&EPA
unuea states
Environmental Protection
Agency
utrice ot Air uuamy EMB Report 85.HWs-2
Planning and Standards December 1984
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Air
Hazardous Waste
Treatment, Storage and
Disposal Facility
Area Sources
VOC Air Emissions
Emission Test Report
Chemical Waste
Management, Inc.
Kettleman Hills Facility
Kettleman City, California
Volume 1
-------
DCN 84-222-078-17-03
EMISSION TEST REPORT NO. 85-HWS-2
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITY
AREA SOURCES
VOC Air Emissions at
Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
Kettleman Hills Facility
Ketcleman City, California
EPA Contract No. 68-02-3171
Work Assignment 75
Prepared by:
Radian Corporation
P. 0. Box 9948
Austin, Texas 78766
Prepared for:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Standards and Engineering Division, MD-13
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
21 November 1984
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 Introduction 1-1
1.1 Site Description 1-1
1.2 Testing Program 1-2
2 Summary and Discussion of Results 2-1
2.1 B-6 Inactive Landfill 2-4
2.2 B-9 Active Landfill 2-4
2.3 P-l9 Surface Impoundment 2-16
2.4 Drum Storage and Handling Area 2-36
2.5 Miscellaneous Surface Impoundments 2-36
3 Process Description 3-1
4 Sampling Locations 4-1
4.1 Pond P-19 4-1
4.2 Miscellaneous Ponds 4-4
4.3 Inactive Landfill B-6 4-4
4.4 Active Landfill B-9 4-4
4.5 Drum Storage and Handling Area 4-4
5 Sampling and Analytical Procedures 5-1
5.1 Air Emission Measurements 5-1
5.1.1 Emission Isolation Flux Chamber 5-1
5.1.2 Mass Balance 5-4
5.2 Air Sample Collection 5-4
5.3 Liquid Sample Collection 5-5
5.4 Soil Sample Collection 5-5
5.5 Analytical Techniques 5-7
5.5.1 Real-Time Monitors 5-7
5.5.2 On-Site Gas Chromatograph's 5-7
5.5.3 Off-Site Gas Chromatographs 5-10
5.5.4 Gas Chromatograph/Mas6 Spectrometry 5-10
6 Quality Assurance Procedures and Results 6-1
6.1 Measurement Variability 6-3
6.1.1 Flux Chamber Measurements 6-3
6.1.2 Mass Balance 6-10
6.1.3 Liquid Concentration Measurements 6-10
6.1.4 Soil Core Concentration Measurements 6-10
6.2 GC-MS Confirmation of Selected Canister Samples 6-15
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
2-17 Measured Liquid Concentrations (mg/1) for P-19 Surface
Impoundment (06/22/84) 2-23
2-18 Summary of P-19 Physical Data 2-26
2-19 Summary of Liquid Concentrations (mg/1) for Samples
Obtained at Varying Depths for P-19 Surface Impoundment... 2-27
2—20 Comparison of Measured Emission Rates and Liquid
Concentrations for P-19 Surface Impoundment (06/20/84).... 2-28
•
2-21 Comparison of Measured Emission Rates and Liquid
Concentrations foir P-19 Surface Impoundment (06/22/84)... 2-29
2-22 Summary of Calculated Mass Transfer Coefficient Values
(m/sec) for P-19 Surface Impoundment (06/20/84) 2-30
2-23 Summary of Calculated Mass Transfer Coefficient Values
(m/sec) for P-19 Surface Impoundment (06/22/84) 2-31
2-24 Effect of Flux Chamber Sweep Air Flow Rate on Measured
Mass Emission Rates (kg/day) for P-19 Surface
Impoundment (06/22/84) 2-33
2-25 Effect of Flux Chamber Sweep Air Flow Rate on Measured
Mass Transfer Coefficient Values (m/sec) for P-19
Surface Impoundment (06/22/84) 2-34
2-26 Summary of Input Values for P-19 Material Balance 2-35
2-27 Summary of Liquid Concentrations and Results of the
P-19 Material Balance 2-37
2-28 Summary of Upwind-Downwind Ambient Concentrations
(ug/m3) Around P-19 2-38
2-29 Summary of Drum Storage and Handling Area Survey 2-39
2-30 Summary of Measured Concentrations (mg/1) for Liquid
Samples from Various Surface Impoundments (06/20/84) 2-40
5-1 Decryption of Portable THC Monitors 5-8
5-2 Instrument Conditions for On-Site Gas Chromatograph 5-9
5-3 Instrument Conditions for GC-FID/PID-HECD Analyses 5-12
iii
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
5-4 GC-MS Conditions for Analysis of Gas Cansiter Samples 5-13
6-1 Precision Estimates for Flux Chamber/Gas Syringe
Sample Results 6-5
6-2 Precision Estimates for Flux Chamber/Gas Canister
Sample Results 6-6
6-3 Estimates of Variabilities of Parameters Associated
with Emission Flux Chamber Measurements 6-7
6-4 Precision Estimates for Flux Chamber/Gas Syringe
Emission Rates 6-8
6-5 Precision Estimates for Flux Chamber/Gas Canister
Emission Rates 6-9
6-6 Summary of Input Values for P-19 Material Balance 6-11
6-7 Precision Estimates for Material Balance 6-12
6-8 Precision Estimates for Liquid Sample Results 6-13
6-9 Precision Estimates for Soil Core Sample Results 6-14
6-10 GC-MS Confirmation of Canister Samples 6-16
iv
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) is
developing an air emissions data base for treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (TSDFs) in support of a background information document. The
emissions data base will include fugitive air emissions from landfills,
surface impoundments, storage tanks, containers (drums), solvent recovery
processes, and land treatment technologies at TSDFs. Although the fugitive
emissions from such sources may include a variety of inorganic and organic
particulate emissions and vapor phase inorganic and organic emissions, the
current emphasis is on volatile organic compounds.
Data for the air emissions data base are being obtained through both
direct measurements and predictive models. Sampling approaches have been
10
developed and demonstrated for emission measurements1' and sampling and
analytical protocols documented for obtaining field data for input to the
predictive models (Section 5.0). ' TSDFs are identified and screened as to
their representativeness and suitability for sampling. During the prelimi-
nary visit to a site, process data are obtained and grab samples collected.
Based upon this information, the site may be selected to perform emission
measurements. This test report documents the results of emission measure-
ments at the Chemical Waste Management, Inc. Kettleman Hills facility.
1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
Kettleman Hills is a commercial hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility located in Rettleman City, California. The site began
operation in 1972, was acquired by the current owner (Chemical Waste Manage-
ment, Inc.) in 1979, and upgraded to accept hazardous wastes. Prior to
1-1
-------
accepting waste for disposal at the facility, samples are required for
analysis to determine compatibility with the facility processes. Wastes
which are water, reactive, explosive, radioactive, or pathogenic are not
accepted. During 1983, the site handled nominally 350,000 tons of waste, of
which an estimated 20 percent was organic. Potential air emission sources
of interest on the site include:
• the P-19 surface impoundment,
• the B-6 inactive landfill,
• the B-9 active landfill, and
• the drum handling and storage activities.
Detailed descriptions of these processes can be found in Section 3.
1.2 TESTING PROGRAM
Emission measurements were performed at the Kettleman Hills facility
during the period from June 18-23, 1984. Testing was conducted by Radian
Corporation, under the direction of Dr. Charles Schmidt. .Process data were
obtained by a representative from GCA/Technology Division, Bedford, Connect-
icut, under contract to EPA, and representatives from the Environmental
Protection Agency observed testing. The objectives of the testing program
were:
• to obtain emission rate data at the P-19 surface impoundment
using the emission isolation flux chamber approach;
• to obtain emission rate data at the P-19 surface impoundment
using a mass balance approach;
• to obtain data on the concentration of volatile organic
compounds in P-19 for comparison to compounds identified
during emission measurements and as future input to predic-
tive models;
1-2
-------
to obtain ambient concentration data immediately downwind of
the P-19 surface impoundment;
to obtain emission rate data at the B-6 inactive landfill
using the emission isolation flux chamber approach;
to obtain data on the concentration of volatile organic
compounds in the B-6 inactive landfill soil for comparison
to compounds identified during emission measurements;
to obtain emission rate data at the B-9 active landfill
using the emission isolation flux chamber approach;
to obtain data on the concentration of volatile organic
compounds in the B-9 active landfill soil for comparison to
compounds identified during emission measurements; and
to survey ambient concentrations at and immediately downwind
of the drum handling and storage area.
1-3
-------
TABLE 2-1. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSES
10
I
K>
Source
B-6 inactive landfill
•-9 active landfill
P-19 aurface impoundment
Niacel laneoue surface iajpoundnenta
Sampling Approach
Flui chamber
Soil •••plea
Flui chamber
Soil aamplea
VluB chamber
Run 1 (6-20-84)
rlui chamber
tun 2 (6-22-84)
Haaa balance
initial
final
Liquid aamplee
Run 1 (6-20-04)
Liquid eamplee
«un 2 (6-22-84)
Opvind/doimuind
Liquid aanplca
Saaplea Obtained
8 ayrioge aaaplea
2 caniiter aavplea
1 core •••pie
1 bulk aaaple
6 (fringe saBplea
4 caniiter aaa^lea
7 core Map lea
7 bulk aaaplea
3 ayringe aaaplea
3 caniiter aaaplea
9 ayringe aaaplea
9 caniater aanplea
18 liquid aaaplea
12 liquid mmmpltt
8 grab aaaplea
36 grab aaaplea
3 caniitera
6 grab aaaplea
Savplea Analyied
6
(2 aa-plea invalid)
All
All
All
All
All
All
1
All
All
All
All
6
6
4
16
3
6
Comeota
Includea 1 duplicate and 1 control
•
fhyaical analyaia
Includes 1 duplicate
Includes 1 duplicate
Fhyeical analyaia
Include* 1 duplicate and 1 control
Includea 1 duplicate and 1 control
1 upwind and 2 downwind
-------
TABLE 2-2. AVERAGE EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS MEASURED FOR VARIOUS
SOURCES AT THE KETTLEMAN HILLS FACILITY
B-9 ACTIVE LANDFILL
P-19 SURFACE IBPOUNOHENT
K>
I
CONPOUNO
1,3-BUIADIENE
ACRTlONITRILf
BENZENE
TOLUENE
ETHYL1ENIENE
P-XTLENE/N-XYLENE
STYRENE
9-XYLENE
ISOOR1PYLBEN2ENE
•I-PROPYL9EN7ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOROMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,1-OICMLOROETHVLENE
•UTHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOPDF3R)"
1,1,1-TR|CHLU*OEIHANE
CAftBON TETMCHLOHIDE
1,2-OICHLOAOPROPANE
TfTRACHLOROETHYLENE
CHLOROB'MZENE
P-l)ICHL1ROBEN7.ENE
l,l-n|CHLOROETHANE
BEN7YL CHLORIDE
l,2-DIBR9fOETHANE
2-CHL1RO-! ,3-BUIAOIENE
TRICHLORETHYLENE
EPICHLOROHYDNIN
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
3-CHLORO-l-PROPCNE
ACETALOEHVOE
HETHYL ACETATE
ACROLtl'l
PROPYLENE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
9LEMNS
TOTAL AROMATIC*
TOTAL HALOGENATCO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPCClrS
UN10EMIIFIEP VOC
TOTAL NMHC
D-» iwmi IYI
LANDFILL -
IKG/OAV)
•
.0094 KO.OOI, .028)
.9162 KO.OOI, .0741
.0701 KO.OOI, .355)
.0134 KO.OOlt. Ollt
.0122 KO. 001, .056)
.1026 KO.OOI, .(Ml
.0039 KP. 001, .018)
.0266 K8. 001, .141)
ND
.0074 K*. 001,. 027)
NO
.0552 1.00121. .1*9)
.••71 KO. 101, .038)
0.338 1 0.753, .423)
.•042 KO. Oil, .022)
NO
.0832 KO.OOI, .325)
NO
.0013 «0.001toB*7>
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
/ 0.457 KO.OOI. 1. 41
0.102 KO.OOlt. 387)
0.189 KO.OOI, .843)
1.05 KO.OOI, 2. 17)
.0339 KO.OOI, .078)
NO
.0127 KO.OOI. .845)
l.«l KO. 001,4.26)
^yT-o^/Aj
AREA 2 „
«KG/DAY>
NO
ND
-------
2.1 B-6 INACTIVE LANDFILL
Emission rates measured at the B-6 inactive landfill using the flux
chamber are tabulated in Tables 2-3 and 2-4, as calculated using the results
of the canister samples and syringe samples, respectively. No compounds
were detected in the syringe samples using the on-site gas chromatograph
(1 ppn> lower limit of detection), and concentrations detected in the canis-
ter samples were typically less than 10 ppbv-C. Halogenated compounds were
primarily detected. The resulting emission rates are very low (at the level
of the blanks/background), as seen in Table 2-3.
A single soil core was obtained at the B-6 inactive landfill. The
result of the analysis of this soil core is shown in Table 2-5. As with the
flux chamber, the primary compounds detected were halogenated species.
Table 2-6 summarizes the physical data for the soil cover on the B-6 land-
fill. Soil temperatures varied with the time of day, showing typical diur-
nal trends. Differences inside and outside the flux chamber were typically
less than 2°C. Because the physical data were obtained from a single sam-
ple, it may not necessarily be representative of the landfill as a whole.
2.2 B-9 ACTIVE LANDFILL
Emission rates measured at the B-9 active*landfill using the flux
chamber are tabulated in Table 2-7, as calculated using the results of the
canister samples. B-9 was zoned into two areas (see Section 4). Area 1 was
a larger temporary storage area and area 2 was a smaller active working
area. As seen in Table 2-7, the compounds emitted from the smaller active
working area were primarily halogenated species, while the temporary storage
area showed generally higher emissions for the paraffins, olefins, and
aromatics. The variability between emission rates measured at the indivi-
dual gridpoints within area 1 is somewhat larger than the sampling and
analytical variability associated with the flux chamber technique (see
Section 6). Variability of the emission rates between gridpoints, based on
the on-site analyses is consistent with the canister results. This implies
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-4. MEASURED MASS EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) FOR B-6 INACTIVE LANDFILL (06/19/84)
SYRINGE SAMPLES
Is)
I
1 SAH'LE ID
j LOCATION
COMPOUND j EMISSION RATE
1 « •
PARAFFINS
OLCFINS
TOTAL AROHATICS
TOTAL HALPGCNATCD HC
TOTAL 1XTGCNATCO NC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED »OC
TOTAL NHHC
. » t t « » . .
s-oo«
6RIO 1
tRG/OAYI
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
....
S-OIZ
GRID 1
IKG/OAVI
NO
NO
NO
•to
NO
NO
NO
NO
S-«i6
GRID J
IKG/OAVI
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
S-fiT
GRID t
IKD/DAVI
ND
'NO
'NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
1 •
$•••8
GRID 6
IKG/DAVI
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
-------
TABLE 2-5. MEASURED SOIL CORE CONCENTRATIONS (yg/m3) FCR 3-6 INACTIVE
LANDFILL (06/21/84)
COMPOUND
SAMPLE 10 U-OOfi
LOCATION GRID 1
CONCENTRATION
US-BUTADIENE
ACRYLOHITRILE
BENZENE
TOLUENE
ETMYLBENZENE
P-XYLENE'M-XYLENE
STYRENE
VXYLENE
ISOPROPYLBENZENE
N-PP.OPYLBEN2ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOR01ETHANE
VINYL CHLORinE
1,1-DICHLOROETHYL£NE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
1,1,1-TRICHLO»OETHAWE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
1»2-OICHLOROPROPANE
TETPACHLOROrTHYLENE
CHLOROBEN2ENE
BPHZYL CHLORIDE
l,2-DIBRO«OrTHANE
2-CHLORO-l,3-»UTADIENr
YPICHL3RETHYLENE
EPICHLHROHYORIN
It 1 ,?,?-TETRACHLOROETHANE
3-CHLORO-l-PROPEMC
ACETALOEHYDE
flETHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPYLENC OXIDE
PtRAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL ARONATICS
TOTAL HALOGEMATED HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL N«HC
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
VD
NO
NO
NO
ND
1070
Nn
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
VD
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
167
NO
235
1070
NO
ND
NO
1*80
2-7
-------
TABLE 2-6. SUMMARY OF B-6 PHYSICAL DATA
Parameter ' Value Comments
Soil temperature 30-40°C Range of surface tem-
perature encountered
Moisture 6.92 W008a
Bulk density (dry) 1.62 gm/cm3 W008a
Specific gravity 2.53 gm/cm3 W008a
Porosity 36.02 Calculated
aSample ID for sample from which data were obtained
2-8
-------
TABLE 2-7. MEASURED MASS EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) FOR B-9 ACTIVE LANDFILL
AREA 1 AND AREA 2 (06/21/84)
Area 1
I
vo
CONPOUNO
1,3-BUTA01ENC
ACRYL9MITRILE
BENZENE
TOLUENE
ETHYLBENZCNE
0-XTLENE
ISOPROPYUBENZENE
tl-PROPYLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOR01ETNANC
VINYL CHLORIDE
! I -niCHLOl
. LENE
CHLOR9FORN
1,1,1-TRIC
CARBON TETI
1,7-OICHLOI
TETRACHL9R
CHLOROBENtENE
P-OICHLOROBEN
I*1-OICHLOROE
BENZTL CHtORIDE
1*2-OIBR9HOETHA
2-CHLORO-It3-BU
TRICKLORETHYLENE
ACETALOFHTOE
HETHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPTLCNF OIIDE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL* AROHATICS
TOTAL HALOCENA
TOTAL OITT6ENAT
SULFVR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
SAMPLE ID »-020
LOCATION BRIO 3
CXISSION RATE IKGSDAY)
C ND
E NO
.0097(>
0.0163
.00332
VLENE .00951
.00435
.00248
ZENE NO
ENE .00112
NO
1C ND
OE 0.0136
FTMYLCNE TO
ILOMDE 0.0792
NO
OR0ETNANE 1.3 OR
CHLORtOC NO
PROPANE NO
THTLENE 0.0304
E NO
NZCNE ND
ETHANE NO
IDE NO
THANE NO
-BUTADIENE ND
LENE NO
IRIN ND
ACHLOROETHANE NO
ROPENE NO
NO
TC NO
NO
IDE NO
(.232
• .•661
ICS •.(9(1
HATED HC 1.69
ATEO HC (.0245
ES NO
VOC .00839
A-072
CO 10 7
(KG/DAY)
NO
ND
to
0.0109
0.043
0.202
.00383
0.0328
0.0*78
0.0103
0.0799
ND
NO
ND
(.0493
0.0213
•.375
NO
NO
• (.195
NO
••••38
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
• .096
0.231
• .49
• .992
0.0543
NO
0.0273
A-021
GRID 0
(KG/DAY)
NO
NO
<0.00I
.••114
.00213
.00743
NO
•••149
NO
NO
NO
NO
•.••66
NO
• .•37
NO
1.33
•.0177
NO
•.•162
ND
ND
ND
HO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
(.222
•••107
0.0144
0.467
•••227
NO
.0(203
MEAN I93X C.I.)
•KC/OIY)
.••209 KO.OOI* .0101)
.00*45 KO.OOI. .02P3)
0.0162 K0.901. .0751)
0.0701 KO.OOI* 0.1531
0.0034 KO.OOI* .0109)
0.0122 KO.OOI. .0364)
0.0026 KO.OOI* .0138)
.00386 KO.OOI* .0177)
0.0766 KO.OOI* 0.141)
.0(742 KO. 001*0.0269)
•••552 1.00171, 1.1091
0.0071 KO. 001*0. 0376)
•.338 1 0.733* 0.473)
.00424 K0. 001, 0.0773)
0.0837 KO.OOI* 0.375)
.(•177 KO.OOI, .00671)
.
0.437 KO.OOI, 1.4)
• iT02 KO.OOI. 0.387)
0.105 KO.OOI. 0.843)
1.05 KO.OOI, 7.37)
• ••339 KO.OOI. 0.0707)
0.0177 KO. 001,0.04531
Area 2
A-023
(MID II
IKG/DAYI
NO
NO
CO.OOI
.06198
.00)*fl
HO
.99373
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.0573
NO
1.5*7
0.09*3
I. 87
NO
0.0103
0.7*
NO
NO
WO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
• •139
*.OI?9
0.0766
3. **
NO
.00303
TOTAL' NNHC
2.07
2.6*
0.716
l.M K0.001* 4.?f)
3.84
-------
that the differences betweewn gridpoints are significant. The total varia-
bility is, however, relatively small and it is expected that the average
emission rate for area 1 is representative of the area as a whole.
Soil cores were obtained at each of the locations where flux chamber
measurements were made. The results of the analyses of these cores are
presented in Table 2-8. These data show a large amount of variability
between samples and no distinct differences between areas 1 and 2.
Table 2-9 summarizes additional physical data for the soil at the
landfill. The soil temperatures varied with the time of day, showing typi-
cal diurnal trends. Differences between soil temperatures inside and out-
side the flux chamber were typically less than 2°C. Soil moisture, bulk
density, and specific gravity were measured for a single soil sample and the
associated soil porosity calculated. This data may not necessarily be
representative of the landfill as a whole.
The measured emission rates were compared to the results of the soil
core analyses in order to verify that the flux chamber was measuring emis-
sions from the landfill. Table 2-10 presents this comparison for each of
the individual gridpoints. The flux chamber generally saw groups of com-
pounds (olefins and some aromatics) which were not present in the soil core
samples. Chloromethane was a major halogenated compound in the soil cores
which was not detected in the flux chamber. A quantitative comparison was
made based upon a comparison of mass transfer coefficients (i.e., emission
rate/concentration) implied from the comparison in Table 2-10. The tabu-
lated mass transfer coefficients are listed in Table 2-11 for each of the
individual gridpoints, the resulting averages (Method 1) and for the average
emission rate and core concentrations for the landfill (Method 2). No
attempt has been made to normalize the mass transfer coefficients for tem-
perature. A general agreement from gridpoint to gridpoint for an individual
compound would imply good inherent precision in the sampling and analytical
methods (i.e., flux chamber and soil cores). The physical reasonableness of
the values for the individual compound mass transfer coefficients would
2-10
-------
TABLE 2-8. MEASURED SOIL CORE CONCENTRATIONS (jig/ra ) FOR B-9 ACTIVE LANDFILL
AREA 1 (06/21/84)
| SAMPLE 10
j LOCATION
COMPOUND 1 CONCENTRATION
1,3-BUTADIENE
ACRVLONITKUE
BENZENE
TOLUENE
FTMYLBEN/ENF
P-KYLEMF/H-XYLENE
STrRENE
0-XYLEME
1 S1PR DPYl BE N7EWE
N-PROPYLBEN7ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLORONFTMANE
VINYL CHLORIDE TAM" >~ '' °
I.I-OICHLOROETMYLENE
*ETHYLEVE CHLOPIOE
CHLOROFORM
I.I.I-TRICHLOROEIHANE
CARBON TFTRACHLORIOE
1,2-DICMlOIIOPROPANE
TET"ACHLOROFTMYLENr
CHLOROBENZFNE
P-DICHLOROBFNZf NE
l.l-DICHLDROETHANE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
1.2-OIBRDWOF THANE
2-CHLORO-1.3-OUTAOIENE
TRICHIORFTHYLENE
FP1CHLOROHYORIN
1.1 .7.2-TETRACHLOROFTHANE
3-CHLORT-l-PROPFNE
ACETALOENYTtF
METHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PRIIPYLENE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
OLEF1NS
TOTAL AROMATICS
TOTAL HALOGENA1ED HC
TOTAL OTYGFNATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIOENT IFIEO VOC
W-OOI
CRIO 3
*3>
NO
ND
60.3
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
N9
40900
• •••«'?M>- •
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
< 3.30
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
169
NO
21*
90000
NO
NO
NO
U-002
GRID 3
•UG/M.-3)
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO •
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
2*3
NO
ND
A690
NO
ND
737
W-003
GRID 4
IU6/-..3)
190
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
17000
NO
moo
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
'10
NO
MO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
323
710
?09
29AOO
NO
NO
9050
W-005
GRID 7
fUG/M**3)
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
147
•990
ND
NO
3620
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
1900
NO
1070
12200
NO
NO
974
W-004
GRID R
IUG/1..3I
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
39
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
301
NO
1440
M»
NO
NO
431
MEAN 195* C.I.)
iur,/r»*3>
30 «0.ri53r 1«4)
13.7 «>
914 K0.1A0, 1200)
142 «< O.'i7, 93M
769 KO.S4I, 1000)
21000 «< 1.64. 9IOCO)
1340 K0.673. 39501
TOTAL !|«HC
99400
9210
36200
16500
2210
24700 «0. M4, 935001
-------
K)
I
K>
TABLE 2-8. MEASURED SOIL CORE CONCENTRATIONS (jJg/m ) FOR B-9 ACTIVE 1.ANDFTLL
AREA 2 (06/21/84) (Continued)
CUNPOUNO
lt3-BUTAOIENF
ACRYLONIIRILF
BCN/ENE
TOLUENE
EIHYLBtNZCNE
P-»TLENE/H-li
STTRfNC
T-XYLENF
ISOPDOPTl BENZENE
N-?ROPTLHEN?tNE
NtPHTHtLENF
CHLOROHETHANF
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,1-9IC"LO
HCTHYLFNE I
CHL"ROFORN
Itltl-TRICl
CARRON TFT!
li2-OICHLOI
TETRACHLOR
CHLOR3P.ENZEHE
P-niCHLTR09rN
l.l-OICHLOROE
BEN7YL CHLORIDE
lt?-DIRR9r10rTHA
?-CHLOR1-I,3-BU
TRICHLORFTHYLFNE
EPICHLIRgHYDRIN
It I t2t?-TFT<(
3-CHLORO-l-P
ACETALDEMYDC
NtTHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPYLFNE OKIOE
OLCFINS
TOTAL AKONATICS
TOTAL MILOGEUA
TOTAL IXYSFNAT
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL 'IrlMC
SAHPIE 10
LOCATION
CONCFNTRATION
F
F
VLENE
?ENE
ENE
F
nt
FTHYLENF
LOR IDE
OPPE THANE
CHLORIDE
PROPANE
THYLENE
E
N{ENE
•ETHANE
IDE
THANE
-BUTADIENE
LFNE
RIN
ACHLDNOFTHANE
00PENF
TE
IDE
ICS
MATED HC
ATEO HC
ES
VOC
W-006
CRIO 10
IU6/M..J)
NO
NO
NO
NO
NP
NO
NO
NO
NO
156
•irj
NO
NO
NO
NO
2510
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
tm
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
9*12
162
2740
2500
NO
NO
• ?5
W-007
6*10 II
NO
NO
NO
NO
NP
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
VD
NO
NO
NO
NO
NP
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
29600
NO
904
NO
NO
NO
NO
NE«N
CUG/H««J»
70.2
15200
Pl.t
7130
30510
1250
M3
IflflOO
-------
TABLE 2-9. SUMMARY OF B-9 PHYSICAL DATA
Parameter Value Comments
Soil temperature
Moisture
Bulk density (dry)
Specific gravity
Porosity
26-34°C
19.82
1 .40 gm/cm3
2.38 gm/cm3
41.22
Range of surface tem-
perature encountered
W002a
W002a
W002a
Calculated
1Sample ID for sample from which data were obtained
2-13
-------
TABLE 2-10. COMPARISON OF MEASURED EMISSION RATES AND SOIL CORE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE B-9
ACTIVE LANDFILL AREA 1 AND AREA 2 (06/21/84)
Area 1
Area 2
•no i
t*
ciHPouNo • lU'./rif-stci
ltl-8UIAD|[Nt
ACM VI ON If * lit
ICNICNt
IQtUCRC
CIHTlBtNICNC
P-Ift{NC/N-KUtNC
$f f R.CNC
0-»VltNC
ISOPIOPUICNZCNC
N-P.ROPflDCNHNi
•IRHIHALINC
CHtOROlKIHAM
VINTt CHI 0» 101
III -OICICOROttNnCNC
«CIHUtN[ CHI.t»IOt
CHIONOFORN
I.I.I- IIICHl MO[IH»NC
CAROCN 1[t«ACMlORID[
li2-OICM.OROP*OP>Nt
tCMACHLOROrfHTlCNt
CHLOROatNlCNC
P-DICHLOIOICNKNt
Itl-OICMCOROffHANI
ItNZTl CHLOKIOC
U2-OIBRONOC1HAM
2-CHlORO-ltl-BUI*OUN(
IIICHLORtfHUtNC
tPICHlOROHIDRIN
I.I .tft-rCIIACM10IIOCtNANt
3-CHl 0*0-1 -PIOPCNC
ACttAlOCHfOC
NCIHTl ACCfAIC
tCKOiCIN
PNOPfltNt OIIOC
PARAFFINS
UCFlNl
tDIAl AIONAIICS
10IIL NAL*C(NAItO HC
IOIAL OIVUNATCO NC
IUIFUI SPtCICt
UMIOlNllrltn »1C
NO
NO
1.149
«.ltf
.*29«
.142*
.•11*
.(1*1
NO
.11*1
NO
NO
• .111
NO
(.411
ND
t.4
ND
ND
*.2*«
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
I.*T
• .919
• .1*
IJ.2
• .1*1
NO
.•44*
4RIO 1
CONC [•
IUG/M1I (U6/N2-SCCI
NO
NO
14.1
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
2(4 ••
114*
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
l.f
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
224
NO
II*
11*11
NO
NO
II*
NO
NO
ND
.••91
• .119
1.91
.•499
1.299
.•4*1
.«>*»
• .421
NO
NO
ND
*.1«4
1.144
t.*2
NO
NO
1.92
NO
.12*4
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
4.**
I.I
].*!
r.ii
(.424
' NO
• .til
4*10 I
CONC [•
tVt/llll IU8/N2-SCCI
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
14?
•9*«
NO
ND
142*
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
19**
NO
1*11
122**
NO
NO
»»4
NO
NO
.•lit
.*••«
.•lit
.*!•*
NO
.1114
NO
NO
NO
HO
t*9!4
NO
t.2**
NO
2.57
• .**»
ND
•.124
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
I.T1
,*w
•.lit
1.14
*.ITI
NO
.*I9*
CONC
IUI/N1I
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
11
NO
NO
NJ
NO
NO
NO
NJ
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
111
NO
144*
3*
•5
ND
411
CNISSION (All
NCAN
.•141
.•114
1.124
• .944
.(249
.•*94
.•212
.•1*1
*.2«l
.*5I*
*.41
.(991
2.41
(.•11
(.44*
.*«**
1.9*
• *.?*>
1 .44
• •!•
• .244
.l**4
l*9t C.I.I
t NO
1 ND
< NO
1 NO
1 NO
1 NO
1 NO
1 NO
1 NO
1 ND
l.***4
1 NO
1 I.*'
1 NO
.*f*ll
(.2221
I.9T4I
2.141
.1*911
*.4]*l
1. I9TI
t.IJtl
l.ll
I. til
*.*5»
*.2*ll
l.tfl
•.1191
< NO t 2.911
f ND •.•9211
NO 11.41
NO l.*2l
NO 4.9TI
ND t*l
NO (.41*1
« ND •*.}9!l
SOIL CONC
MAN .*« C.I.I
11.4 « NO • tt.JI
4* 1 tO . 24*1
*4*l 1 NO ,35I(*I
494 1 NO • 241*1
Itl* 1 ND • 41*11
(.949 1 ND . 11
4T5 f NO • ?49>l
1140 1 NO • 34241
I94M 1 ID .5M9II
9*( 1 10 • I5*«l
t* CONC
IUG/H2-SICI IUC/N1I
NO
NO
.**!*
.1142
.1141
• .US
NO
.•99T
ND
NO
NO
NO
*.*•*
NO
*.44
1.44
12.1
NO
• .IT*
12.1
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
2.4
1.224
*.44
41.1
.1444
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
MO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
2*41*
NO
**4
NO
NO
NO
NO
IDlll NHHC
14.1
1411*
!*.«
145*1
9.9*
III*
14.1 I NO • 11.tl III** I ND .5UMI
1*9**
-------
TABLE 2-11. SUMMARY OF CALCULATED MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT VALUES (M/SEC) FOR B-9 ACTIVE LAND-
FILL AREA 1 AND AREA 2 (06/21/84)
— Mass Transfer Coefficients (m/sec)
Area 1
Aren 2
CONFOUND
tUD » (*IO I IRIO I
no*
HtlHOe I
c.i.i
HtlNW t
IRIP II
N>
I
Itl-OUIAOKM
•CRftOMITRIlC
DCNItNC
TOlUtNt
CIHTtUNlCNC
SITUCNC
0-mC»t
MOPIO'UtCNZCNt
NtrHtHALCNt
CNlDROHCIHtNt
»INTt CHLPRIDC
ltl-OICK.-OROMHYI.CNC
NCTHYtCNt CHI 0*1 DC
CHIOROFORN
Ittil-mcHOROCINMI
CIRION TttRICHlORlOE
tCTIICNtOROCIMTLCNE
CHLOKOItNICNC
P-OICMIOROICNICNE
l.l-OICML'MOttHINt
ItNITt CNCMIPC
Itl-CIIMNOCTMINt
l-CHtOIO»lrl-eU1IOICNC
l«ICNl>IRCTMLENC
lil.til-TCtDtCHtOROCtNINC
J-CHlORO-l>r*OrCM
ACCIUOCHtOr
HCfHTL *C(UIC
•CROLCIN
Oil Of
MUFFINS
IflMt «RON«TICt
IOI»l HUHtMtCD NC
TOtlL DITtrMUO HC
fUlfUR tr>CCICt
UNIOtNIIFICD »0t
TOI.Al NNHC
.till
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
•0
NO
NO
»!!-»
NO
Ml
NO
ND
NO
NO
• .I If
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
N9
M)
ND
.MM
NO
.MM
.III*
ND
NO
.MM
.HIS
NO
ND
•0
ND
NO
NO
ID
NO
NO
NO
.IMS
NO
NO
NO
.Mil
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
.IMT
NO
f.Mf
.lilt
ND
ND
.Mil
.•lit
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
10
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
.1157
NO
rit-i
.itni
NO
NO
JK-t
.lias
.Mil
.(Ml
tlf-t
.11*1
O.ITI
.tll«
.t«tl
.MM
I. IS
.*M« I. •(!!,. II ITI .Mil l'.»lt..HMI
.(lit 4>.t*ti.ltf tl .1113 «-.IM
.«3SJ <-.!!«. I. l»tl .IIH I-. Ill ,.lli?l
.Mil <-«f-«t.*M
-------
imply that there is no large bias for the measurements of the specific
compounds.
2.3 P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT
Emission rates measured at the P-19 surface impoundment are tabulated
in Tables 2-12 and 2-13 for the tests conducted on June 20 and June 22,
respectively. These emission rates were calculated based on the results of
canister samples, and include the average emission rate and 952 confidence
interval. These data were generally consistent with the data obtained on
site with the gas syringes and field gas chromatograph, as shown in Tables
2-14 and 2-15. The variability between emission rates measured at indivi-
dual gridpoints is smaller for the measurements made on June 22. The varia-
bility for the June 22 test is generally at the same level as the sampling
and analytical variability associated with the flux chamber measurement
technique (see Section 6), for both canister and gas syringe results. The
low variability implies that the composition of the pond was generally
homogeneous, and as such the average emission rate should be representative
of the pond as a whole. Note that the measured emission rate for gridpoint
24 was significantly higher than the other gridpoints. This gridpoint was
at the corner of the pond where waste dumping took place (see Section 4),
and as such, might be expected to have higher emission rates. During col-
lection of the canister samples on June 20 at gridpoints 6 and 17, it was
noted that the chamber differential pressure was higher than normal. This
abnormality may have affected these canister sample results on that day.
The flux chamber measurements for the gas syringe results show better agree-
ment than the canister results on June 20 supporting this concern.
Numerous liquid samples were taken at P-19 on both June 20 and 22. The
results of these analyses are presented in Tables 2-16 and 2-17 for samples
collected June 20 and 22, respectively. Those samples which corresponded to
flux chamber measurements are identified. The data are quite consistent,
with the total variability being no different than the sampling and analyti-
cal variability expected for the sampling and analytical procedure. This
2-16
-------
TABLE 2-12. MEASURED MASS EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/20/84)
N>
i UNTIC 10
i l(C4tl«N
cixroun* i tNiitioN MIC
I * *
Ill-CUflOKNt
•CRVtONIt* ILC
BCNZIM
TOlUCNt
CfNVtBCNKNC
P*l VI CNf /N«XI1CNC
•ITlCNt
9'IUCWC
iiorioMLOCMCNC
N'PROMIOCNZCNC
NOMfHUCNt
C«l OllOllt INI«t
»INH CM19IIOC
1.1-OICM.MOtlMTltNt
HCIHVUK CHl«RIDt
CNIORO'OM
ltltl-fllCM.MMI«*NC
C4RB9N TtTRICMlOMOI
1 1 f •• 1 CHI OR OPNOIINC
TCtR4CHlOROCtNTl(«t
CNlOROBCNItllt
r-oicm.o«oetNji«
ifi-oieicoiacTMiNt
ItNtTl CNIMIM
l|}-OI*RMKVN*Nt
f *CM19ROM If 1*011 1101 CRC
TIICHLIUTMTKNC
trtCNtOROHTMIN
II i ti if -rttRiCHioaot mine
l&6M.**RO~l*frROPCOt
icCfnoriiToc
KCfNTl «C(T*II
ACR9LKIN
fROPTICK l«l»t
PHIPFIN*
oicriNt
l»f«l «RON1TIC«
I0t*l HIIMINIIIO NT
tortt tiiirNHito HC
tui.ru* SPCCKS
uNiotiiirico voc
•-•it
•mo t
IM'OITI
•D
NO
•••1*1
•.u?
••191
•« *ll
m
••141
NO
•0
m
NO
NO
NO
6. It
O.I4t
11.*
HO
NO
l.tl
NO
•.It*
•0
NO
NO
•0
NO
ND '
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
•0
• .It
•••I?
1.1
• •'4
••tV4
M
•.•141
••IB If
(Kt/DMI
N*
NO
.•1141
•«lt*9
•.1119
•.1411
no
i.iifi
•0
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
• .14*
•.(Ml
• .41
NO
M
I.I3«I
«B
l.lltt
•0
NO
•0
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
•0
NO
•.11?
I. IMS
1.14
• .•1
• .1*1
NO
.41911
MIN 1*91 C
1.1*1! Kl.llll
li»l Kl.llll
• ill KI.III4
1.31 Kl.lll.
I.4IT Kl.lllt
t»TI Kl.lll.
l.lll Kl.lllt
11. S Kl.lll.
»«*l«-t Kl.lllt
liTt K«.l*lt
IITC-t Kl.llli
•«t4T IC9.99I4
I.IIIS Kl.lll.
f.ll Kl.lllt
I.IS Kl.lllt
4.11 Kl.lllt
M Kl.lll,
l.*l Kl.lll.
• .•II* Kl.lllt
.1.1
1.1991
l.lll
f.lil
II. l»
f.fll
19. fl
I.Sfl
til
.••4*11
f.fll
• •I390I
KS9P
l.ltll
•till
11.41
111
1911
11.41
I.II1I
•HI tl
IK4/B1TI
NO
NO
•.111
l.fl
(.ft
•0
t.ll
NO
no
NO
NO
NO
ND
3. II
If.*
•0
.•1411
.•11*4
1.31
• .II*
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
NO
41. 1
11.3
II*
II.*
NO
NO
I0f»l NMNC
1.4
It.* Kl.tll. 1441
fll
-------
TABLE 2-13.
MEASURED MASS EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
CONPOONt
ItNFU 10
tOCIIION
MISSION t*ic
t-iit
HID 1
IM/DtVI
*-•>•
4*10 4
IKt/OITI
• -41I
MIO T
IKI/OtVI
i-tlt
til 10 T
UN/DM i
«-*j?
ttio ir
Ilt/Ottl
NC»N lt«S Cil.l
llt/OITI
»'ll)
MIO *«
UBSOMI
Itl-IUIIDItNf
iciuoNUiitt
OCN1CNC
tOtUCNC
KJ
I
00
r-IUCNt/N-mCM
SttttNC
0-lTltNt
ISOfl*»UltNICW
CHLOIONttlllNC
TI1HL Cm.** IOC
Itl-OICWOROEINTUK
Ntinmir CM.OIIOC
CNlMOfMN
l.l.l-M|(NlMIIlNt>C
C««ltN UlHlCNtOllOe
Itt-OICNLOROrNOFINt
UTMCHlOIOCtOUCNt
CNtOIOOtNItNt
f-OICMCONOOCNKM
l.l-4ICNLMOttMNI
ICNtTt CMIMIOC
l.t-OII«OKOCTH«Nt
t-CNtO*0-lt>-OUI*OltHt
IIICntllUtNTttNC
C^ICNtOIONfMIN
Itl.ttt-tltltCMlOHOETIUNl
!-em.o«9-i-r«or(N(
ICtfitOCHTOt
NCfNTl «Ctt»Tf
ICMICIN
MRFTltNC OllOt
p*«*rri«i
•LtriNt
Hut UONATICS
IOKL HH04CN1ICO NC
tOIII tlMCNAHO HC •
toirin trfcus .:
UNIDfNIlrllO *«C
" . I
TOML NMMC
NO
NO
I.MI9
«.**
t
?.SI
NO
t.f*
NO
NO
NO
NO
t.ll*
t.its
11.4
1.04
14. S
NO
NO
).**
t.ttlt
t.Hl
t.tt4
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO •
NO
NO
NO
NO
ISil
It.*
tl.l
ISM
«.M
NO
I.I It
II*
NO
NO
4.1*1*
S.tt
L«S
0.1)
NO
|.5I
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
II. S
LSI
Sl.t
NO
NO
S.)*
NO
t.m
*.ti*T
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
t«
o.«4
14
Tl.t
l.ll
NO
NO
II?
NO
NO
4.091*
s.ts
LSI
S.I*
NO
l.%4
NO
NO
NO
00
NO
NO
II. 1
!.»)«
IS.I
NO
NO
1.41
^00*11
t.tt*
0.1)0
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Hi)
4.tt
ISi?
)t.l
t.«
NO
t.19*
• l.t
NO
NO
1.0414
i.tl
Ittl !•
OVM
NO
1.41
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.19*
NO
It
I.tl*
It.T
'00
'NO
l,il
NO
till*
o.|»
NO
'NO
'NO
NO
'NO
'NO
'NO
'NO
'."»
NO
."•
M.t
O.It
14.)
«».«
t,»i
NO
NO
0».*
NO
NO
t.tD*
*;si
'j L>»
1^*1
NO
t.)0
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
!».»
l.ll
)t.«
NO
•0
4.41
l.tll*
t.?TI
t.llt
•0
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
«».*
T.S*
t*.t
19.1
1.1*
NO
V>
I*T
1.1*1 It.tZMt t.UJI
S.40 I t.tl. It.tl
».» Kt.ttlt 4.«9I
It Kt.ttl. ft.*)
l.»t Kt.ttlt 4.111
1.11*1 Kt.ttltt.IT4t!
t.|l* Kt.ttl. t.ltll
.tttlO l
I.It? Kt.ttl • t.TIVI
Sl.f Ut.ttlt 1141
*.*r I tlT««« ItiTI
ft.J (Cf.Otlt Slit)
4Si4 I «!.«• II.tl
l.tt I I.IS. 9.11
t.MTS Kt.ttlt I.II4I
144 ( •».»• !•'»
NO
l.tt*
II.)
II
1S.S
NO
It.T
t.l«t
NO
NO
NO
•.«*)
NO
M.t
I.«S
tt.t
NO
NO
t.s
NO
O.l*«
l.fl
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Ml
t*.*
*?
tl.l
».»f
NO
NO
-------
TABLE 2-14. MEASURED MASS EMISSION RATES (KG/DAY) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/20/84)
SYRINGE SAMPLE
coitrovNo
IINPU 10
loc«tl*n
CHIISION *«U
(•ID «
m/oKi
•-•It
••10 II
IKC/OMI
NC»N IfSI C.I.I
IKISDIVI
(•10 t«
< IK/0111
01(1111$
tOMl IIOMMCI
fOI»l NUOCCNtltO HC
fO»U OimMUO NC
suiru* spcctrt
IMIOCNIIFIIO »OC
fOUL tlNNC
•0
•0
IS.*
IIS
II.»
31.1
S.I*
II.I
NO
•0
II. • « TI
• -III
•«io ir
oe/otfi
Nt«N
(HI
s-*t*
•RIO M
IKI/DITI
IOTII ••OR»tlC»
tOT«t IKltCtNIKO NC
rotu 9ricrN«tco NC
soif«« srtcitJ
UNIOINIIFIIO fM
IOI1U NNHC
II.)
I.M
NO
NO
•0
**.*
JJ.3
NO
NO
«0
NO
)•.*
Tl.T
u.r
•o
ss.»
St.l
I'.S
S.«J
NO
»<•»
NO
NO
II.•
f.'?
H.I
!.»»
i*.a
NO
NO
II.*
II
»l.5 I <•.!« It.M
I.IT* I
I II
III
NO
NO
NO
NO
SSI
Ml
-------
TABLE 2-16. MEASURKU LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS (MG/L) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/20/84)
ro
I
K>
o
SAWPLE in
LOCATION
conPOUNn CONCENTRATION
li3-BUTAOlFNE
ACRYLONlTRIir
RENZENE
TOLUCNC
ETMYLPENJCNr
P-XYIENE'H-XYLENE
STYRCNE
0-XYLENE
1 SOPR OP Yl BENZENE
N-PROPYLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOR9*ETHANE
VINTL CHLORIDE
Itl-QICHLOROFTHVLENE
HfTHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
1,1,1-TRICHLOROEIHANC
CARBON TCTRACHLORIDE
li?-DICHloROPROPANE
TETRACMLiROFTHYLENr
CHLOROtEVZENE
P-OICWLOROBENZENE
Itl-OTCHLOKOETHINC
BENZYL CHLORIDE
I,?-OIB«0*OETH«NE
2-CMlORO-l.l-FUTADIfNE
TRICHL9RETHYLENC
CPICHLOROHYDRIV
Itl t?t?-TETRACHLOROETMANE
3-tHLORO-|-PPOPENE
ACETALOEHYDE
HETHYL ACETATE
ACR3LEIN
PR1PYLENE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
OLCMNS
TOTAL AROHATKS
TOTAL HALOGENATEO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL N«HC
i-ao«
6RID 1
• ts/i»
NP
wn
».?»5
• .5
1.36
«.«!
NO
1.51
ND
I. 06
• .756
7.0?
ND
ND
i.ft
1.139
f,.58
ND
NO
1.575
NO
1.515
ND
ND
NO
NO
•»0
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
80.?
l?.l
36.1
M.t,
1.945
ND
3.71
16"
L-03K
GRID 1
I1G/LI
ND
NO
NO
10.6
IT.?
0.134
«.?T
0.?3M
0.569
l.*6
NO
6.05
0.51
NO
03.5
7.03
Tn.9
NO
I.M
2.0*
I.OT35
O.AIT
5.04
ND
ND
NO
10
VO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
VO
?<(.?
i?.r
5?.T
?34
17. T
NO
A. 31
337
L-noi
GRID 6
IIG/l »
ND
NO
0.157
3.87
7.74
fl.»7
l»0
?.76
NO
ND
0.339
MO
NO
ND
4.74
0.156
16.5
ND
NO
1.71
ND
I.E4
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
tti)
10
ND
ND
ND
10
66.4
43.3
64
71.7
0.471
ND
0.734
746
L-019
GRID 6
INS/11
NO
ND
NO
3.49
».H7
1.06
?.5
I.9R
1.3
f.3?
NO
7.38
0.777
1.59
«.*S
• .15
13.2
NO
ND
1.48
NO
1.44
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
nr>
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
76
• 4.7
65.1
116
• .461
NO
• .431
372
l-0?|a
GRID 6
115'LI
NO
NO
*.??«
6.?«
3.14
P.9»
1.34
7. 91
1.33
2.84
ND
0.378
0.136
7.7t
4.1?
0.174
14.5
1.1?
NO
1.44
NO
1.47
ND
NO
NO
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
71.8
37.8
10?
57.5
1.74
NO
4.03
268
L-077
GRID 6
«ir,/i»
NO
NO
0.704
5.09
3.04
».0o
1.45
2.77
1.51
7.73
NO
3.56
1.73
7.1?
6.48
• .153
14
ND
ND
1.6?
NO
1.63
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
to
NO
NO
NO
NO
91.3
36.7
79.6
64.?
2.9?
ND
1.75
?»5
NOTE: KGSL is EQUIVALENT TO PPN ASSUMING A DENSITY IF 1 CM/ML.
-------
TABLE 2-16. (Continued)
K)
10
saw it in
LOCATION
CONPOU'ID CONCENT8ATION
I.J-BUTADIFNF
ACRYLONITftlLE
BEN7ENE
TOLUENC '
ETHYL»ENZENr
P-XYLENE<«-XYIENE
STYRENE
P-XYLENE
ISOPROPYLBCNZENE
N-PROPYL8ENZF.NE
NAPHTHALENE
CHL 98. METHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
l,l-DICHL9»oETNYirNC
1ETHYLCNE CHI. 0« IDE
CHLOROFORM
1.I.1-TRICHL080ETHANC
CARBON TFTRACHIQR1DE
lt2-DICML9R9PROPANE
TFT«AC-U!)ROFTMYir.NE
CHlOR3B''«(Zriir
P-OICML080BFNIENE
Itt-DICHLOROETHANE
BENZYL CHLORIOC
1 ,2-niB»OH?ETH»NE
2-CHLORn-l,3-"tmOIENC
TRICHLOMF1HYICNE
EPICHLOROHYOMN
l«l .2.7-TET8ACHLOROFTHANE
3-tHLOR9-l-PROPENE
ACCTALDEHYOE
METHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPYLENE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL AROMATICS
TOTAL HALOOENAIEO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFU* SPECIES
UNIOENIIFIED VOC
TOTAL N1HC
1-035
GNIO 13
(HG /LI
NO
NO
• .333
1.06
1.76
3.52
0.4*
1.16
• .556
ND
NO
20.7
2.34
wn
3.81
0.0786
14.3
ND
ND
• .872
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
' NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
VO
NO
44.2
28.9
?3
51. 8
2.09
NO
• .609
149
L-B29
GRID 13
MG/L>
NO
ND
t.ot
3.78
8.78
1.76
?.27
(.373
1.12
3.24
ND
1.49
0.36T
8.77
NO
• .138
13.6
NO
NO
1.66
NO
1.64
NO
NO
ND
ID
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
74.3
37.7
97.3
48.1
7.78
NO
14.8
292
1-075
GRID 17
inr./L>
NO
NO
• .997
4.72
2.3T
7.63
7.38
1.98
l.i?
7.1
0.319
12
2.33
• .424
.1.32
0.0993
It.l
NO
NO
2.23
ND
1.8
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
48. T
28.6
93
«7.3
NO
ND
13.5
233
L-»I7
G8|0 18
<1G/L>
ND
NO
7.19
4.03
9.33
1.33
2.97
2.39
1.88
2.36
• .561
NO
ND
NO
4.54
ND
13.2
NO
ND
1.89
NO
1.3
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
92.3
42.9
BS.6
77.2
21
ND
19.3
267
1-007
GRI3 19
I1G/L)
ND
NO
0.762
l.9|
1.47
4.64
NO
1.7
NO
NO
0.731
ND
NO
ND
II
• .773
11.7
NO
ND
0.713
NQ
0.899
ND
NO
NO
ND
N5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
84.3
73.7
33.6
37. f
14.6
11
17.7
210
1-006
SKID 72
IMG/LI
.NO
NO
0.27?
3.54
79.5
9.89
ND
3.2»
ND
ND
0.677
MO
NO
NO
10.4
NO
80.7
NO
NO
2.34
Nn
2.74
•.0373
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
155
38.8
83.4
142
37.8
NO
16.1
435
NOTE: HG/L is EQUIVALENT TO PPM ASSUMING A DENSITY IF i OH/ML.
-------
TABLE 2-16. (Continued)
K>
I
K>
K)
SANPLE 10
LOCUION
COHPOUMP CONCENTRATION
i,3-9ui»oirNt
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE 1
TOLUENE
ETHYLeeri2CNE
P-XYLENE'I1-»YIENE
S'YPENE
0-HYLENE
ISOPROPVLBENZENE
II-PROPYLBENZENE
NfHTHALENE
CHLORONETMANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
I.I-OICHLOROE1HYLENE
HCTHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
Itl «I-TRICHLOROETMA«IC
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
l«2-DICMLOROPROPANE
TfTRACNLnROrfHYLENE
CHLOR03ENZENE
P-01CHLQROBEMENE
1.1-OICHlOROETMANE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
1.2-OIPR!"«OETHANE
?-CHLORO-1,3-BUIAOIENC
TMICHIORETHYLENE
fPICHLPROHYPRIN
J,l ,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
3-CHLO»0-l-PROPENE
ACETALOEHYPE
1rTHYL tCETATE
ACROLEIN
PBOPYLFNE. OXIOE
PIRAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOIAL AROHATICS
TOfIL HALOCENATEO HC
TOTAL tVYGENATEO HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL NNMC
1-033
GRID 72
CMC /LI
NO
NO
0.7
*.BI
7.61
T.a
!.?»
7.5T
l.»1
7.77
ND
i.sr?
t.101
MO
4.61
• .173
13.1
ND
ND
1.63
ND
1.61
ND
ND
• ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
VO
ND
NO
53.7
M.6
6H.3
Si
1.391
ND
1.45
231
1-017
GRID 73
«»15/L»
NO
NO
0.641
3.07
3.56
A.M
ND
3.33
NO
NO
0.73T
11.2
24.4
NO
7.5(1
0.202
14.5
ND
0.04*7
1.72
NO
0.919
0.0247
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
10
10
ND
NO
116
47.9
60.8
»S
IK.I
NO
13. T
374
ME»N
0.474
4.*l
7.31
«.(I9
I.M
7.9
0.77
1.44
0.709
3.15
7.15
l.*3
17
t.9«B
7P.7
0.491
0.8093
2.15
•.0754
1.43
0.4X3
75.7
37.1
77. 3
?4.T
7.73
B.f3
293
<9->X C.
O.I??,
1.71.
3.01,
0.115,
0.67,
0.714,
0.366,
0.755.
0.065,
0.793,
«.00?t>.
(0.0332,
«.007|,
K.0999,
1 9.53.
«.017».
K.OfMI,
( (.R75,
K.0016,
I 1.04.
K.004I,
59.3,
?9.7,
53.1.
44.*.
2.04,
« 4. AD.
< 272,
l.t
>.«?(.>
9.»l»
11.6)
IX>
7»
5.01)
1.07>
?.!?»
0..35.')
7.l>
5.'T»
3.7.11
34.31
7.721
46. M
1.45)
J.769I
3.421
0.07.M
I.RII
l.7.n>
92.lt
45»
10?)
145)
13.4)
12.41
36*1
L-0233
GRID 24
I1G/L)
NO
NO
1.96
35.3
l°.5
»4.B
0.^51
in.n
• .731
ND
10
2.75
1.65
1.26
120
7.31
133
7.56
ND
11.4
• .374
2.92
2.M
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
10
ND
ID
»2
23.4
233
406
1.65
ND
6. ft
75?
L-031
GRID 74
196/L)
NO
NO
ID
1.46
3.97
1.26
1.35
0.35(1
ND
2.71
ND
"0
1.346
ND
5.54
0.14ft
II
NO
• .•166
1.8
NO
1.52
ND
ND
VO
»0
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
*I.
40.
T4.
34.
4.
ND
21
211
NOTE: ne/i is EQUIVALENT TO PFN ASSUMING A DENSITY IF i GN/HL.
Corresponds to flux chamber measurements
-------
TABLE 2-17. MEASURED LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS (MG/L) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
ho
10
Co
SAMPLE 10
LOCATION
COMPOUND CONCENTRATION
1.3-8UTAOIENE
ACRYLONITRILC
BENZENE 1
TOLUENE
ETHYLPCN7ENE
P-XYLEOIE/H-XYICNE
STYRENE
0-XVLENE
ItOPROPYL BENZENE
N-P»OPVLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOROnrTHANE
VIHYL CHLORIDE
Itl-DICHLOROCTHYLENE
NFTHYLfKF CHLOMOE
CHLOR1C?RH
1.1.1-IRICHlOROEIHANE
CARBON TCTRACHLORIDE
li2-DICHLOROPROPANE
TF.T»ACHLOROFTMYLCNE
CHL9ROBENZENE
P-OICHLOROBENZENE
lil-OICHLOROETHANE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
lt2-OIBR010ETHANE
7-CHLORO-l i J-BUIAOlFNr
TRICHLORETHYLENE
EPICHLOROHYORIN
Itl »2»2-TCTRACHLOROETH»NE
3-CHLORO- I-PROPENE
ACETALDFHYOE
MFTHYL ACETATE
ACR3LEIN
PRUPYLFNE OXIOE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TUT«L AH01ATICS
TOTAL HALOGENATEO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNinENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL *IHHC
1-039
GRID 6
NO
ND
t. 228
2.47
1 .7
5.72
ND
1.85
•.705
1.64
NO
17
0.844
2.99
7.14
1.233
18.5
ND
NO
2.64
• .014
Nfl
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
33.7
32.4
48 ^4
73.7
NO
ND
1.81
190
GRID 6
ING/LI
ND
NO
NO
3.42
7.. 83
9.86
1.23
3.13
NO
ND
0.8^3
2.58
0.211
0.509
3.94
0.735
15.8
NO
NO
2.72
0.0597
1.64
.00742
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
66. «
39
75.9
40.1
2.21
NO
2.74
224
L-87P
GRID 6
1 1C 'L 1
NO
NO
Nt>
3.26
3.f>3
9.81
1.25
3.11
1.36
2.84
0.273
8.35
1.32
ND
4.03
0.152
17
1.37
ND
2.74
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
78.3
20.5
83.7
76.3
8.843
0.444
24.2
283
L-0593
GRID 7
• MS'll
NO
NO
NO
9.03
2.11
7.15
.0*759
2.2
ND
NO
0.244
9.76
2.21
NO
9.73
0.8736
II. 8
ND
ND
f.08
NO
1.39
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
•10
39
26.7
58.3
39.8
0.574
NO
VO
164
L-062°
GRID 7
ING'LI
ND
ND
NO
3. 72
9.7|
1
2.99
1.97
1.3
2.4
0.816
10.1
2.52
ND
4.1
0.1*3
12.4
ND
NO
2.51
ND
1.43
ND
ND
N3
SO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
5ft. 8
3J.9
85.8
65. S
0.791
NO
5.4
2TO
1-065
GRID T
IHI'LI
ND
NO
ND
3.17
8.78
t.87|
2.69
1.76
0.871
2.07
0.409
1.03
NO
0.497
6.01
0.157
12.8
ND
NO
1.66
ND
1.54
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
5S.3
44.5
S8.4
43.5
1.49
ND
1.96
2IT
L-054
GRID 9
ING/LI
NO
NO
0.44«
4.39
7.74
».*9
NO
2.9
NO
ND
0.634
4.01
4.32
NO
4.68
ND
12. •
ND
ND
2.47
ND
1.57
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
' NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
VO
68.9
46
62
54.7
5.8
NO
0.535
737
1-042
GRID 11
I<1G/L»
'NO
NO
NO
3.37
3.44
«.29
1.77
2.09
1.24
?. IS
0.701
l.ll
ND
NO
8.21
1.22'
7.34
ND
NO
2.T2
NO
0.517
•10
NO
ND
NO
NO
NP
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
56.5
4|
75.3
29.7
0.131
in
4.93
2JT
NOTC: KS/L is COUIVALFNT TO PPN ASSUMING A OCNKMY IF i OH/ML.
-------
TABLE 2-17. (Continued)
10
I
K)
| SAHPLC 10
| LOCATION
COMPOUND | CONCENTRATION
1
1,3-BUTAOIrNF
ACRYLONITRIir
BENZENE
TOLUENF
ETHYLBCN7ENE
P-XYLE«/H-XYLENE '
STYRFNE
0-XYLENE
ISOPR1PYL BENZENE
M-PROPYLDEN7ENE
NIPHTH41E'
3.48)
0.949)
6.15)
0.769)
3R.P)
0.377)
4.15)
0.15)
2.35)
0.978)
81. 5)
59.3)
99.3)
100)
?.?S)
0.106)
HI
37*1
L-«63d
GRin 74
•tG/l)
NO
NO
0.153
II .?
14.9
90. P
ND
14.9
0.505
7.15
0.301
10. 1
7.13
NO
6.65
0.502
41.9
NO
ND
8.08
0.429
4.55
0.602
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
Ml
103
169
133
2.22
ND
ND
5<*
NOTr; NG'L IS EOUIVAIENI 10 PPN ASSUMING A DENSITY IF I GM/ML.
Corresponds to fiux chamber measurements.
-------
implies a generally homogeneous composition for the impoundment, and as
such, the average concentration is expected to be representative of the pond
as a whole. It should be noted that the liquid concentrations were signifi-
cantly higher at gridpoint 24. This is consistent with the emission rate
measurements and the idea that the concentrations would be higher at the
point of the waste dumping.
Table 2-18 summarizes the physical data for P-19. The liquid tempera-
tures varied with the time of day, showing typical diurnal trends. Differ-
ences between liquid temperatures inside and outside the flux chamber were
typically less than 2°C. Liquid samples were taken at varying depths be-
neath the surface at a single gridpoint to provide information on possible
stratification. The results of these analyses are provided in Table 2-19.
Although no conclusive statement can be made based upon this limited data,
the halogenated compounds do appear to be accumulating at greater depths.
The measured emission rates were compared to the results of the liquid
sample analyses in order to verify that the flux chamber was measuring
emissions from the surface impoundment. Tables 2-20 and 2-21 present this
comparison for each of the individual gridpoints measured on June 20 and 22,
respectively. Qualitatively, the flux chamber generally did detect the
volatile components in the impoundment. However, there were a group of
compounds which were present in the impoundment and not detected in the flux
chamber samples, including styrene, isopropylbenzene, N-propylbenzene,
naphthalene, chloromethane, vinyl chloride, and 1,1-dichloroethylene. A
quantitative comparison was made based upon a comparison of mass transfer
coefficients (ie., emission rate/concentration) implied from the comparison
in Tables 2-20 and 2-21. The tabulated mass transfer coefficients are
listed in Tables 2-22 and 2-23 for each of the individual gridpoints, the
resulting averages (Method 1), and for the average emission rate and liquid
concentrations for the impoundment (Method 2) as measured on June 20 and 22,
respectively. No attempt has been made to normalize the mass transfer
coefficients for temperature. A general agreement from gridpoint to grid-
point for an individual compound would imply good inherent precision in the
2-25
-------
TABLE 2-18. SUMMARY OF P-19 PHYSICAL DATA
Parameter Value Comments
Water temperatures 25-35°C Range of temperatures
encountered
pH 8.0-8.4 Range of pH en-
countered
2-26
-------
TABLE 2-19. SUMMARY OF LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS (MG/L) FOR SAMPLES OBTAINED AT VARYING DEPTHS
FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT
ro
I
Ni
COMPOUND
1,3-BUTAOIEME
ACRYLONITRILF
BENZENE
TOLUFNF
ETHVLBFNZENE
P-XVLKNF/H-XYLENE
STVRtN1'
3-XVLFNE
1 STPROPTLPtN/ENT
N-PBOPYLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHL9ROHETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,1-OICHLOROETHVLFNE
1EIHYLENE CHLORIDE
CML1R.DFOHH
1,1 ,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIOE
1 ,2-OICHLOROPROPANE
TETRACHLOROFTHVLENE
CH1080BEN7ENE
B-OICHLOROBEN7ENE
1,1-OICHLOROETHANE
BENCYL CHLORIDE
1,2-OIBROMOETHANF
7-CHLORO-l ,3-PUTAOIENE
TMCMIORFTMYLENE
FPICHLOROHVORIN
1,1 ,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANC
3-CHLORO-l-»ROPrNE
ACETALOEHYDE
NETNVI ACETATE
4CR'H.?IN
PROPYLENE OXIDE
'ARAFF1NS
OLEFINS
TOTAL ARONATICS
TOTAL HALOr.ENATEO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR ».PECl£S
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL NMHC
L-070
P-19, GRin PT 6
SURFACE
ND
NO
NO
3.76
3.03
9.81
1.25
3.11
1.36
2.84
0.223
8.35
1.3?
N!)
4.03
0.15?
17
1.37
NO
2.74
NO
, "9
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
78.3
20.5
83.7
76.3
0.843
0.444
24.?
783
i-ori
36/77/84
P-19, CHID PT 6
1 fl DEEP
NO
ND
NO
3.52
2.73
8.89
0.819
1.12
NO
3.4
I.I
8.64
1.568
ND
1ft. 7
1.08
40.9
NO
NO
T.B9
.0076
1.23
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
70.5
22.8
66.2
131
1.5
ND
2.13
293
L-9T?
06/77/B4
P-19, GR ID PT 6
7 FT DEEP
NO
NO
NO
?. 76
2.45
1.15
2.39
2.52
O.ft67
2.35
0.47
. 30.8
3.59
1.74
5.78
0.187
18.1
ND
0.248
2.7
ND
ND
MO
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
64
23.1
56.8
94.9
l.ll
ND
2.36 .
741
«E AH
NO
ND
O.I
4.1
5.37
1.3
.HI
.77
.68
.77
0.431
1?
?.l?
0.44?
5.7?
0.187
73."
0.10?
NO
?."3
.0648
1.53
t.373
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
64.5
43.9
75.3
74.1
1.44
.0379
4.1
76?
i (oi* r
06/77/R4
P-19
SURFACE
(.0147,
( 7.4,
I ?.(,«,,
* 7.19,
» 0.799.
( I.?'..
(0.294,
(0.<9r.
(0.781 ,
( ?.(•?.
(0.755.
«.065 ,
( 4.?9,
(0.106,
( 9.05,
«.1?4,
( 1.71.
K0.07.
(0.709,
«.23?«
( 47.6.
( 28.4,
( 51.4.
( 47.7,
(0.5??.
«.P07.
(0.197.
( 198,
.1.)
0. M6>
5.11)
8.1R)
70.3)
1 ,M>
6.79)
1.07)
1 .1? )
O.*8l>
21.3)
3.4(0
0.94°)
6.151
O.?6»l
3ft. fl)
0.377)
4.|5>
0.15)
7.35)
0.87ft)
81. 5)
59.31
9°. 3)
1001
7.351
0.106)
S)
37M
NITE: MG/L is EQUIVALENT TO ppn ISSUHING A DENSITY OF i OH/ML.
-------
TABLE 2-20. COMPARISON OF MEASURED EMISSION RATES AND LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS FOR P-19 SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENT (06/20/8/0
N>
I
to
oo
COMPOUND
lt3-BUTADIENE
ACRYLOVITMLE '
BEN7ENC
TOLUENE
ETHYL6EN2ENC
P-«YLENE/N-»YLENE
STYRENE
0-«YLENE
ISOPROPYL6ENZENE
N-PRQPYLBEN7ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOR04ETHANE
VINTL CHLORIDE
Itl-DICHLOROETHYlENE
NETHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
1> 1 tl -IRICHLOROEIHANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
1.2-OICHLOROPROPANE
TEfRACHLOROCTHYLCNC
CHLOROBEN2ENE
P-OICHLOROBEN7ENE
Itl-DICHLORPETHANE
BENZYL CHCORIOE
lt2-OIBROriOE THANE
2-CHLORO-lf3-8UTAOICNE
TRICHLORETHYLENE
EPICHLOROHVORIN
111 • 2i2-TETI>ACHLOROr.THANE
J-CMLORO-1-PROPENE
ACETALOEHTDE
HETMYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PR1PYLENE 0»IOE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL AROHATICS
TOTAL HALOGENATED HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VIC
TOTAL NNHC
6MO
ER
IU5/N2-SEC)
ND
NO
.0337
1.53
0.464
1.60
ND
(.498
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
11.8
I. 19
25.6
ND
NO
2.98
ND
0.312
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
6.39
1.14
5.T2
52.4
1.13
NO
.0632
6t.7
6 CRIO 17 EMISSION RATE LIQUID CONC GRID 24
MG/L) «U6/H2-SEC) 3.SF,) 72 1.6?
NO ND ND ND ND
4.03 .8094 13.5 .8318 < ND .0.116,) 8.5 « in . 77.1) NO 6. ft
26B 2.59 293 79 < ND • 451) 322 ( ID t Al?) 393 752
NOTE: NG/L is EQUIVALENT TO PPN ASSUMING A DENSITY or i GH/NL.
-------
TABLE 2-21. COMPARISON OF MEASURED EMISSION RATES AND LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS FOR P-19 SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
K)
VO
• RID 4
CR
CONP9UNO • IU4/Hl-tCC>
1,1-SUIIDUNC
tCRIlOIIIIRIlC
•CN((NC
lOLUCNt
CIMfLDCNlrNC
P-mtNC/N-IILCNC
limnC
0-1 fL INF.
ISOPROPfLi.CNir.Nt
N-PROPtLBCNUNC
NtPHIHAltNt
CNLORONrtHINt
»INIl CHLOMDC
1,1-OICMDROCfMtLCNC
NCIHTLCNC CHLORIOC
CHLOROFORN
• •1,1-tRiCMioiiotiwRNt
C4RBDN ItlRACHLORIOC
t.l-OICHLOROPROr«*E
TCtmCHLOROCtntlCNC
CHLDNOOCNICNC
P-OICHLOROBCNZtNC
1,1-OICHLOROCfHINC
•CNm CHLORIOt
l,2-OIBRONOrtM4Nt
t-CHlOIO-l.3-BUI40IF.Nr
IMCHLORCINflCNC
CPICHLOROHfORIN
1,1 ,2«2-l CIRtCHLOROtlHtNC
l-CKLO*0-l-P*OPfNt
ICtMLOCHfDC
HC?H»l ACCIMC
4CROLCIN
PDOPfLCNC (RIOC
PARAFFINS
OICFINS
IOI4L 4RON4IICS
TOIAL MILOSCN«ltO HC
TOI4L IIItCNMCO NC
SULFUR SPCCU*
UNIOCNIIFICO »OC
IO?4L NKHC
NO
NO
(.141
7.44
1.1*
II.?
NO
1.2*
NO
NO
ND
NO
(.134
.•211
14.2
2.»t
31.1
NO
NO
».»•
.•25?
(.413
(.23
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
44.2
14.4
14.1
123
3.42
NO
(.!(»
21*
(RIO ?
CONC CR
INB/LI. lUS/HI-SCO
ND
NO
NO
1.14
2.*1
».(«
1.24
1.12
(.471
1.42
• .32*
3.44
(.747
• .234
1.**
• .1*4
14. «
(.444
ND
2.41
.•2**
(.(!(
.*•!?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
72.3
2*.*
7*. I
51.2
1.51
• .222
11.5
234
NO
NO
(.112
t.l!
2.71
K.I
NO
!.*«
NO
NO
ND
ND
(.142
NO
21. t
1.12
1*.4
NO
NO
«.((
.•••4
(.32?
• .23
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
41.*
K.I
2*. 3
74. 4
4.*2
NO
(.!«?
IS*
•RIO 11
CONC CR
INC/LI IU4/KI-SCCI
NO
NO
NO
1.1?
3.11
4.*?
1.3
2.((
(.44*
1.2
1.31
7.7
2.14
NO
3.11
• .111
12.1
NO
NO
2.1
NO
1.41
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
41.1
4(.l
?2
32.*
• .4*1
NO
2.*
217
NO
NO
• .133
• .13
4.1*
19.3
NO
4.1*
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
14.1
1.41
41.1
ND
ND
12.2
.*«•!
1.41
•.425
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
It.l
l«
44.*
13?
S.41
NO
NO
!••
CONC
1 ItO/ll
ND
ND
NO
1.1*
1.2*
K.7
NO
1.15
NO
1.772
*.«74
1.27
1.52
!.((
1.41
(.111
1*
ND
ID
1.2?
• .141
2.5?
.•21*
ND
ND
ND
NO
Nl
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
47.7
41.*
72.5
55.1
4.111
NO
*.*•!
241
CNIStlON R4H
IUC/N2-SCCI
MEAN
(.1*2 1
ll.l 1
5.51 1
11.1 1
5.54 1
.•142 1
•.212 1
.••t? 1
15 1
2.31 «
3*.l 1
• .24 1
.•21* 1
».?*« <
(.411 t
112
11.2
34.1
124
4.(1
.(711 «
11* 1
I*S« C.I.I
NO •1.4121
NO • 24.21
NO t 13. (1
NO . 31.71
NO • 13.31
ND » (.21
NO • l.?ll
NO .(.(141
M.I. 33.41
1.33, 3.4?|
22. *• 77. (1
2.T2, 11.71
•0 ,.*4(fl
.(132, 1.351
ND , !.(»
NO 14*1
NO 44.11
ND 1421
••.1 l«l»
l.ll 11.11
ND .(.lilt
NO • 7141
LIQUID COKC
IRS/LI
BHII
.(1*1
4.2*
5.1
13.3
(.?«(
4.14
(.431
1.14
(.4*3
4. (4
1.42
(.3(1
4.15
(.21
11.1
(.2
1.14
(.1(1
1.17
.((«»
71.3
44.1
14.4
43.2
(.134
.(44?
5.41
2?S
1*11 C.I.I IU
NO (.1121
10
NO
-------
TABLE 2-22. SUMMARY OF CALCULATED MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT VALUES (M/SEC) FOR P-19
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/20/8/4)
to
OJ
o
COMPOUND
lt3-8UTADIENE
ACRYLONITRUE 1
RE'IZCNE
TOLUENE
CTHVLBENZENE
P-XYLENE/M-XYIENE
STYRENE
0-XYLENE
ISOPRQPYLBENZCNC
N-PR3PVLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOROMETIIANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
Itl-OICHLOROETHYlENF
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
Ifl tl-TRIOHLOROETHANE
CARBON TtTRACHLORlOE
1.2-DICHIOROPROPANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENF
CHLOR08ENZENE
P-OICHLnROBfNZENE
1,1-OICHLOROETHANE
BENZYL CHCORIDE
I.Z-OIBRONOTTHANE
2-CHLOROMr3-tUTAOIENE
TRICHLORETHVLENE
FPICHLOROHYflRlN
ltlt?t2-TFTRACHLOROETMANE
3-CHCnRO-i-PROPENE
ACETCLOEHIOE
METHYL ACETATE
AC* Ott IN
PROPYLENE OXIOE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL AROMATICS
TOTAK HAL86CNATED HC
TOTAL OXYCENATEO HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIOENTIFIKD VOC
TOM* NMHC
..„--., ..
GRID 6
NO
NO
UE-8
24E-8
15F-*
Mt -8
NO
UE-8
NT)
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
29E-7
• 9E-T
IRF-7
NO
ND
21E-T
ND
2 IE "8
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
m-9
3QE-9
IE-6
UE-8
ND
I6E-9
2«-S
6RIO 17
ND
NO
*E-9
I3E-9
9E-9
1IE-9
NO
I2E-9
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
T8E-9
22E-B
71E-9
ND
NO
3 BE -9
NO
SE-9
NO
.NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
13E-9
3E-9
3E-*
23E-9
ND
NO
7E-IO
IBE-9
Nifsrm *.ui r r n i im 3 m/5
GRID 2*
ND
NO
13E-B
35E-8
24E-8
22E-8
NO
24E-8
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
48E-8
76E-B
R8E-B
NO
NO
I3E-T
24E-9
R6EM
96E-9
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
1BE-T
T3E-8
22E-8
99C-8
13E-t
ND
ND
52E-8
t
B7E-9
UE-8
99E-*
1IE-I
10E-8
13E-
32E-
90E-
1IE-
24F*>
ZOE-
96E-
I8E-B
UE-8
S3E-9
92E-B
33E-7
»E-9
ME-B
nciN iv
IETHOD 1
<-!E-7»3IE-8»
1-2E-7.33E-HJ
C-2E-7t33E-R»
< -2E-7 ,3it-«>
l-2E-7«3dE-RI
«-3E-8«3«E-7>
I-TE-S.13E-SI
«-!E-«,33E-T»
l-2E-Ct<8E-7>
«-SE-7,10E-7>
«-BE-7.12E-7»
I-6E-7*82E-R>
I-IC-7«?6E-R>
I-^F-I ,19E-7»
(-3E-7.7IE-8I
31 C.I
63E-»
25E-"
IAE-P
17E-K
t TE-A
»8E-8
12E-7
89E-8
IBE-T
21E-*
23E-»
9SE-9
2tE^
B*E~
TTE-
32E-
37E-
«£-•
2*1-*
.1
METHOD 7
•
<-3E-7,«OE-8»
C-IC-6.I8E-7I
I-9C-7.12E-7)
<-IE-(il3E-7l
1 -IE-6. 1 3E-T)
«-5E-6t39E-T»
(-9E-6.1IE-6)
l-*E-ft t*2E-7l
I-5E-S.&7E-7)
1 -1E-6»I*E-7I
l'lC-EtlSE-71
C-«E-TtSOE-8>
t-'*E-7»51E-*>
I-2E-6.33E-7I
•-1E-6, I5E-7I
ND - CONPOUNO WAS NOT DETECTED IN EITHER THE AMBIENT SAMPLE OR THE tlOUtO SAMPLE.
-------
TABLE 2-23. SUMMARY OF CALCULATED MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT VALUES (M/SEC) FOR P-19
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
N>
I
OJ
COMPOUND
1,3-BUTAOJENE
ACRYLONITRIIE
DE'IZENE |
TOLUENE
F.THYLBSNZCNE
P-XYLENE/N-XYLENE
STYRENE
•J-XYLEVE
ISOPROPYL8ENZENE
N-PROPVL9CNZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLORONETHANE
VINTU CHLORIDE
1 • 1 -Of CHL n*0t THYLENE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
l»Itl-TRICHL OR OE THANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
1«2-OICHLOR.OPROPANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
CHLOROBENZFNE
P-0 1CHLOROBENZENE
Itl-OICHLOROETHANE
BEN7TL CHtnRIDE
1,2-ilBROMOETHANE
2-CHtORO-lt3-BUTAilENE
TAICHtQRETHVLENE
EPICHLORtlHYORIN
Itl t2i2-TETRACHLOROETHANC
3-CHLORO-l-PROPENE
ACETAIOEHYOE
METHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPYLENE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL ARONATICS
TOTAL HALOGENATEO MC
TOTAL 9XYSENATEO HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNI DENT IF IEO VOC
TOTAL NNHC
•RID *
NO
NO
NO
23E-T
11E-7
12E-T
NO
10E-7
NO
NO
NO
NO
20E-8
91E-9
91E-T
l«E-6
•2F-T
NO
ND
I7E-T
B6F-8
75F-8
STE-6
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
tlE-B
49C-B
«3E-8
2IE-7
36F-7
NO
8E-9
R6E-"
•-- n«aa
GRID 7
NO
NO
NO
HE -7
46E-B
23E-7
NO
ME-7
ND
NO
ND
NO
»2£-9
NO
9(C-7
13E-*
23E-7
ND
NO
2IE-T
ND
37E-B
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
HO
NO
ND
91E-B
23E-8
4IE-H
1«E-T
39E-1
ND
33E-9
T3E-B
HftPiann l>\
GRID 17
ND
NO
NO
2&C-T
I3E-7
ME-7
NO
13E-7
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
I8E-6
19E-6
36C-T
NO
ND
5TE-T
23E-8
33E-B
22E-6
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
HE-1
32E-8
62E-8
2BE-7
30E-*
ND
NO
I3E-T
iLrr in inn in'siii
GRID 24
ND
NO
39E-7
27E-7
ME-7
I3E-T
NO
13E-T
94E-8
NO
ND
NO
43E-C
NO
98E-7
9«E-T
I1E-7
ND
NO
13E-7
NO
79E-9
3RE-7
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
36E-7
93E-8
1IE-T
I2E-T
SRE-T
ND
ND
l*E-f
f
33E-
23E-
1E-
I6E-
I2E-
9«E-
I8C-8
91E-9
• «E-I
14E-&
29E-?
27E-7
99E-8
9»E-»
37E-*
13E-7
38E-9
36E-8
20E-7
18E-*
38E-9
18E-7
ni»M 19
IETHOO 1
MTE-7t29E-7l
«3«E-8tlTE-7»
(66E-8.26E-7I
1 10E-7 t!3E-7»
<>lE-7t92E-8l
«9E-'t 12E-CI
(78E-7tl9E-&l
«l«E-7t«JE-7>
»12E-7,42E-T>
I1(E-R«89E-B>
I-3E-S.. 00911
(<-
II7E-8»9E-8
72E-7
I4E-7
39E-B
62E-8
I9E-T
HE-7
HE-9
1IE-7
1
IflHOD t
I-2E-6.66E-7I
1 -!E-6«^3E-7>
• -2C-R tME-TI
<-2E-6«ME-T>
(-3E-7t^6E-8>
(23E-7tl9E-«>
<-]E-6
l-SE-8t33E-TI
f-3E-7»3«E-T»
»-2E-7»99E-8>
l-*E-3 t??E-ft >
l-«2E-6t33E-7>
l-3E-7tITE*T>
C-?iC-7,17E-TI
C21?-B.3tE-7l
l-»E-6tl7E-S>
•-SE-7.2RE-7*
NO - CONPOUNO WAS NOT DETECTED IN EITHER THE AH8IENI SAMPLE OR THE IICUID SAMPLE.
-------
sampling and analytical methods (i.e., flux chamber and liquid samples).
The physical reasonableness of the values for the individual compound mass
transfer coefficients would imply that there is no large bias for the mea-
surements of the specific compounds.
During the flux chamber measurements at the P-19 surface impoundment, a
cursory investigation was made on the effect of sweep air flow rate on the
measured mass emission rate. The flux chamber sweep air flow rate is nor-
mally operated at 5 1pm. During these tests, runs were made at 3, 5, 10,
and 15 1pm. Results of these runs are summarized in Table 2-24. The
increased sweep air flow rate does appear to have an effect on the measured
emission rate. At this time, it is not known if the increase in measured
emission rate is due to lowered air phase concentrations or increased liquid
phase surface agitation. The effect of these changes in measured emission
rates on the implied mass transfer coefficients is summarized in Table 2-25.
It should also be noted that during the flux chamber measurements at
P-19, an additional 100' of sampling line was required to reach the sampling
locations from the shore. Under normal conditions, the flux chamber has
been operated with 10 feet of sampling line. Recovery tests performed with
methane on the flux chamber configured for the P-19 tests resulted in lower
than normal recoveries (see Appendix G). Experience has shown that recover-
ies are generally >90Z for the typical system configuration. With the
additional sampling line in place, recoveries of 702 were obtained. These
losses can probably be attributed to interactions between the organics and
the walls of the sampling line. Based upon this information, the emission
rates measured at P-19 may be biased low.
A liquid phase material balance was made at P-19 on June 20 over an 8.5
hour period in order to calculate volatile losses from the pond. Table 2-26
summarizes the data used for the material balance. An evaporation rate of
439,000 gal/mon/acre was calculated based upon this information. This is
significantly greater than the 220,000 gal/mon/acre reported by the facil-
ity. A second water balance calculation was made for a 24-hour period. The
2-32
-------
TABLE 2-24. EFFECT OF FLUX CHAMBER SWEEP AIR FLOW RATE ON MEASURED MASS EMISSION
RATES (KG/DAY) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
tsJ
U>
] SAH»Lt 10
1 location
riou RAIT
COMPOUND | CNISSION RATE
1.
1,3-BUTADJENE
ACRVLONITRIIE
BCUZENE
TOLUCNC
ETHTLP.ENZENE
P-IYtENE/N-XTLCNE
STYRCNE
O-XUENE
ISOPKOPUBENZENC
N-PROPTLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOROHETMANE
VINTt CHLORIDE
1.1-OlCMLOaoCTHTlENC
NETHUENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORH
l.ltl-TRICHLO'OttNAlE
CARBON TCTMCHLORIOr
lt2-OICfn.OROPROPANt
TETRACHC3ROCTHVLENC
CHLOR9BENZENE
p-niCHLOR-oBENZENE
lil-OICHLOROETHANE
BENZYL CHLORIDE >
lt2-OIBRONOETHANE
2-CHCORO-lt3-BUTAOIENE
TRICHtORETHVLENE
CPICNLOROHTDRIN
l.l,Jt?-ltT»*CHLOROttH»NE
S-CHIORO-I-MOPENE
ACETUDEHVOE
HCTMTL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPTLCNE OXIDE
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL ARONATICS
TOTAL HAIOSCNATEO HC
TOTAL IXTGfNATCD HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
•-•36
GRID 2*
3 LPH
IKO/DATI
NO
ND
1.242
II J6
7.80
25.1
NO
T.9I
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
3». I
1.91
41.1
ND
NO
a. 3
ND
•.fit
liB6
NO .
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
Ml
19. T
*•
126
S.TT
ND
NO
A-133
6*10 24
3 IPH
IK0/OAV >
ND
NO
• .249
16.3
»r
35. S
ND
IB.T
• .148
ND
NO
ND
• .493
NO
32.2
1.48
23.2
ND
NO
3.5
NO
• .19*
1.23
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
238
29.9
9T
HT.8
7.62
NO
ND
A-834
6RIO 24
10 LPH
fKB/OAVt
NO
NO
8.T72
21.4
13.3
32.2
NO
13.3
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
26.2
•.738
22. M
ND
ND
4.TI
ND
•.139
0.699
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
371
49.8
139
74.3
6.32
ND
NO
A-133
SAID 24
13 IP*
(KB/DAT!
ND
NO
• .31
17
12.9
40.3
NO
12.3
NO
NO
NO
0.»J3»
NO
NO
ST. 9
9.23
59.9
NO
NO
14.3
•••993
• ^323
>.64
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
,NO
318
9f.2
ito
189
14
ND
NO
TOTAL NNHC
393
47)
631
647
-------
N>
CO
TABLE 2-25. EFFECT OF FLUX CHAMBER SWEEP AIR FLOW RATE ON MEASURED MASS TRANSFER
COEFFICIENT VALUES (M/SEC) FOR P-19 SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT (06/22/84)
I
| FlOU MATE
COMPOUND 1 MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT
_ 1 ._
1,3-flUTADICNE
ACRYLONtTRJLE
BENZENE
TOLUENE
TTMYLPENZCNF
P-XYLENE/M-XYLFNE
STYRcNE
0-XYLENC
ISOPROPYLBENZFNE
N-PROPYLBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLORO'IETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
Itl-OICMLOROETHYLtNE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
1,1,1-IRICHlOBOt THANE
CARBON TFTRACHIORIDE
1^2-DICPLOROPROPANC
TETMACHLOROETHVLENE
CHLOROBENJENE
P-OICHLOROBENZENE
I,I-OICHLOHOETH»NE
BEN2YL CHLORIDE
1«?-OIBRO«OFTHANE
?-CHLORO-lt3-BUTADIFNE
TRICHLORETHYLENE
EPICMIOROMYDRIN
l»lt2<2-TETRACHLOKOFTHANE
3-CHLORO-I-PRO"ENE
ACETALDEHYOE
HfTHYl ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PROPYLtNE OXIDE
PIRIFMNS
OLEFINS
TDTAL AROIUTICS
TOTAL HALOGENATED HC
TOTtL OXY6CNATEO HC
SULFUR SPEC IF S
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
TOTAL NHHC
3 LPM
IN/SEC)
HO
NO
29E-T
I«»E-T
98E-8
9IE-8
NO
93E-«
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
lit -6
TOE-T
IBC-T
ND
ND
I9E-7
NO
S*E-9
5TE-T
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ZSE-7
35E-8
T5F-R
I7F-T
31f-7
ND
NO
HE-7
5 LPH
IN/SECI
NO
NO
35E-I
JTE-T
I«E-T
I3E-7
NO
13E-T
9«E-8
ND
ND
ND
«SE-8
ND
90E-T
S*E-T
1IE-T
ND
NO
I3E-T
NO
T9E-9
38E-T
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
36E-7
53E-8
IIE-7
IZE-T
58E-T
NO
NO
I6E-7
l« LPN
IM/SEO
NO
NO
93E-7
3SE-7
I9E-7
I9C-7
ND
19E-7
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
73E-7
J7E-7
I8E-7
NO
NO
llt-7
ND
63E-9
Zlt-T
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
5JE-7
S2E-8
I5E-7
10E-7
64E-7
NO
ND
JZE-7
15 IPN
in/sco
NO
NO
S7E-7
78E-T
UE-7
I5E-7
ND
15E-7
ND
ND
NO
6E-9
NO
NO
ltl-t
12E-6
Z7E-7
NO
NO
33E-7
43E-8
2IE-8
8IE-7
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
«5E-7
3«r-e
12E-7
26E-7
12C-6
NO
ND
2?E-7
ND - COMPOUND HAS NOT OETECTFD IN EITHER THC ANBIFNT SAMPLE OR THE tlOUID SAMPLE.
-------
TABLE 2-26. SUMMARY OF INPUT VALUES FOR P-19 MATERIAL BALANCE
Variable
Value
Comments
Input volume from
truck dumping
Input concentration
Initial volume of
pond
15,360 gallons ±10Z
(see Table 2-26)
2,925,000 gallons ±25%
Initial concentration (see Table 2-26)
Final volume of pond 2,931,039 gallons ±252
Final concentration
Elapsed time
(see Table 2-26)
8.5 hours +52
Company records
Assumed as maximum
concentration measured
in pond
Assumed as 75Z of
rated capacity of pond
Average measured
concentration
Calculated from a
measured rise in pond
level of 1/8"
Measured
2-35
-------
result (256,000 gal/mon/acre) over this period of time was in closer agree-
ment with the value reported by the facility. Liquid samples were only
obtained for the 8.5 hour period, restricting the emission rate calculations
to this time frame. Table 2-27 presents the liquid concentration data for
the material balance, and the calculated emission rates. The mean emission
rate and 95Z confidence intervals were calculated based on 100 calculations
of the emission rate, allowing the values of the input data to vary within
their stated variability. The results of the material balance are greater
than the emission rates measured using the flux chamber. However, the
variability of the material balance results is quite large.
A set of upwind-downwind ambient air samples were collected (canisters)
in an attempt to observe the impact that the P-19 emissions had on the air
quality in the vicinity. Results of these analyses are presented in Table
2-28. Many of the compounds present in the pond were not detected in the
ambient air samples. Additionally, the two downwind samples were not con-
sistent and the upwind concentrations typically were greater than one or
both downwind samples.
2.4 DRUM STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA
A survey of the drum storage and handling area was made during the
morning (0900-1100 FST) of June 22. During this period, no specific activ-
ity was taking place in the area. Ambient hydrocarbon measurements were
made in the immediate vicinity of storage areas using a portable organic
vapor analyzer (OVA). The results of this survey are shown in Table 2-29.
2.5 MISCELLANEOUS SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
Liquid samples were obtained from various surface impoundments within
the facility other than P-19. While these samples may not necessarily be
representative of the individual impoundments as a whole, they can be used
as an indication of the composition. Table 2-30 lists the results for each
of the samples, in order that the samples may be compared easily. It should
2-36
-------
TABLE 2-27. SUMMARY OF LIQUID CONCENTRATIONS AND RESULTS OF THE P-19 MATERIAL BALANCE
(06/20/84)
K>
CO
CONIOUMI
Itl-BUItOICNC
tCHTLONHIIILC
HCNitNC i
TOLUCNC
ClrtflKNtrNt
IITUCNC
0-ITlflt
Nr
2-CML1HO-I .3-BUtlOlt«C
CPICHLOHOHTOIIIN
I.I ,2t2-ICI>«CHLO*OtlH
-------
TABLE 2-28. SUMMARY OF UPWIND-DOWNWIND AMBIENT CONCENTRATIONS (pg/m3) AROUND P-19
K)
CO
00
COMPOUND
SAMPLE ID
DATE
LOCATION
CONCENTRATION
lt3-BUTAOIENE
ACRYLOrilTRILE
HEN2ENC '
TOtUCNC
FTHYL8EN7ENF
P-»YIE*E/H-»YLENE
STVRENE
Q-IYLENE
ISOPROrrLBENZENE
N-PROPYLBEN7ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLORORETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
1
1)6/20/84
OOMNUIND P-19
IUG/1..3)
ND
NO
6.4
21.6
8.1
8.5
NO
ND
NO
NO
12.2
NO
NO
ND
792. 0
ND
606.0
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
841.0
20.7
86.2
1600.0
435.0
NO
39.5
2590.0
A-011
06/20/84
DOWNWIND P-19
ND
•iO
5.6
19.7
7.9
28.3
ND
9.2
ND
NO
4.5
'ID
7.1
NO
• 73.6
ND
108.0
34.6
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
198.0
31.0
121.0
273.0
647.0
ND
24.3
646.0
-------
TABLE 2-29. SUMMARY OF DRUM STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA SURVEY
Area
Total Hydrocarbons
(ppm)
Continents
Vicinity of tank
storage
Drum storage area
Drum transfer
area
PCB building
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
220 empty drums; all open;
in good condition
600 empty drums; all open;
in good condition
no
decantat ion in progress
70 drums; 32 empty; all in
good condition
2-39
-------
TABLE 2-30. SUMMARY OF MEASURED CONCENTRATIONS (MC/L) FOR LIQUID SAMPLES FROM VARIOUS
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS (06/20/8A)
to
SAMPLE ID
LOCATION
COMPOUND CONCENTRATION
1,3 -BUTADIENE
ACRVL01MKILE
etmt.ui
TOLUENE
ETHYLBEN2ENE
P-XYLENE/N-XYLENE
STYHENE
0-XYLENE
ISOPftOPVLBENZENE
N-PROPYLBEN/ENE
NAPHTHALENE
CHLOROMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
Itl-DICHLOAOFTHVLCNE
METMYLENE CHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
Itltl-IRICHLOMOEIHANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
li2-OICHLOROPROPAN£
TETRACHLlROrTHYLlNE
CHLORO^rNZENF
P-niCNLO«OBr.N7ENE
1,1-OICHlOROETHANE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
1,2-DIBROHOrtHANE
2-CNLO«.n-lt3-'»UTADIENE
TRICHLORETHYLENE
roitMLOROHYORIN
1.1 ,2t2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
3-CHLORO-I-PROPENE
ACETALDEHYOE
HETHYL ACETATE
ACROLEIN
PRHPYLENE OXIDC
PARAFFINS
OLEFINS
TOTAL AfcONATlCS
TOTAL HALOGENATEO HC
TOTAL OXYGENATED HC
SULFUR SPECIES
UNIDENTIFIED VOC
T9TAL MMHC
EPA-l-001
P-12
(KG /LI
NO
ND
9.11?
8.176
• .253
0.646
O.1 13
o.?s
ND
NO
0.124
0.964
•. T66
ND
9.06
0.053T
T.06
ND
ND
0.443
0.0246
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
4.73
0.147
3.53
26.7
1.35
ND
0.601
35.6
EPA-l-002
P-12
ING/LI
NO
NO
0.142
0.74
0.207
0.722
0.06B
0.785
NO
NO
0.541
4.6?
0.292
ND
16
0.0076
NO
ND
ND
0.554
0.0938
NO
0.0235
NO
NO
SO
NO
NO
NO
10
ND
ND
NO
NO
2.1*
0.6*6
3.4|
2*. 7
1.96
ND
6.5S
41 .A
EPA-L-003
P-14
ING /I I
ND
NO
0.0022
0.762
3.36
12. »
NO
3.71
O.SS5
ND
0.493
2.83
0.6*2
NO
1.12
0.0209
0.0945
NO
0.0439
0.22*.
0.119
2.03
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
VO
NO
NO
30.8
19
113
17.9
0.405
NO
0.446
IRI
EPA-L-004
P-18
(NC'LI
NO
NO
0.257
NO
0.16
0.0401
0.0654
fO
NO
NO
0*139
NO
0.794
W
0.695
0.0290
NO
NO
NO
0.0829
ND
NO
ND
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.52
1.08
0.67
4
«.K9
NO
0.407
14.7
EPA-l-005
P-IB
116'LI
NO
NO
NO
1790
1040
1190
NO
489
725
NO
190
NO
10
NO
NO
NO
203
NO
ND
46.9
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
10
29000
16400
13300
5250
1140
NO
2950
66900
EPA-l-006
P-19
(HG/LI
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.0595
MO
NO
0.0179
0.0966
0.03D5
NO
0.0995
NO
2.13
NO
0.0267
NO
ND
0.112
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
3.64
0.692
3.R7
7.34
NO
ND
O.?<)|
15. S
NOTE: HG/L IS EQUIVALENT TO PPM ASSUMING A DENSITY IF 1 GM/ML.
-------
be noted that P-18 had an oily layer on the top of the pond. Sample EPA-L-
005 was primarily the oil, while EPA-L-004 was the aqueous layer. All other
pond samples were aqueous.
2-41
-------
SECTION 3
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
3-1
-------
SECTION 3.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The following section details the treatment, storage, and disposal
operations observed during the June 1984 testing program at the Kettleman
Kills facility. Each operation type is discussed separately. A general plot
plan of the facility is shown in Figure 3-1.
3.1 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
3.1.1 Landfills
Free liquids are not accepted for disposal to the landfills. Any
containers containing free liquids are solidified prior to disposal. The
landfills accept bulk waste solids and containerized solids. Empty drums are
crushed prior to burial.
Containerized solid wastes are transported to the facility in sealed
containers and unloaded directly into the assigned burial area. Containers of
previously examined and tested compatible wastes are placed upright in the
landfill disposal areas and covered with soil. Bulk solid wastes are placed
in layers in the landfill, compacted, and covered daily with soil. Subsequent
layers of solid wastes and soil cover, sloped for drainage, are added until
the final landfill configuration is achieved.
To date, none of the landfills have been closed. Completed landfills have
a 3 foot native clay cover. Active landfills have approximately 1 foot of
native clay between lifts, and 6 inches of loose cover applied daily. The
landfill areas have no leachate collection systems and no gas ventilation
systems.
3-1
-------
A.
NCF.TH
Cer.-rsi Prccsssinc
Arss
Solidif icacic
Aria
Tigura 3-1. Plot Plan of C-"I Facility
3-2
-------
Current landfill activities at the site involve operations at B-9, B-13,
and 5-15. The B-9 expansion is operational and encompasses B-8 through B-ll,
or approximately 38 acres. B-17, the largest landfill (about 41.6 acres) vill
not be under construction until after 1986. The active landfill (B-9) is
utilized to dispose of bulk solids, empty containers, containerized reactive
and high pK materials, Hydroxide filter cake, and contaminated soil. It is
covered daily with 2 or 3 feet of soil. The inactive landfill (B-6) was
completed in 1982 and has a surface area of approximately three acres. The
wasie types disposed of at this site icluded containerized waste solvents,
sludges, and toxics.
Landfills are the only units at the CWM facility that undergo partial
closure as they are filled. The remaining waste management units are designed
to be in service for the life of the facility.
3.1.2 Surface Impoundments
A summary of the surface impoundments at CWM is provided in Tables 3-1 and
3-2. The surface impoundments accept bulk liquid wastes (less than 5 percent
orgar.ics) with minimal solids. Non-RCRA drilling muds are accepted in one
area (MP-1). Ponds which receive heavy metals are cleaned out on a yearly
basis and the sludge disposed in the landfill area. The ponds average 8 feet
in depth, and have a nominal 2 feet of freeboard. There is daily activity at
most of the ponds.
At the CWM facility, shallow surface impoundments are used as a waste
treatment method for volume reduction via solar evaporation. Because of
potential air emissions, solar evaporation is limited to non-volatile wastes.
These basins are sloped so that any free water flows away from the area where
sludges are dumped by truck.
3.1.3 Drum Handling and Storage Activities
All wastes that are stored at the facility are received in bulk, 55 gallon
drums, 5 gallon pails or carboys. Wastes are stored in drums or tanks.
Typical wastes stored at the facility include pesticides, PCBs, wood
preservatives, and miscellaneous organics.
3-3
-------
TABLE 3-1. SUMMARY OF CWM SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
Surface
Designation Waste Types Area (Ac)
P-la
P-2a
•D-2&
P.Aa
P-6
P-7
P-8
P-9
P-10
P-ll
P-12
P-13
Waste Sulfonation Tars
Waste Sulfonation .Tars
Waste Sulfonation Tars
Refinery waste materials
Waste Acids
Waste Acids
Waste Acids
Scrubber waste, Brines
Dilute pesticide waste
high pH liquids
Same as P-10
High pH liquids, Brines
0.28
0.28
0.27
0.34
0.28
0.19
0.14
1.90
0.70
0.70
2.6
Capacity
(gals)
460,000
460,000
iiQ.OOO
550,000
275,000
190,000
140,000
4,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
7,000,000
6,300,000
alndicates inactive facility-excavated and buried in B-15
NOTE: All impoundments (ponds) receive only bulk liquid waste materials
containing minimal solids. Listed capacity is at the 2-foot freeboard
level.
3-4
-------
TABLE 3-2 SUMMARY OF CWM SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
Surface
Impoundments Surface Capacity
Nur.ber Area (acres) (gals) Comments
P-l to 4 - - Eliminated by excavation
of B-9
P-5 - - Closed prior to November
19, 1980
P-6 to 8 0.6 0 Scheduled for closure
(No wastes after 1/26/83)
P-9 1.9 4,000,000 Active
P-10 0.7 1,000,000 Active
P-ll 0.7 1,000,000 Active
P-12 2.6 7,000,000 Active
P-13 2.4 6,500,000 Active
MP-1 0.6 98,000 Non-Regulated
P-14 1.1 2,200,000 Under construction
P-15 1.8 5,200,000 Active
F-16 1.6 4,700,000 Active
P-17 0.9 1,300,000 To be improved
P-18 3.0 3,300,000 Active
P-19 1.8 3,900,000 Active
P-20 1.4 2,900,000 Under construction
P-21 1.4 2,900,000 Under construction
P-22 2.9 6,300,000 Proposed
P-23 4.2 9,600,000 Proposed
P-24 2.5 5,500,000 Proposed
P-25 4.4 9,800,000 Proposed
P-26 1.2 3,000,000 Proposed
P-27 1.3 3,000,000 Proposed
P-28 2.9 6,000,000 Proposed
3-5
-------
The drum marshalling area (B-13F) is situated near the wastes processing
area. Bermed embankments surround the staging area. All drums are off-loaded
into this area. Here, they are opened and sampled to determine the proper
processing. • The drums containing free liquids are then selected for
decanting. Puiapable organics are sent to the surge tanks and separation
tanks for physical separation of phases. Chlorinated organics are solidified
and then landfilled. Supplemental fuels are sent to the fuel tanks for
storage and testing prior to being hauled off-site. Nonchlorinated,
nonignitable aqueous organic wastes are sent to the aqueous organic tank.
Sludges from the decanting operation are solidified with the non-RCRA kiln
dust and landfilled. During the site visit the drum handling area contained
220 open drums. Turnaround time for the drum handling area is approximately
3 days.
3.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
CWM receives various hazardous wastes from the petroleum, agricultural
products, electronics, wood and paper, and chemical industries which are
ultimately disposed of via landfill. Table 3-3 describes the waste materials
handled at Landfill B-9 and Pond P-19 on June 18, 20, and 21, 1984.
3.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA
The meteorological data recorded by the California Air Resources Board
(CARS) at the Kettleman Hills facility on June 20, 1984 is presented in
Table 3-4. This information was collected at pond P-19 and has been
summarized from the strip chart recordings provided by CARB.
Table 3-5 provides additional meteorological information as compiled on
site at the CWM facility in Kettleman Hills, California during the period of
June 18 through 22, 1984.
3-6
-------
TABLE 3-3. WASTE MATERIAL HANDLED AT LANDFILL B-9 AND POND P-19
JUNE 18, 20, AND 21, 1584
TSD
Landfill B-9
*
Waste Description
Grease- ink-glue- trichioroe thane
Thiocarbaciates
Contaminated soil
Baghouse wastes
Filter cake
Empty bottles
Off-specification production
Fertilizer floor sweep
Ouantitv Received
5000 gal
110 bbl
55 cu. yd.
47 cu. yd.
^-6 cu. vd.
41 cu. yd.
40 cu. yd.
20 cu. yd.
Pond P-19 Oily wastewater
Metal contaminated wastevater
Dibutyl phthallate
Metal contaminated solvent
Flyash
Phenols
Sodium fluobate
Alkaline vastewater
25360 gal
17300 gal
10000 gal
9000 gal
5040 gal
4500 gal
4500 gal
2100 gal
3-7
-------
TABLE 3-4. METEOROLOGICAL DATA RECORDED AT p-19 BY THE CALIFORNIA
AIR RESOURCES BOARD ON JUKE 20, 1984
Time of Day
Anbient Air
Temperature (°F)
Wind
Velocity (mph)
Wind
Direction
0915
1015
1115
1215
1315
1415
1515
1615
1715
72
74
78
81
88
89
88
88
88
10
11
6
6
6
6.5
6
9
5
E
E
SE
SE
SE
SE
E
KE
N
3-3
-------
1ftDIE 3-3. CLIHATOLOOICAL DATA FOR THE CHEMICAL WASTE HANAOENENT FACILITY IN KETTLEMAN CITY, CALIFORNIA ON JUNE IB THROUGH 22, 1904.
Ditri
6-IB-IM
6-19-84
6-20-04
6-21-04
6-22-B4
Tine
OF DAY
0100
0200
03oo
0400
0500
0600
0700
OBOO
0400
1 OOi*
II 00
1200
1300
MOO
1 1500
vO | 400
1700
IBOO
IVOO
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
air Mind nlnd
lenp. velocity direction
IF) (»ph)
85 4 NU
85 4 H
85 0 • -
84 0 -
83 0 -
B2 0
00 0
84 2 NE
VO 2 t
92 1 E
9} 3 SE
94 S SU
94 5 E
98 3 E
100 3 SE
101 6 BE
101 7 SH
101 9 SH
9f B SH
97 2 SH
93 S SH
92 4 SH
90 3 SH
8B 4 SH
air Mind Mind
t«*p. viloclty direction
(Fl («ph>
BB 4 BH
87 3 NU
86 0 -
84 0
79 0 -
78 1 BH
80 0 -
83 2 E
BB 3 E
91 2 E
9J 3 E
94 4 S
97 6 SE
99 6 E
102 4 E
102 S NE
102 S NE
100 8 . N
96 7 W
92 B N
90 7 N
86 6 N
80 0 -
86 0
•Ir Mind Mind
leap, velocity direction
IF) Uphl
NO 0 -
ND 0
ND 0 -
MD 0
NO 0
NU 1 NH
67 0 -
67 0 -
69 2 E
69 2 E
72 4 SE
75 3 6
78 4 E
81 3 HE
84 7 NE
III) 6 NE
U6 7 II
B6 0 H
BS 7 H
04 B N
82 10 N
79 B N
78 4 HH
77 4 NU
•Ir Mind Hind
tenp. velocity direction
(Fl (nph)
76 3 N
72 3 NH
71 4 H
70 0
67 1 H
65 2 N
66 10 N
60 0 H
70 II N
72 6 N
76 4 HE
7B 6 E
112 4 E
BS 6 Hb
B6 6 NE
117 B NE
87 6 NE
87 9 N
B6 8 N
84 6 H
02 6 N
BO 6 N
77 3 H
7B 5 H
•Ir Mind Mind
teap. velocity direction
(Fl Uphl
7B 3 N
77 3 II
76 4 H
75 2 H
69 0 -
60 0
70 0 -
77 0
82 5 H
82 3 II
83 6 II
85 B N
88 8 II
91 6 II
72 8 N
73 7 II
74 6 N
73 7 N
93 7 N
92 3 H
88 0 -
85 2 H
82 3 U
BO 0
Motet Mind direction » direction Iron which the Hind It bloMlng
ND seani that there mi no data available.
-------
SECTION 4
SAMPLING LOCATIONS
The following section presents the location of sampling activities at
the TSDF. Included are schematic diagrams shoving the emission sources and
sampling grids, the rationale for the sampling point selections, and any
statements necessary to qualify or limit the results. The presentation has
been organized by source.
4.1 POND P-19
The P-19 surface impoundment is a rectangular pond with dimensions of
nominally 450* x 150'. The entire surface of the pond was gridded (Figure
4-1). The south end of the pond where the dumping takes place showed signs
of sludge and oil on the surface. Otherwise, there was no visual indication
of non-uniformity within the pond. Emission measurements using the flux
chamber and liquid samples were collected from P-19 on two separate days.
Six sampling locations were randomly selected for the flux chamber measure-
ments (Figure 4-1). However, only three different locations could be sam-
pled June 20 and four different locations on June 22 due to a lack of time.
Liquid samples were taken corresponding to each location where emission
measurements were made.
Additionally, liquid samples were taken from numerous grid points on
June 20 in order-to perform a mass balance. Figure 4-2 shows the locations
of the six samples from initial and final sets which were analyzed and used
for the mass balance.
4-1
-------
•*-N
K)
1
3
2
1
6a
b/
5
4
9
8
7b*
12
11
10
15
14
13
18
b
16
21
20
19
24 a
b
23
22
Waste
mi load ing
Grid dimensions: 450' x ISO'
Surface area: 67.500 ft2
a denotes sampling points on 6-20
b denote:) sampling points on 6-22
* denotes duplicate sample
/ denotes control point
Figure 4-1. Diagram of emission isolation flux chamber sampling locations
at pond P-19.
-------
•*-N
1
3'
2
I*
1
f*
61*
f*
5
1
4
91
8
1
7
.2'
II
• O'
15 «
f*
14
13
f*
18'*
1 7
16'
21 '
20
19'*
24 '
l*
23"
221*
f*
X
X
X
X
Waste
unloading
area
Urid dimensions: 450' x ISO'
Surface area: 67,500 ft2
1 denotes Initial sampling location for mass balance
f denotes fln.il sampling location fur mass balance
* denotes sample analyzed and used In mass balance
Figure 4-2. Diagram of liquid grab sampling locations at Pond P-19.
-------
4.2 MISCELLANEOUS PONDS
Single or duplicate liquid grab samples were collected at ponds P-12,
P-13, P-14, and P-18. These samples may not necessarily be representative
of the overall composition of their respective ponds.
4.3 INACTIVE LANDFILL B-6
Inactive Landfill B-6 was an eliptical area of nominally 25,500 ft .
This area was gridded as shown in Figure 4-3. Sampling locations were
randomly selected and are thought to be representative of the overall land-
fill. Emission measurements were made at six grid points, and a single soil
core sample was collected at the locations shown. Any obvious surface
spills were avoided when making the emission measurements. A background
emission measurement was made at a clean location.
4.4 ACTIVE LANDFILL B-9
Active landfill B-9 is depicted in Figure 4-4. The landfill is rela-
tively homogeneous, but for sampling purposes was divided into two areas.
The area labeled temporary storage (area 1) had not received fresh waste in
1-2 days. The area was gridded and four points randomly selected for emis-
sion measurements using the flux chamber. Soil cores were obtained at all
eight grid points in this area. Emission measurements and soil sampling
were conducted at the two locations indicated in the active working area
(area 2). Sampling points were selected by visul inspection in area 2 due
to time limitations. A background emission measurement was made at a clean
location.
4.5 DRUM STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA
A survey was made of the various drum storage areas including the tank
storage area, an outside drum storage area, a building for PCS drum storage,
and a drum transfer area.
4-4
-------
t
N
, «bc
6*a
1 1
16*
21
2
7
12
17
22
3
8
13*
18*
23
.
4
9
14
19
24
5 * i
10
15
20
25
1
Grid dimensions: 180' x 180' - based on square inscribed in actual
elipcical area
Surface area: 25,500 ft* - based on area of circle with average diameter
of 180 ft
*denotes sampling point
a denotes duplicate sampling
b denotes control point
c denotes soil core
Figure 4-3. Diagram of sampling locations at inactive landfill
B-6.
4-5
-------
1
2
3*a 5 ; 7*
!
' |
4* ! 6 8 *
i
ROAD
*
Soil 10
drums
Mixed
waste
11
Temporary Storage Area (area 1)
Dimensions: 200' x 80'
Surface area: 16,000 ft2
Active Working Area (area 2)
Dimensions: 120' x 60'^
Surface area: 7,200 ft-
•denotes sampling point
a denotes duplicate sample
Active Working Area
Figure 4-4. Diagram of sampling locations at active landfill
B-9.
4-6
-------
SECTION 5
SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
This section describes those procedures used for sample collection and
analysis. Included are discussions of air emission measurement approaches,
air, solid and liquid sampling and analytical techniques.
5.1 AIR EMISSION MEASUREMENTS
Air emission measurements were made using two approaches, specifically:
emission isolation flux chamber and mass balance. These approaches are
described below, and should be differentiated from the sampling and analyti-
cal techniques used to collect and/or analyze the samples. The sampling and
analytical techniques associated with these approaches are described in
Sections 5.2, 5.3 and 5.6.
5.1.1 Emission Isolation Flux Chamber
The emission isolation flux chamber is a device used to make a direct
emission measurement. The enclosure approach has been used by researchers
to measure emission fluxes of sulfur and volatile organic species. ' »
The approach uses an enclosure device (flux chamber) to sample gaseous
emissions from a defined surface area. Clean, dry, sweep air is added to
the chamber at a fixed controlled rate. The volumetric flow rate of sweep
air through the chamber is recorded and the concentration of the species of
interest is measured at the exit of the chamber. The emission rate is
expressed as:
Ei - CjR/A (Equation 1)
5-1
-------
where,
A
E^ - emission rate of component i, yg/m -sec
GJ • concentration of component i in the air flowing from the chamber,
Pg/m3
R » flow rate of air through the chamber, nr/sec
5
A - surface area enclosed by the chamber, m
All parameters in Equation 1 are measured directly.
A diagram of the flux chamber apparatus used for measuring emission
rates is shown in Figure 5-1. The sampling equipment consists of a stain-
less steel/acrylic chamber with impeller, ultra high purity sweep air and
rotameter for measuring flow into the chamber, and a sampling manifold for
monitoring and/or collection of the specie(s) of interest. Concentrations
of total hydrocarbons are monitored continuously in the chamber outlet gas
stream using portable flame ionization detector (FID)- and/or photoioniza-
tion detector (PID)-based analyzers. Samples are collected for subsequent
gas chromatographic (GC) analysis once a steady-state emission rate is
obtained. Air and soil/liquid temperatures are measured using a thermo-
couple .
To determine the emission rate for a source of much greater area than
that isolated by the flux chamber, a sufficient number of measurements must
be taken at different locations to provide statistical confidence limits for
the mean emission rate. The area sources measured were gridded and a mini-
mum of six (6) measurements made (when possible) to account for spatial
variability. Additionally, a single point was selected as a control point
to define temporal variability. On-site GC analyses were performed for all
flux chamber measurements and canister samples were collected for each area
to allow off-site, detailed GC analysis. Prior to using the chamber, blank
and species recovery data were obtained.
5-2
-------
U)
CARRIER
GAS
TEMPERATURE
READOUT
SAMPLE COLLECTION
AND/OR ANALYSIS
FLOWMETER
5 Ipm
V
ON/OFF FLOW
CONTROL
GRAB SAMPLE
PORT
PLEXIGLASS
DOME
STAINLESS
STEEL COLLAR
Figure 5-1. Cutaway side view of emission isolation flux chamber and sampling apparatus.
-------
5.1.2 Haas Balance
Theoretically, emissions or losses from any process can be estimated
from an accurate mass balance. If all inlet and outlet process streams are
precisely characterized with regard to flow rates, composition, and physical
properties, any difference between the total known amount of material enter-
ing the system and that known to be leaving would be losses or accumulation.
This can be expressed as:
FX - FO - A + L
where,
Fj, FQ » total known mass of material entering and leaving the
process, respectively, during the measurement period.
A • known mass accumulation of material in the process during
the measurement period. If A « 0, the process is con-
sidered to be at steady state.
L - unmeasured mass loss of material.
The accumulation may be obtained from mass or volume measurements
(e.g., impoundment liquid levels at the beginning and end of the measurement
period). The accumulation term can be negative or positive. The difference
between the net amount of material flowing into the process (inflow-outflow)
and the measured accumulation is attributed to unmeasured losses.
5.2 AIR SAMPLE COLLECTION
Two methods-were used to collect air samples for analysis during the
sampling discussed above. A gas tight syringe was used to collect gas
samples for analysis on site using a gas chromatograph (GC) and evacuated
stainless steel canisters were used to collect gas samples to be shipped to
Radian's Austin laboratories for detailed GC analysis. The gas tight
syringes were 100 cc volume, constructed of glass and teflon, and protected
5-4
-------
from sunlight. Gas aliquots were taken from the syringe for injection into
the on-site GC (Section 5.5.2).
The stainless steel canisters were cleaned and evacuated in Radian's
Austin, Texas laboratories and sent to the field. The canister sampling
system included a sintered stainless steel filter to protect the system from
suspended particulate matter and a vacuum flow regulator to provide a con-
stant sampling rate over the 20-minute sampling periods. Following sample
collection, the canisters were shipped back to Radian's laboratories. The
canisters were pressurized to 10-15 psig with UHP nitrogen to provide posi-
tive pressure for removing the sample for analysis and to dilute oxygen and
moisture in the sample to minimize sample component reactions. Canister
dilution is calculated from the absolute pressure before and after sample
collection, and after addition of UHP N£.
5.3 LIQUID SAMPLE COLLECTION
Liquid samples were taken from surface impoundments for volatile or-
ganic analysis (VOA) using the purge and trap technique (Section 5.5.3).
Samples were collected following the guidelines outlined in ASTM D3370,
"Standard Practices for Sampling Water." Samples were collected in glass
VOA vials with teflon-lined caps. The VOA vials were filled to the brim and
capped. Samples were stored at reduced temperatures prior to analysis.
5.4 SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTION
Soil samples were collected for volatile organic analysis using a
headspace technique (Section 5.5.3). Samples were collected with a thin
wall, brass core.sampler. The sampler (Figure 5-2) was driven or pressed
into the soil surface far enough to fill the sampler, but not compress the
soil core. The sampler was then removed and the ends capped. Samples were
stored at ambient temperatures prior to analysis.
5-5
-------
-WING NUT
-END CAP
THREADED ROD
Ol
I
ON
1/4"SWAGELOK
FITTING
BRASS CORE SLEEVE
TEFLON RING
TEFLON CAP LINER
-CAP
•LOCK WASHER
Figure 5-2. Soil core sample sleeve.
-------
Bulk soil samples were also collected for measurement of moisture
content and specific gravity. These samples were typically composites ob-
tained using an open-blade type auger. Samples were placed in glass jars
and sealed to-prevent moisture loss.
5.5 ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES
The analytical techniques used on site are discussed in Sections 5.5.1
and 5.5.2 while the off-site analytical techniques are discussed in Sections
5.5.3 and 5.5.4. A mobile laboratory served as a base of operation during
field testing.
5.5.1 Real-Time Monitors
Real-time continuous monitors were used on site to determine general
levels of THCs and to indicate the point in time at which gas syringe and
gas canister samples should be collected. For example, the instruments were
used to determine when steady-state conditions had been reached during flux
chamber measurements, and to survey potential sampling points at the drum
storage and handling area. The following monitors were available during the
field tests: HNU Model PI-lOls, Century System Model OVA-108s, and AID,
Inc. Model 580. Performance data on the monitors are summarized in Table
5-1.
5.5.2 Op-Site Gas Chromatographs
The HNU field portable GC-FID/PID was used to provide rudimentary
speciation data and total hydrocarbon data on air samples (syringe) col-
lected during flux chamber measurements. The GC was operated in an isother-
mal mode with a 20% SP-2100/0.1% CW1500 column. Quant itation was based on
standards of benzene in hydrocarbon-free air. Retention times were gener-
ated from a multicomponent standard. Instrument conditions are summarized
in Table 5-2.
5-7
-------
TABLE 5-1. DESCRIPTION OF PORTABLE THC MONITORS
HNU
Model PI 101
Century System
OVA-108
Analytical Instrument
Development, Inc.
OVM-580
Technique
Precision
Sensitivity
Response Time
Range
Power Supply
Service Life
(continuous
use/charge)
Weight
Photoionization
iF.S.
0.1 ppmv
<5 sec
0.1-2000 ppmv
DC
10 hrs
8 Ibs
GC/FID
±10 for standard
analyses
1 ppmv (methane)
2 sec
1-10,000 ppmv
1-100,000 ppmv
logarithmic
DC
8 hrs
14 Ibs
Photoionization
+F.S.
0.1 ppm (benzene)
2 sec
0-200 ppm
AC/DC
8 hrs
8.2 Ibs
5-8
-------
TABLE 5-2. INSTRUMENT CONDITIONS FOR ON-SITE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH
Instrument: BNU Model 301 equipped with flame ionization and photo-
ionization detectors
Injection System: Gas-tight syringe injection (1.0 mL) into a heated inlet
GC Column: 6' x 1/8" O.D. stainless steel packed with 20% SP-2100/0.1%
CW 1500 on 100/120 mesh Supelcoport
Carrier Gas: Zero grade N£ at 40 mL/min
Temperature Program: Isothermal at 100°C
Data System: HP 3390A plotting integrator
5-9
-------
5.5.3 Off-Site Gas Chromatographs
All gas canister samples and selected solid and liquid samples were
analzyed in Radian's Austin laboratories for C^-CIQ hydrocarbon species
using a Varian Model 3700 gas chromatograph. Sample analysis involved
cryogenic concentration, gas chromatographic separation, detection by mul-
tiple detectors, and data evaluation. The use of multiple detectors pro-
vided species-specific response for halogenated compounds (Hall Electrolytic
Conductivity Detector - HECD), unsaturated compounds (photoionization detec-
tor - PID), and hydrocarbon species in general (flame ionization detector -
FID). The liquid samples were analyzed using a purge and trap technique
modified to integrate with the cryogenic concentration. The solid samples
were analyzed using a headspace technique with direct syringe injection.
Speciation was based upon retention times relative to toluene, toluene
normalized response factors, and specific halogenated standards. VOCs were
quantitated against propane and hexane standards and reported as ppbv-C and
mass concentrations of the compound based upon molecular weight. Utiliza-
tion of this gas chromatography system with multiple detectors has been
Q
previously described. A diagram of the system is shown in Figure 5-3
and the operating conditions are listed in Table 5-3.
5.5.4 Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometrv
The identity of the major compounds observed in the samples were con-
firmed by GC-MS using a protocol similar to that used for the GC-FID/PID/
HECD analysis. A limited number of samples were selected for GC-MS analysis
based upon their representativeness following GC analysis. The operating
conditions of the GC-MS are summarized in Table 5-4.
5-10
-------
Ul
I
Figure 5-3. Block diagram of the gas chromatography system.
-------
TABLE 5-3. INSTRUMENT CONDITIONS FOR GC-FID/PID-HECD ANALYSES
Injection System: Cryogenic focusing type with heat-traced (60°C) stainless
steel transfer lines and valving
Sample Dryer: 40" x 1/8" O.D. single tube Perma Pure®
Purge Gas: UHP air at 1 L/min
Sample Flow Rate: 100 mL/min
Cryogenic Trap: 6" x 1/8" O.D. stainless steel loop packed with 80/100
mesh glass beads
Trapping Temperature-: -186°C (liquid 02)
Desorption Temperature: Boiling water to 90°C; heating cartridge to
180°C
Sample Volume Determination: Pressure differential in vacuum reservoir
plumbed to cryotrap outlet; Wallace and
Tiernan high-precision vacuum gauge
Chromatographic System: Varian 3700 capillary cbromatograph with flame
ionization, photoionization, and Hall Electrolytic
Conductivity detectors
Analytical Column: 2-60 m x 0.35 mm I.D. SE-30 wide bore fused silica
capillary
Carrier Gas: UHP He at 2 mL/min; 19 psig head pressure
Effluent Splitter: SCE 0.22 mm I.D. fused silica
PID/FID Split Ratio: 75/25
Oven Program: -50°C for 2 min to 100°C at 6°C/min; 100°C until elution
completed
FID: Varian
Detector Gases: H2 at 30 mL/min; air at 300 mL/min
Makeup Gas: UHP N2 at 30 mL/min
PID: HNU Model 52
Lamp: UV; 10 eV
Detector Temperature: 225°C
Makeup Gas: UHP N2 at 30 mL/min
HECD: Tracer Model 700A Reactor Temperature: 900°C
Halogen Mode Electrolyte Flow Rate: 0.9 mL/min
Data System: Plotting integrator type with computer interface
Peak Integration and Plotting: Varian Vista 401
Peak Identification and Data Reduction: Apple II Plus microcomputer
with Radian-developed software
5-12
-------
TABLE 5-4. GC-MS CONDITIONS FOR ANALYSIS OF GAS CANISTER SAMPLES
GC-MS Conditions
Instrument
lonization voltage
Scan rate
Scan range
Column
Initial temperature
Program rate
Final temperature
Interface
HP 5982
70 eV
1 scan/1.5 sec
36-300 amu
60-meter DB-5 fused silica
wide bore, thick film
-50 °C
6°/min
150°C
Open split
5-13
-------
SECTION 6
DATA QUALITY
There is always some amount of uncertainty associated with any measure-
ment data due to inherent limitations of the system used to make the mea-
surements . The usefulness of the measurement data is dependent to some
extent upon the degree to which the magnitude of this uncertainty is known
and upon its relative impact. The TSDF testing described in this report
included a quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program. The objec-
tives of the QA/QC efforts were twofold. First, they provided the mechanism
for controlling data quality within acceptable limits. Second, they form
the basis for estimates of uncertainty by providing the necessary informa-
tion for defining error limits associated with the measurement data.
The quality control part of the QA/QC effort consisted of numerous
procedures designed to provide ongoing checks of the primary components of
the various measurement systems. Examples of these procedures include
instrument calibration checks (single points) linearity checks (i.e., multi-
point calibrations), control standard analyses-, blanks (see Appendix H) and
duplicate samples and analyses (see Appendix I). These procedures, along
with required frequencies and acceptance criteria for each QC check, are
described in detail in the Test Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared
for this field test.
The evaluative part of the QA/QC effort was designed to provide a basis
for quantitative estimates of uncertainty in the measurement data. Uncer-
tainty estimates for individual measurements, such as the concentration of a
particular class of VOC compounds, for example, provided the basis for
estimates of overall uncertainty in the approaches for measuring emission
rates and/or concentrations. Independent QA audits were not performed as
6-1 •
-------
part of the sampling and analysis effort for this site. As such, no speci-
fic comments have been made concerning the accuracy of the measurements.
Recovery tests were run using methane for the flux chamber system. The
average recovery for the flux chamber measurement procedure was 70%. This
is attributed to the extremely long sample lines used for the pond testing.
Prior experience indicates that recoveries greater than 90% can be obtained.
Those results are included in Appendix G. Appendix H presents blank values
for both the sampling and analytical systems.
Uncertainty estimates should be viewed as the uncertainty involved in
making a single measurement. As such, they can be compared to the overall
uncertainty of a group of field measurements to determine if the variability
is predominantly due to the method or temporal/spatial fluctuations. The
overall variability should be equal to or greater than the estimated sam-
pling and analytical variability. The degree to which it is greater indi-
cates the significance of temporal/spatial variations in the set of field
measurement.
The variability reported in this section has been expressed as a coef-
ficient of variation (C.V.) which is defined as:
S
C.V. = x x 100
where, S is the standard deviation and X is the mean of the individual
measurements.
The results presented in Section 2 include 95% confidence intervals for
mean emission rates and concentrations. The 95% confidence interval is
estimated by:
X its/ /n
6-2
-------
where, n is the number of measurements used to compute the average, X, and
standard deviation, S, and t is a tabled statistical value (0.025 confidence
level, n-1 degrees of freedom; when n is greater than 10, t approaches 2).
A comparison can then be made between the estimate of precision, C.V.,
and the 95% confidence interval where the 95% confidence interval is com-
puted using the C.V.:
/C.V. x X \
Xi c
6.1 MEASUREMENT VARIABILITY
With any measurement effort, a primary data quality consideration is
measurement variability, or precision. For this program, duplicate samples
and/or analyses were used to quantitate sampling and analytical variability
for the various measurement parameters and techniques (see Appendix I). In
order to increase the representativeness of these estimates of variability,
results for this site were pooled with the results from field tests per-
formed by the same field crew, with the same equipment and during the same
time frame. The resulting precision estimates represent the amount of
variability which was due to random error in the sampling/analytical pro-
cess, independent of actual variability in the parameter measured.
6.1.1 Flux Chamber Measurements
Flux chambers were used to make direct emission measurements (see
Section 5.1.1). Two samp ling /analytical techniques were used in this mea-
surement approach. One technique consisted of collecting samples in eva-
cuated stainless steel canisters which were then returned to Austin for GC
analysis. The other technique involved collecting samples in a gas syringe
for on-site analysis by GC . Duplicate flux chamber samples were collected
using both the canister (2 sets) and syringe (4 sets) sampling techniques.
6-3
-------
Syringe samples collected during the program were analyzed in duplicate
(i.e., duplicate analyses of a single sample). Results for duplicate
analyses (32 sets) were used to estimate analytical precision for the on-
site GC analyses. Results for duplicate samples (6 sets) were used to
estimate overall sampling and analytical variability of the VOC concentra-
tion measurements associated with the flux chamber technique. Precision
estimates are summarized in Table 6-1.
The precision estimates shown in Table 6-1 are expressed in terms of
pooled (i.e., "average") coefficients of variation for duplicate samples and
duplicate analyses. The coefficient of variation represents the standard
deviation of the measured values expressed as a percentage of the mean. Two
estimates are presented for each class of compounds. One is for species in
each class (e.g., paraffin species), and represents the pooled CV for indi-
vidual compounds in that class. The other estimate represents the preci-
sion, or variability, for class totals (e.g., total paraffins).
Similar estimates of precision for flux chamber canister samples (4
sets) are also presented in Table 6-2.
Additionally, an estimate of the emission rate variability was made
based on a Monte Carlo simulation. Values were input to the emission rate
equation using typical magnitudes and uncertainties. Table 6-3 lists the
values assumed. The values of the VOC concentrations and variabilities are
those listed above. Two hundred trial calculations were made of the emis-
sion rate allowing the input values to vary within the assigned range-. The
calculated emission rates were then used to determine the uncertainty of the
measured emission rate. These results are summarized in Tables 6-4 and 6-5
for flux chamber emission rates calculated using gas syringe samples and gas
canister samples, respectively.
6-4
-------
TABLE 6-1. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR FLUX CHAMBER/GAS SYRINGE
SAMPLE RESULTS
Mean Sampling Plus
Hydrocarbon Class8 Cone, (mg/nr) Analytical'' Analytical0
(CV, %) (CV, %)
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aromatic s
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Species6
Total NMHCe
24.3
59.2
50.5
71.2
10.4
10.4
35.0
35.0
33.1
218
55.6
53.2
27. 2d
67. 4d
.
-
36. 4d
36. 4d
47.4
51.1
36.8
34.4
14.2
36.7
16.2
16.2
36.4
36.4
28.6
48.1
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in samp ling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
cEstimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
Estimate is based on a single duplicate sample result for less than three
compounds.
eExcludes oxygenated HC species.
6-5
-------
TABLE 6-2. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR FLUX CHAMBER/GAS CANISTER
SAMPLE RESULTS
Hydrocarbon Class3
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aroma tics
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Speciesd
Total NMHCd
Mean
Cone, (yg/m3)
2410
11900
936
17400
4090
55100
6920
44800
3350
237000
Sampling Plus
Analytical
(CV, %)
53.8
48.3
55.6
49.2
51.8
34.8
51.7
47.5
51.7
43.8
Analytical0
(CV, %)
23.9
23.5
25.0
46.4
20.2
23.4
51.7
43.4
28.7
43.8
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in sampling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
cEstimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
"Excludes oxygenated HC species.
6-6
-------
TABLE 6-3. ESTIMATES OF VARIABILITIES OF PARAMETERS ASSOCIATED
WITH EMISSION FLUX CHAMBER MEASUREMENTS
Parameter
Value
Variability Estimate
Used in Simulations3
Concentration of species
Sweep air flow rate
Exposed surface area
5 1/min
0.13 m2
10%
5%
Variability estimates are expressed as a percent of the mean.
The values of the VOC concentration are those shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2.
Coefficient of variation is estimated from the duplicate sample and
analytical results shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2.
6-7
-------
TABLE 6-4. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR FLUX CHAMBER/GAS SYRINGE
EMISSION RATES
Hydrocarbon Class3
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aroma tics
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Speciesd
Total NMHCd
Mean Emission
Rate
(yg/m2-sec)
15.6
38.0
32.4
45.7
6.68
6.68
22.5
22.5
21.3
140
Sampling Plus
Analytical15
(CV, %)
53.8
54.4
28.3
66.4
-
-
37.2
37.2
47.2
50.3
Analytical0
(CV, %)
41.8
35.4
18.0
38.8
20.7
20.7
37.2
37.2
29.6
46.2
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in sampling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
cEstimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
Excludes oxygenated HC species.
6-8
-------
TABLE 6-5. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR FLUX CHAMBER/GAS CANISTER
EMISSION RATES
Hydrocarbon Class3
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aroma tics
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Speciesd
Total NMHCd
Mean Emission
Rate
(pg/m2-sec)
1.55
76.4
0.601
11.2
2.63
35.4
4.45
28.8
2.15
152
Sampling Plus
Analytical
(CV, %)
57.0
53.3
56.3
47.0
51.0
38.8
53.4
52.3
55.8
46.2
Analytical0
(CV, %)
25.8
27.0
27.4
46.5
22.5
23.5
53.4
43.2
32.7
46.2
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in sampling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
cEstimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
dExcludes oxygenated HC species.
6-9
-------
6.1.2 Mass Balance
A mass balance approach was used to calculate emission rates of vola-
tile species from the P-19 pond. The calculated emission rate is based upon
measured values of liquid volume and mass concentrations of the volatile
species. The uncertainty associated with the mass balance calculation was
estimated using a Monte Carlo simulation, as previously described. Values
were input to the mass balance equation using typical magnitudes and uncer-
tainties. Table 6-6 lists the values assumed. Note that the liquid concen-
tration values were as determined below. Table 6-7 summarizes the precision
estimates for the mass balance calculation.
6.1.3 Liquid Concentration Measurements
Liquid samples were obtained to determine the concentration of volatile
species present in the ponds (see Section 5.3). The samples were obtined in
VOA vials and returned to Austin for analysis by GC, as with the canister
samples. The results of duplicate analyses (3 sets) from a single sample
were used to estimate the analytical precision. Results for analysis of
duplicate samples (2 sets) were used to estimate the sampling and analytical
variability of the liquid concentration measurements as a whole. These
precision estimates are summarized in Table 6-8.
6.1.4 Soil Core Concentration Measurements
Soil core samples were obtained to determine the concentration of
volatile species in the landfills (see Section 5.4). The samples were
obtained using a thin walled tube sampler which was capped on site and
returned to Austin for analysis by GC, as with the canister and liquid
samples. The results of duplicate analyses (4 sets) from a single sample
were used to estimate the analytical precision. Results for analysis of
duplicate samples (2 sets) were used to estimate the sampling and analytical
variability of the soil core concentration measurements as a whole. These
precision estimates are summarized in Table 6-9.
6-10
-------
TABLE 6-6. SUMMARY OF INPUT VALUES FOR P-19 MATERIAL BALANCE
Variable
Value
Comments
Input volume from
truck dumping
Input concentration
15,360 gallons £102
(see Table 2-26)
Initial volume of
pond
2,925,000 gallons ±252
Initial concentration (see Table 2-26)
Final volume of pond 2,931,039 gallons ±252
Final concentration
Elapsed time
(see Table 2-26)
8.5 hours ±52
Company records
Assumed as maximum
concentration measured
in pond
Assumed as 752 of
rated capacity of pond
Average measured
concentration
Calculated from a
measured rise in pond
level of 1/8"
Measured
6-11
-------
TABLE 6-7. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR MATERIAL BALANCE
Hydrocarbon Glass8
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aroma tics
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Species8
Total NMHC8
Mean
Emission Rate
(kg/day)
59.4
1370
-22.5
-84.3
16.5
-144
-41.1
-347
35.1
864
Coefficient
of Variation
(2)
781
120
1210
971
458
851
527
777
732
514
aExcludes oxygenated HC species.
6-12
-------
TABLE 6-8. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR LIQUID SAMPLE RESULTS
Mean Sampling Plus
Hydrocarbon Class8 Cone. (mg/L) Analytical Analytical0
(CV, 2) (CV, Z)
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aromatic s
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Speciesd
Total NMHCd
2.19
45.3
1.91
31.5
2.33
53.2
2.47
34.3
2.24
166
55.4
20.5
67.5
43.0
56.9
29.2
56.5
45.1
58.4
26.1
40.7
21.4
42.3
43.0
28.9
19.1
25.4
14.9
34.8
17.9
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in sampling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
cEstimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
Excludes oxygenated HC species.
6-13
-------
TABLE 6-9. PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR SOIL CORE SAMPLE RESULTS
Hydrocarbon Class3
Paraffin Species
Total Paraffins
Olefin Species
Total Olefins
Aromatic Species
Total Aromatic s
Halogenated HC Species
Total Halogenated HC
All Species6
Total NMHCe
Mean
Cone, (yg/nr)
854
17000
2040
1810
222
611
3970
16700
2350
39000
Sampling Plus
Analytical1*
(CV, 2)
113
116
103d
135
114
133
106
105
111
85
Analytical0
(CV, 2)
105
116
-
135
16.7
59
105
105
90
82
aSpecies CV represents agreement between replicate values for summation of
identified species of the class indicated; CV for total reflects agreement
of values for class totals based on total peak area for a given class.
Estimate of total variability in sampling/analytical process, based on
results for duplicate samples.
c£stimate of analytical variability, independent of sampling variability,
based on results for duplicate analyses.
Estimate is based on a single duplicate sample result for less than three
compounds .
eExcludes oxygenated HC species.
6-14
-------
6.2 GC-MS CONFIRMATION OF SELECTED CANISTER SAMPLES
As part of the analytical quality control for the project, several air
samples that had previously been analyzed by GC-FID/PID/HECD were selected
for confirmation of compound identity by GC-MS. The results obtained from
the samples selected for confirmation are presented in Table 6-10. The GC-
MS analytical protocol used for the confirmation was designed to provide
qualitative information on the major components observed in the samples.
The sensitivity of the instrument and the sample size analyzed were selected
with this fact in mind. The compounds which were listed were not neces-
sarily the major components in the samples selected. As a result, the
number of compounds from the target list confirmed is relatively low.
6-15
-------
TABLE 6-10. GC-MS CONFIRMATION OF CANISTER SAMPLES
Compound
1.3-Butldleae (
AcrjrlonitrlU
Beniene
Toluene
Etbjlbeoieie
p-Xyleni/m-Xjrlene
Btyrene
o-Xjrlene
leopropylbentene
n-Propylbenieoe
Naphthalene
ChloroMtbaee
Ylnj-1 Chloride
l.l-Dlcbloroethjlene
Nethylene Chloride
Chloroform
1.1 ,1-Trlchloroetbane
Carbon Tetracbloride
1 1 2-Dich loropropane
Tetrechloroetbylene
Chlorobeoiene
p-Diehlorobraieoe
1 , l-Diehloroethene
••oijrl Chloride
1 . 2-Dibrm>«tbM«
}-Chloro-1.3-but«li»*
Tr ic b loroat by I0a«
Kp ic b lo rohyd f In
1,1,1. J-t«tr«cbloro«t h«o«
3-Ghloro-l-propen*
Acetildehydt
Hetbyl «c«t«t«
Acrolein
Propyleo* Oxld«
A -00*
Cone . Covpound
(u»/«3) Confirmed
K>
HO
10.9
JO. 6 lb
29.4
101. 3 I
•D
14.0
ro
m>
RD
6.2
M>
m
719.8 I
7.1
314.) I
82.4
m>
142.7 I
m>
NO
2J.3
m
m>
RD
272.7 X
HD
ND
HD
RD
RD
RD
ND
A -007
Cone . Co^ioond
(U|/BJ) Con fined
HD
• RD
392.0 X
19410.2 S
72S3.8
1)496.8 X
RD
69S2.3 X
HD
RD
HD
ND
HD
HD
88S59.0
8697.4
166682.6
ND
HD
23012.1
14.2
3913.0
416.3
RD
RD ,
RD
467)6.1 X
ND
HD
RD
RD
RD
ND
RD
A -008
Cone . Compound
(U|/B}) Confirmed
RD
RD
6.9
84.9
33.2
234.9 X
ND
35.4
RD
ND
ND
ND
RD
HD
429.2 X
34.7
1236.1 X
HD
ND
10). 8
HD
17.8
ND
ND
RD
HD
299.1 X
RD
RD
RD
RD
HD
RD
HD
Cone.
(at/a1)
HD
ND
RD
13). 7
534.4
2)14.
71.
407.
96.
127.
993.1
HD
ND
ND
613.2
264.7
4664.9
ND
ND
2422.9
HD
47.2
RD
RD
HD
RD
1864.3
ND
RD
RD
RD
RD
RD
ND
A-022
Compound
Confirmed
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*D«t. obtained from the CC/PID/flD/RECD «n»lyil. .
bX - Confirmed
-------
Section 7
REFERENCES
1. Radian Corporation. Evaluation of Air Emissions from Hazardous Waste
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. EPA Contract No. 68-02-
3171, Task Number 63, Austin, Texas, June 1984.
2. Balfour, V. D. and C. E. Schmidt. Sampling Approaches for Measuring
Emission Rates from Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities. In Pro-
ceedings of the 77th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control
Association, San Francisco, California, June 1984.
3. Radian Corporation. Protocols for Sampling and Analysis of Surface
Impoundments and Landtreatment/Disposal Sites for VOCs. EPA Contract
No. 68-02-3850, Work Assignment 11, Austin, Texas, September 1984.
4. Ford, P. J., et. al.. Characterization of Hazardous Waste Sites—A
Methods Manual: Volume II—Available Sampling Methods. EPA-600/4-83-
040, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1983.
5. Hill, F. B., V. P. Aneja, and R. M. Felder. A Technique for Measure-
ments of Biogenic Sulfur Emission Fluxes. J. Environ. Sci. Health
AIB(3), pp. 199-225, 1978.
6. Adams, D. F., M. R. Pack, W. L. Bamesberger, and A. E. Sherrard,
"Measurement of Biogenic Sulfur-Containing Gas Emissions from Soils and
Vegetation." In Proceedings of 71st Annual APCA Meeting, Houston, TX,
1978, 78-76.
7-1
-------
7. Schmidt, C. E., W. D. Balfour, and R. D. Cox. Sampling Techniques for
Emissions Measurements at Hazardous Waste Sites. In Proceedings of 3rd
National Conference and Exhibition on Management of Uncontrolled Waste
Sites, Washington, D.C., 1982.
8. Cox, R. D., K. J. Baughman, and R. F. Earp . A Generalized Screening
and Analysis Procedure for Organic Emissions from Hazardous Waste
Disposal Sites. In Proceedings of 3rd National Conference and Exhibi-
tion on Management of Uncontrolled Waste Sites, Washington, D.C., 1982.
7-2
------- |