.03
0.11
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.12
ND
ND
3.71
ND
0.15
0.41
ND
0.46
1.37
ND
0.16
ND
0.66
ND
0.13
ND
NWNJ 14488R2
8/25/98
12/1/98
L8JM010
ppbv
3.75
3.63
0.58
ND
0.16
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.25
ND
ND
1.92
1.19
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.42
0.94
0.11
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13
ND
ND
3.70
ND
0.12
0.40
ND
0.42
1.26
ND
0.16
ND
0.61
ND
0.11
ND
U = Under Detection Limit
ND = Not Detected
Nwnj_98.xls
-------
1998SNMOC-NWNJ
Toxics Option Report ( June 1998 - September 1998 )
SAMPLE SITE #
SAMPLE DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
ACETYLENE
PROPYLENE
CHLOROMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,3-BUTADIENE
BROMOMETHANE
CHLOROETHANE
ACETONITRILE
ACRYLONITRILE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
trans - 1,2 - DICHLOROETHYLENE
1,1 - DICHLOROETHANE
METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER
METHYL ETHYL KETONE
CHLOROPRENE
BROMOCHLOROMETHANE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYL TERT BUTYL ETHER
1,2 - DICHLOROETHANE
1,1,1 - TRICHLOROETHANE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
TERT-AMLY METHYL ETHER
1,2 - DICHLOROPROPANE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
METHYL METHACRYLATE
cis - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE
trans - 1,3 - DICHLOROPROPENE
1,1,2 - TRICHLOROETHANE
TOLUENE
DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE
N-OCTANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
CHLOROBENZENE
ETHYLBENZENE
m,p - XYLENE
BROMOFORM
STYRENE
1,1,2,2 - TETRACHLOROETHANE
o - XYLENE
m- DICHLOROBENZENE
p- DICHLOROBENZENE
o - DICHLOROBENZENE
NWNJ 14984
9/18/98
11/3/98
L8KC01 1
ppbv
3.66
4.67
0.89
ND
0.09
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.25
ND
ND
1.59
1.07
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.48
0.69
0.11
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.08
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.19
ND
0.15
0.20
ND
0.35
0.92
ND
0.12
ND
0.46
ND
0.04 U
ND
NWNJ 15058
9/30/98
10/24/02
L8JI015
ppbv
7.15
8.04
0.39
ND
0.46
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.68
ND
ND
6.21
1.18
ND
ND
0.06
ND
ND
0.60
2.23
0.11
0.16
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.12
ND
ND
6.92
ND
0.35
0.20
ND
0.96
2.88
ND
0.24
ND
1.43
ND
0.26
ND
U = Under Detection Limit
ND = Not Detected
Nwnj_98.xls
-------
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Newark, New Jersey
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
NWNJ
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
13180
6/29/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK024
ppbv
3.79
1.92
0.13
4.89
0.13
ND
0.34
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13
ND
13597
7/20/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK025
ppbv
6.04
2.90
0.43
6.07
0.36
ND
0.35
ND
0.09
0.08
ND
0.15
ND
13900
7/29/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK026
ppbv
5.96
2.61
0.25
4.96
0.21
ND
0.28
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.11
ND
14096
8/7/98
8/18/98
8/22/98
Q8HU027
ppbv
19.81
3.96
0.45
7.51
0.46
ND
1.21
0.35
0.28
0.17
ND
0.37
ND
14251
8/18/98
9/25/98
10/2/98
Q8JB022
ppbv
25.34
3.58
1.26
6.55
0.22
ND
1.84
0.46
0.23
0.22
ND
0.38
ND
14669
9/2/98
10/22/98
10/28/98
Q8J-019
ppbv
20.78
5.43
0.54
8.83
0.36
ND
3.54
0.34
0.30
0.20
ND
0.43
ND
14778
9/10/98
10/28/98
10/29/98
Q8J#018
ppbv
18.62
2.26
0.51
3.80
0.17
ND
2.75
0.26
0.16
0.11
ND
0.26
ND
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Newark, New Jersey
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
14810
9/15/98
10/28/98
10/30/98
Q8J#026
ppbv
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
14985 D1
9/21/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK057
ppbv
22.13
4.30
0.79
6.82
0.38
ND
3.22
0.46
0.32
0.24
ND
0.51
ND
14985 R1
9/21/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK058
ppbv
21.62
4.42
0.87
6.85
0.41
ND
3.22
0.41
0.32
0.27
ND
0.34
ND
14986 D2
9/21/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK059
ppbv
22.03
4.38
0.83
6.89
0.43
ND
2.31
0.47
0.27
0.24
ND
0.57
ND
14986 R2
9/21/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK060
ppbv
21.87
4.44
0.70
6.61
0.38
ND
2.50
0.35
0.31
0.22
ND
0.53
ND
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
FIELD BLANK DATA
Sample Site: Newark, NJ
RAW AMOUNT
Derivatized Cone, (ug/ml)
NWNJ
Sample Date
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
8/25/98
Q8JB019
14502FB
10/2/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.36
0.00
0.00
0.39
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FIELD BLANK
Underivatized Conc.(total ug)
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
Q8JB019
14502FB
10/2/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.01
0.04
ND
0.35
ND
ND
0.45
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Fort Worth, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
CAMS 13
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
13605
7/20/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK021
ppbv
4.73
2.01
0.09
3.86
0.14
ND
0.44
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
13906
7/29/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK022
ppbv
2.68
1.16
ND
2.77
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.11
ND
ND
ND
14175
8/11/98
8/18/98
8/22/98
Q8HU025
ppbv
3.77
1.60
ND
3.93
0.20
ND
0.46
ND
ND
0.05
ND
0.15
ND
14667
9/2/98
10/22/98
10/28/98
Q8J-016
ppbv
4.45
2.28
0.21
6.35
0.31
ND
0.56
0.28
ND
0.05
ND
0.09
ND
14787
9/10/98
10/28/98
10/29/98
Q8J#016
ppbv
3.20
1.58
ND
3.57
0.22
ND
2.03
0.11
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
14899
9/18/98
10/28/98
10/30/98
Q8J#029
ppbv
1.58
0.73
0.04
0.59
0.10
ND
0.14
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.09
14981
9/23/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK029
ppbv
1.46
0.72
ND
1.83
0.14
ND
0.32
0.09
0.07
ND
ND
ND
0.18
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Fort Worth, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
14996
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK030
ppbv
2.43
0.86
ND
0.66
0.12
ND
0.25
0.10
0.07
ND
ND
0.14
0.18
15020
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK031
ppbv
1.97
0.93
ND
0.67
0.18
ND
0.33
0.14
ND
ND
ND
0.12
0.30
15033 D1
9/28/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK048
ppbv
2.92
1.42
0.13
0.56
0.23
ND
0.59
0.26
ND
ND
ND
0.26
0.36
15033 R1
9/28/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK049
ppbv
3.15
1.40
0.11
0.85
0.34
ND
0.64
0.21
ND
ND
ND
0.33
0.34
15034 D2
9/28/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK051
ppbv
1.59
0.85
0.05
0.52
0.20
ND
0.26
0.21
0.07
ND
ND
0.17
0.24
15034R2
9/28/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK052
ppbv
1.60
0.83
0.08
0.32
0.13
ND
0.33
0.19
ND
ND
ND
0.17
0.20
15051
9/30/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK032
ppbv
4.64
2.55
0.34
6.07
0.36
ND
0.53
0.26
0.14
0.11
ND
0.12
ND
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
FIELD BLANK DATA
Sample Site: Fort Worth, TX
RAW AMOUNT
Derivatized Cone, (ug/ml)
CAMS 13
Sample Date
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
9/29/98
Q8KK016
15031 FB
11/12/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.09
0.11
0.00
0.39
0.00
0.00
0.71
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FIELD BLANK
Underivatized Conc.(total ug)
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
Q8KK016
15031 FB
11/12/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.05
0.08
ND
0.38
ND
ND
0.82
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Dallas, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
CAMS5
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
13213
7/3/98
8/3/98
8/11/98
Q8HK015
ppbv
7.54
2.89
0.12
5.03
0.25
ND
0.31
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13
ND
13616
7/20/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK018
ppbv
5.31
2.27
0.05
3.41
ND
0.33
0.07
ND
0.04
ND
0.39
0.10
ND
13902
7/29/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK019
ppbv
2.95
1.00
ND
2.42
ND
0.12
0.14
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
14177
8/11/98
8/18/98
8/22/98
Q8HU024
ppbv
4.78
1.67
0.07
4.13
0.25
ND
0.55
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.12
ND
14256
8/19/98
9/25/98
10/3/98
Q8JB023
ppbv
4.50
ND
0.13
6.79
0.16
ND
0.63
0.12
0.17
ND
0.22
0.11
ND
14671
9/2/98
10/22/98
10/28/98
Q8J-015
ppbv
7.71
2.79
0.22
7.11
0.36
ND
1.18
0.42
ND
0.07
ND
0.16
ND
14783
9/10/98
9/10/98
10/29/98
Q8J#015
ppbv
14.95
13.94
0.17
13.93
3.13
ND
2.73
0.45
0.24
0.43
0.24
0.46
ND
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Dallas, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
14999
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK027
ppbv
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
15024D1
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK044
ppbv
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
15024 R1
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK045
ppbv
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
15025 D2
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK046
ppbv
2.99
1.26
0.13
1.23
0.23
ND
0.46
0.14
0.10
ND
ND
0.15
0.18
15025 R2
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK047
ppbv
2.97
1.37
0.14
1.25
0.23
ND
0.59
0.15
0.10
0.09
ND
ND
0.14
15043
9/28/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK028
ppbv
3.39
1.76
0.20
1.97
0.25
ND
0.61
0.22
ND
0.10
ND
0.24
0.33
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
FIELD BLANK DATA
Sample Site: Dallas, TX
RAW AMOUNT
Derivatized Cone, (ug/ml)
CAMS5
Sample Date
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
9/29/98
Q8KK017
15082FB
11/12/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.03
0.08
0.00
0.35
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FIELD BLANK
Underivatized Conc.(total ug)
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
Q8KK017
15082FB
11/12/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.02
0.06
ND
0.35
ND
ND
0.46
0.06
0.03
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Dallas, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
DLTX
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
13215
7/3/98
8/3/98
8/11/98
Q8HK016
ppbv
3.29
1.12
0.19
3.15
0.16
ND
0.15
0.09
ND
ND
ND
0.25
ND
13613
7/20/98
8/3/98
8/11/98
Q8HK017
ppbv
4.37
1.45
0.29
3.47
0.19
ND
0.31
0.11
ND
ND
ND
0.13
ND
13904
7/29/98
8/3/98
8/12/98
Q8HK020
ppbv
2.75
0.86
0.12
2.68
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.09
ND
14257
8/11/98
9/25/98
10/2/98
Q8JB021
ppbv
3.40
1.66
0.07
3.28
0.21
0.08
0.36
0.13
0.10
ND
0.15
0.14
0.09
14258
8/20/98
9/25/98
10/3/98
Q8JB024
ppbv
3.15
1.61
0.21
2.91
0.19
ND
0.69
0.14
0.10
0.13
ND
0.13
ND
14583
9/2/98
10/22/98
10/28/98
Q8J-017
ppbv
5.93
2.45
0.23
2.40
0.29
ND
0.43
0.20
0.15
ND
0.14
0.17
0.19
14789
9/10/98
10/28/98
10/29/98
Q8J#017
ppbv
4.69
1.42
ND
3.46
0.15
ND
1.38
0.12
ND
ND
ND
0.05
ND
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Dallas, Texas
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
14975
9/18/98
10/28/98
10/30/98
Q8J#030
ppbv
2.44
1.30
0.08
3.06
0.11
ND
0.40
0.10
0.08
ND
ND
0.15
ND
14993 D1
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK053
ppbv
2.15
0.68
0.09
3.81
0.11
ND
0.53
0.11
0.17
ND
ND
0.13
0.10
14993 R1
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK054
ppbv
1.91
0.70
0.08
3.88
0.11
ND
0.46
0.11
0.12
ND
ND
ND
0.14
14994D2
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK055
ppbv
1.78
0.62
0.06
3.30
0.11
ND
0.36
0.10
0.09
ND
ND
ND
0.08
14994 R2
9/24/98
11/9/98
11/13/98
Q8KK056
ppbv
1.95
0.59
0.07
3.20
0.08
ND
0.21
0.10
0.11
ND
ND
0.11
0.09
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
FIELD BLANK DATA
Sample Site: Dallas, TX
RAW AMOUNT
Derivatized Cone, (ug/ml)
DLTX
Sample Date
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
8/27/98
Q8JB020
14526FB
10/2/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.23
0.09
0.00
0.44
0.00
0.00
0.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FIELD BLANK
Underivatized Conc.(total ug)
Data File ID
FBID
Date Analyzed
Q8JB020
14526FB
10/2/98
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
0.13
0.07
ND
0.43
ND
ND
0.94
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
1998 SNMOC CARBONYLS
Sample Site: Juarez, Mexico
Underivatized Concentration (ppbv)
JUMX
SAMPLE #
SAMPLE DATE
EXTRACTION DATE
ANALYSIS DATE
FILE NAME
UNITS
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr/lsobutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Tolualdehydes
Hexaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
14831
9/9/98
10/22/98
10/28/98
Q8J-028
ppbv
3.24
2.18
0.20
5.01
0.29
ND
0.57
0.10
ND
0.06
ND
0.07
ND
15029
9/22/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK037
ppbv
2.66
1.39
0.06
1.62
0.24
ND
0.31
0.16
0.09
0.27
ND
0.05
0.19
15090
9/25/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK038
ppbv
2.09
1.07
0.11
3.10
0.21
ND
0.44
0.16
0.11
0.30
ND
ND
0.22
15092
9/29/98
11/9/98
11/12/98
Q8KK040
ppbv
2.18
1.40
0.08
2.93
0.22
ND
0.48
0.17
0.09
0.30
ND
0.06
0.23
u - Concentration is below the detection limit
-------
TiCHNICAL REPORT DATA
fPltrASE READ INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE iEFQflf ilOMVLETING)
1.
RiPfJRT NO, 2.
C TTTLi ftUB SUBTITLE
1iil NON METHANE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (J4MOC) AND
SPECIATED NONMETH AN E ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SNMOCJ
MONITORING PROGRAM
J. AUTHOR*
*.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAUE ANO ADDRE11
12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
OFFIC1 OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ARCH TRI ANGLER ARK, NC 27711
If
j pecipiewrs ACCESSI&M wo,
ft. REPORT DATE
4. PERFiJfiWIMCi ORGANIZATION CODE
4 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
1Q. PROGRAM fcLfcMEIT NO.
11. COMTRACT-KiRftNT WO.
1 3. TYPE Qf REfORT AND PERlOO COVERED
H. SPON3DWNO AOENCV CO[*E
, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE COUNTRY WHERE THE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD (« AAQS>
FOR OZONE £ BEING EXCEEDED, ADDITIONAL MEASUREMENTS OP AM BIE NT NOW METHANE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS (NMOCJ ARE NEEDED TO ASSIST IN THE AFFECTED STATES IN DEVELOPING REVISED OZONE
CONTROL STHATEIGES. BECAUSE OF PREVIOUS DIFFICULTY ON OBTAINING ACCURAHGl NMOC
MEASUREMENTS, THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTKJN AGENCY (EPA) HAS PROVIDED MONITORING
AND ANALYTICAL ASSISTANCE TO THESE STATES, BEGINNING IN 1384 AMD CONTINUING THROUGH THE
199« N1MGG WON fTO RING PROGRAM,
11
a.
Klf WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS b. IDEttTIFtP^OPeN ENDED TERMS
OIONE CONTROL STRATEGIES
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
(N A AQS) 1 9SB N MOC MON ITO RING PROGRAM
HON METHANE ORGANIC COMPOUND
MONITORING ANALYSIS
. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
UNLIMITED
2 GOSfcll FlELLwGROUP
I
21 NO. Of PAGES
22 PRICE
-------
-------
------- |