United States Region 2 EPA902-R-95-001a
Environmental Protection 902 November 1995
Agency
&EPA Determination of Landfill
Gas Composition and
Pollutant Emission Rates
at Fresh Kills Landfill
Volume I
Project Report
-------
RCN 654-028-41-07
DCN 95-654-028-41-01
DETERMINATION OF LANDFILL GAS COMPOSITION AND
POLLUTANT EMISSION RATES AT
FRESH KILLS LANDFILL
Revised Final Report
EPA Contract No. 68-D3-0033
Work Assignment 1-41
Work Assignment Manager:
Ms. Carol Bellizzi
Air Programs Branch (2 AWM-AP)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Region
New York, New York 10007-1866
Prepared by:
Radian Corporation
8501 North Mopac Boulevard
P.O. Box 201088
Austin, Texas 78720-1088
10 November 1995
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
DISCLAIMER
This document was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by Radian
Corporation. This report has not been approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
for publication. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the authors and
not necessarily those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of company or
product name is not to be considered as an endorsement by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Landfill Description 1-1
1.2.1 Section 3/4 1-3
1.2.2 Section 2/8 1-3
1.2.3 Section 6/7 1-4
1.2.4 Section 1/9 1-4
1.3 Project Objectives 1-4
1.4 Technical Approach 1-5
1.5 Uses and Limitations of the Data 1-7
2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2-1
2.1 Conclusions 2-2
2.2 Recommendations 2-3
3.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH 3-1
3.1 Sampling Strategy 3-1
3.2 Sampling Procedures 3-4
3.2.1 Passive Vent Gas Sampling 3-4
3.2.2 Flux Chamber Monitoring 3-5
3.2.3 Landfill Gas Recovery System
Sample Collection 3-7
3.2.4 Liquid and Soil Sampling 3-9
3.3 Analytical Procedures 3-10
3.3.1 VOC Analytical Methods 3-10
3.3.2 Landfill (Fixed) Gas Analysis 3-11
3.3.3 Volatile Organic Compounds in
Liquid and Soil Samples 3-11
3.3.4 Mercury Analysis 3-12
3.3.5 Hydrogen Sulfide Analysis 3-12
3.3.6 Landfill Gas Analyzer 3-12
3.3.7 Soil Analyses 3-12
Radian Corporation iii
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
4.0 RESULTS 4-1
4.1 Results of Sampling at Passive Vents 4-1
4.2 Results of Sampling at Soil Surfaces 4-3
4.2.1 Flux Chamber Sampling 4-3
4.2.2 Surface Soil Sampling 4-4
4.2.3 Seep Sampling 4-4
4.3 Results of Sampling at the Gas Collection
System 4-4
4.3.1 Gas Collection Headers 4-4
4.3.2 Gas Extraction Wells 4-5
4.3.3 Landfill Gas Condensate 4-5
4.4 Results of Sampling at Vapor Monitoring Wells 4-6
4.5 Results of Activity Factor Determinations 4-6
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
5.1 Measurement Results for the Passive Vents 5-1
5.2 Measurement Results for the Surface Flux 5-2
5.2.1 Surface Emissions Over Soil, Clay and PVC Cover 5-3
5.2.2 Surface Emissions from Toe, Side, and Top 5-4
5.2.3 Cracks and Seeps 5-4
5.2.4 Spatial Temporal Variations in Surface Emissions 5-5
5.3 Measurement Results for the Gas Collection System 5-6
5.4 Measurement Results for Other Potential Emission Sources 5-9
5.5 Composition of Landfill Gas 5-9
5.6 Overall Emissions from Fresh Kills Landfill 5-9
5.7 Comparison of Data With Other Landfill Studies 5-11
5.8 Estimation of Future Emissions 5-13
5.8.1 Annual Emissions 5-13
5.8.2 Future Emissions 5-13
6.0 QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS 6-1
6.1 Summary of Data Quality 6-1
6.2 Results of Quality Control Measures 6-2
6.2.1 Field Quality Control 6-2
6.2.2 Analytical Quality Control 6-5
iv Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
7.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
6.3 Results of QA Audits 6-10
6.3.1 Technical Systems Audit 6-10
6.3.2 Performance Evaluation Audit 6-10
REFERENCES
7-1
Appendix A Master Log
Appendix B UTM Coordinates for Sampling Locations
Appendix C Example Calculations
Appendix D Complete GC/MD Analytical Results for Canister Samples
Appendix E Measured Mass Flow Rates
Appendix F GC/MS Analytical Results
Appendix G Comparison of GC/MD to GC/MS Results
Appendix H Results of Off-Site Fixed Gas Analysis of Canister Samples
Appendix I GC/MS Analytical Results for Soil Samples
Appendix J Particle Size Distribution of Soil Samples
Appendix K GC/MS Analytical Results for Liquid Seep Samples
Appendix L GC/MS Analytical Results for Condensate Samples from the Landfill Gas
Collection System
Appendix M Emission Rates from Passive Vents for All Compounds
Appendix N Emission Fluxes for Landfill Surface for All Compounds
Appendix O Quality Assurance Audit Report
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
AAM Ambient Air Monitoring
ACMM Actual Cubic Meters per Minute
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
CFM Cubic Feet per Minute
CH4 Methane
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CV Coefficient of Variation
ELCD Electrolytic Conductivity Detector
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FID Flame lonization Detector
MIR Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
GC Gas Chromatography
GC/MD Gas Chromatography with Multiple Detectors
GC/MS Gas Chromatography with Mass Spectroscopy
GPS Global Positioning System
Hg Mercury
H2S Hydrogen Sulfide
LCS Laboratory Control Standard
LFG Landfill Gas
MEK Methyl Ethyl Ketone
mL Milliliter(s)
MS Matrix Spike
MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
NA Not Applicable
NC Not Calculated
NIST National Institutes of Standards and Technology
NM Not Measured
NYC DOS New York City Department of Sanitation
OVA Organic Vapor Analyzer
PK) Photoionization Detector
ppb part(s) per billion
ppb V part(s) per billion by volume
ppm part(s) per million
ppmV part(s) per million by volume
PSD Particle Size Distribution
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
QC Quality Control
RF Response Factor
VI
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Stud]
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
(Continued)
RPD Relative Percent Difference
RRT Relative Retention Time
RT Retention Time
TCD Thermal Conductivity Detector
THC Total Hydrocarbon
TNMHC Total Non-methane Hydrocarbons
TNMOC Total Non-methane Organic Compounds
TNR Toluene Normalized Response
UHP Ultra High Purity
U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator
VOA Volatile Organic Analysis
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
Radian Corporation
VII
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Active Face
Activity Factor
Detection Limit
Emission Factor
Emission Flux
Emission Rate
Feature
Fixed Gas
GLOSSARY
Area where new municipal solid waste (MSW) is added to the landfill and
covered with soil cover. There are active faces on both Sections 6/7 and
1/9 where new MSW is placed in rows roughly 50m wide and 6m high on
top of previously landfilled waste.
A unit weight, volume, distance, or duration of activity that emits a
pollutant. Activity factors are multiplied by emission factors to yield an
estimated emission rate. Activity factors used in this report include the
area of a given emission source (e.g., m2 of emitting surface), the number
of vents with measurable flow, and the mass of MSW present (e.g., kg of
waste).
Three standard deviations above average of seven replicate analyses of
low-level standard, performed according to procedures given in 40 CFR
136, Appendix B.
An average value which relates the quantity of a pollutant released to the
atmosphere with the activity associated with the release of that pollutant.
In most cases, these factors are simply averages of all available data of
acceptable quality, without consideration of the influence of various
process parameters such as temperature. Emission factors used in this
report include the emissions per area of a given emission source (e.g.,
^g/min per m2 of emitting surface), emissions per vent with measurable
flow (e.g., g/sec per vent), and emissions as a function of the mass of
MSW (e.g., g/sec per kg of waste).
Emissions in terms of rate per area or, in other words, mass per time per
area (e.g., ^g/min-m2). The emission flux multiplied by the total area of a
given emission source yields the emission rate for that source.
Emissions in terms of mass per time (e.g., g/sec).
Potential emission sources at the landfill, including passive vents, active
face, cracks, seeps, perimeter vent trench, and the three parts of the outer
surface of the mounds of waste: top, side, and toe.
Generally refers to gases that are present in the Earth's atmosphere in fixed
concentrations: nitrogen, oxygen, methane, and carbon dioxide. In this
report, fixed gases refer to these same compounds (e.g., analysis for fixed
gases in vent samples), though their concentration within the landfill is not
necessarily "fixed".
Vlll
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
GLOSSARY (Cent)
Landfill Gas
Not Detected
PVC Cover
THC
TNMHC
TNMOC
All of the gas present within the landfill. This gas typically is
approximately 50-60% methane, 40-50% carbon dioxide, and 1-2% all
other trace gases.
No instrument Response. For GC-MD analysis of canister samples for
VOCs, ^250 area counts was the criteria for none detection.
Polyvinyl chloride membrane used to cover landfill as part of closure
activities. Additional soil is placed on top of the PVC cover and
vegetation may be seeded to provide erosion control.
Total hydrocarbons, including methane.
Total non-methane hydrocarbons, all volatile organic compounds present
in a gas sample excluding methane. In this report, the TNMHC values are
the sum of the FID response for all compounds reported as hexane (i.e.,
calculated using the hexane response factor and the molecular weight of
hexane).
Total non-methane organic compounds. Equivalent to TNMHC.
Radian Corporation
IX
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
METRIC CONVERSIONS
Non-Metric Unit
°F
in.
ft.
mile
Ib.
gal.
mph
acre
acre
Multiplied by
0.555556 (°F-32)
2.54
0.3048
1609.344
0.453592
3.78541
0.44704
4,046.8564
0.404686
Yields Metric Unit
°C
cm
m
m
kg
L
m/sec
m2
hectare
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Air Emissions Study
Acknowledgments
This report was prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by Radian
Corporation, Austin, TX. John O'Connor served as the contract manager. Bart Eklund was the
project manager and lead author. The other primary authors were Eric Anderson, Barry Walker,
and Don Burrows. The Radian peer reviewer was Rich Pelt.
The field sampling crew consisted of Eric Anderson, Jim Clarke, Steve Deaver, Bart
Eklund, Carl Galloway, Gary Hall, Steve Mischler, Randy Monson, Judy Nottoli, Jim Owens,
Tom Pavlik, Lori Rodriguez, Mike Sabisch, Randy Stephens, and Barry Walker.
The analytical work was performed by Carl Shaulis, Linda Bendele-Voight, Mike
Shepherd, Paty Shaulis, Jacquie Coplin, Terri Shaw, Mary Ellen Heavner, Gene Niedecken, Carl
Skelley, Pete Prinski, Sheeri Lindeman, Xavier Escobar, Dave Palmer, Pam Chen, Becky Bums,
Ken Williams, Becky Stenzel, Mike Howdeshell, Joe Rettinger, Bobby Basquez, Mary Ruth
Aaron, Becky Reichardt, Donna Kirk, Brett Bercher, and Robert O'Keefe.
Data reduction was overseen by Steve Mischler. The database was prepared by Pat
Edwards, Monica Hanzel, and Mei Beth Shepherd. The stastistical analysis was performed by
Teresa Musselman, Larry Hilscher, and Mary Hall. The quality assurance work was performed
by Don Burrows, Christine Hannon, and Carolyn Condon. Report graphics were prepared by Joe
Gagliano. Technical editing was done by Brad Netherton. Report preparation was performed by
Janie Lopez, assisted by Barbara Hawthorne, Christine Torres, and others.
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance provided by the following: The City of
New York Department of Sanitation, including Phillip Gleason (Director, Landfill Engineering),
Ted Nabavi (Senior Environmental Manager), and George Bossert (Director, Freshkills); and Air
Products and Chemicals, Inc., including Cecil Bonnell Jr. (Plant Manager).
Radian Corporation xi
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Fresh Kills Landfill is the largest
landfill in the United States. In total, the
landfill property covers approximately 1,200
hectares (3,000 acres) of Staten Island, a
borough of the City of New York. The New
York City Department of Sanitation (NYC
DOS) operates the landfill and places there
approximately 11,800 metric tons (13,000
tons) per day of municipal solid waste
(MSW), six days a week, throughout the
year. The landfill is located near residential
and commercial areas of Staten Island. One
major limited-access highway crosses the
landfill, and other secondary roads extend
onto the landfill property.
Citizens' interest groups and
government agencies on Staten Island have
requested that studies be conducted to
determine the operating status and potential
effects of the landfill on the surrounding
communities. Of particular concern are air
emissions from the landfill and their impact
on local air quality. The landfill releases air
emissions that may result in odors
downwind of the facility and this has
heightened community awareness of the
landfill.
Air monitoring currently is being
performed at the landfill. The New York
State Department of Environmental
Conservation operates an ambient air
monitoring (AAM) network at the Fresh
Kills landfill and collects samples every 6th
day for volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
paniculate matter, and metals (NYDEC,
1995). Data are reported for roughly 20
individual VOCs; the sampling and analysis
performed by the state is not intended to
address all of the compounds that could be
emitted from the landfill. AAM data can
provide information about the air quality at
the locations where monitoring occurs and,
if the monitoring locations are selected
properly, it can provide information about
the maximum, or worst-case, ambient
concentrations of pollutants in an area.
AAM data by themselves, however, do not
provide information about the amount of
pollutants being released from the landfill or
the locations where emissions are released,
so the AAM data cannot be readily used to
estimate the air quality further downwind
within the community.
To evaluate air emissions from the
landfill, the U.S. EPA Region H elected to
perform a short-term intensive study to
measure emissions of VOCs and other
selected pollutants from the landfill and
characterize the composition of the landfill
gas. Radian Corporation, under EPA
Contract No. 68-D3-0033, Work
Assignment 1-41, assisted the EPA in this
effort. Hundreds of gas samples were
collected at the landfill over a three week
period in June and July of 1995, along with
a limited number of soil and liquid samples.
This report documents the findings of this
measurement program.
1.2 Landfill Description
The general layout of the landfill is
shown in Figure 1-1. The total area covered
by landfilled municipal waste is 426.5
hectares (1,054 acres), and the mounds of
waste extend up to 46 m (150 ft.) or more in
height. The landfill is divided into four
sections designated as 1/9, 6/7, 3/4, and 2/8.
Radian Corporation
1-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
NORTH
WIND ROSE
Newark, New Jersey Wnxiso~<1
1992 Annual
Figure 1-1. Schematic of General Landfill Layout
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Sections 3/4 and 2/8 no longer accept trash;
sections 6/7 and 1/9 are open and accept
trash from all five boroughs of New York
City. As shown in the wind rose in Figure
1-1, receptors located north, south, and east
of the landfill may be impacted by air
emissions from the landfill. The wind rose
data are from the nearest National Weather
Service station to Fresh Kills.
The landfill currently accepts primarily
residential (household) garbage. Hazardous
waste and medical waste are not currently
placed in the landfill, nor are there any plans
to allow them in the future. Some organic
matter in the garbage, such as leaves and
Christmas trees, is segregated and sent to a
composting facility. The type of wastes and
the composition of the wastes within each of
the four sections are believed to be similar.
Each of the four sections of the landfill is
described below.
1.2.1 Section 3/4
The northwest portion of the Fresh
Kills landfill is designated as Section 3/4
and covers approximately 57.2 hectares
(141 acres). The waste in this section dates
from when the section was opened in 1955
until it was closed in 1992. Section 3/4 is
no longer accepting waste and currently is
undergoing closure; i.e., being retrofitted
with: 1) passive vents, 2) an impermeable
PVC cover, and 3) a series of active gas
collection wells. The passive vents in this
and the other sections eventually will be
plugged and the gas from the venting system
will be combined with gas from the active
gas collection wells. The collected gas will
be processed and sold to a local utility.
Most (119) of the passive vents had
already been installed at the time of the field
sampling. Only those vents above the 42.7
m (140 ft.) elevation were not in place. The
impermeable cap on the north, east, south,
and west toe of this section consists of 0.30-
0.46 m (12-18 in.) of compacted clay and
covers approximately 9.1 hectares (22.5
acres). This portion of the cap was put in
place between 1988 and 1990. The
remaining 48.1 hectares (119 acres) of
Section 3/4 are being capped with a PVC
cover. This was approximately 17%
complete at the time of sampling and the
work is progressing at a rate of one acre/day.
The PVC cover is being applied to the side
slopes first, with the top receiving the PVC
cover last.
The active gas collection system plan
calls for the installation of 84 collection
wells and a series of underground headers
connecting the wells. To date,
approximately 60 of the planned active gas
collection wells have been installed
throughout the landfill, however, the gas
collection portion of the system has not been
installed. The wells are 0.1 m (4 in.) in
diameter and protrude above the landfill
surface.
1.2.2 Section 2/8
The southeast portion of the Fresh
Kills landfill is designated as Section 2/8
and comprises two distinct areas, which
cover a total area of approximately 58.1
hectares (143 acres). The waste in this
section dates from when the section was
opened in 1948 until it was closed in 1993.
Section 2/8 no longer accepts waste and
currently is being retrofitted with: 1) passive
vents, 2) an impermeable PVC cover, and 3)
a series of active gas collection wells.
Radian Corporation
1-3
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Most of the planned 113 passive
vents have been installed (102 were installed
at the time of our testing). The impermeable
PVC cover on the north end of this section
consists of 0.30-0.46 m (12-18 in.) of
compacted clay and covers approximately
8.3 hectares (20.5 acres). This portion of the
cap was installed in 1990. The remaining
49.8 hectares (123 acres) of Section 2/8 are
being capped with a geomembrane, and this
had been completed for approximately 7.3
hectares (18 acres) at the time of the field
sampling program, with the work
progressing at a rate of 0.4 hectare/day (one
acre/day). The PVC cover is being applied
to the side slopes first, with the top receiving
the PVC cover last.
The active gas collection system plan
calls for the installation of 48 collection
wells and a series of underground headers
connecting the wells. All of the planned
active gas collection wells have been
installed throughout the landfill, but the gas
collection piping has not been connected to a
gas recovery system.
1.2.3 Section 6/7
The northeast portion of the Fresh
Kills Landfill is designated as Section 6/7
and covers approximately 136 hectares (336
acres). This section has been accepting
waste since 1961 and the northern 75.4
hectares (186 acres) is currently active.
There are no active gas collection wells,
passive vents, or PVC cover at this section.
The waste in this section is covered with
0.3-0.6 m (1-2 ft.) of intermediate cover
(i.e., soil). The south portion of Section 6/7
contains the landfill's composting
operations.
1.2.4 Section 1/9
The southwest section of the Fresh
Kills Landfill covers approximately 176
hectares (435 acres) and is designated as
Section 1/9. This section has been accepting
waste since 1948 and is still active. This
section has an active gas collection system
which covers the southern 2/3 of this
section. The gas collection system is
operated by Air Products and produces about
400,000 m3/day (14 million ftVday) of
landfill gas. The landfill gas is routed to a
gas processing plant adjacent to Section 1/9
where condensate, CO2, and most VOCs are
removed. The cleaned gas is sold to a local
utility. This section contains three distinct
regions: the area of the gas collection
system, the closed area without landfill gas
recovery, and the active landfill. There are
approximately 36 passive vents in the
southern portion of this section which are
between 18 and 40 m (60 and 130 ft.) in
elevation.
1.3 Project Objectives
The overall objectives of the
program were to characterize the
composition of landfill gas and determine
the overall emission rate of various
pollutants from the landfill. The specific
objectives of this program were to:
• Collect samples of landfill gas from
various locations and analyze the
samples for a comprehensive list of
target analytes;
• Measure the fluxes of landfill gas
from the surface of each section of
the landfill using an emission
isolation flux chamber;
1-4
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Measure the flow and composition of
landfill gas in the gas collection and passive
venting systems; and
• Develop emission rate estimates for
major features of the landfill and an
overall emission rate estimate for the
entire landfill.
1.4 Technical Approach
A general overview of the sampling
approaches that were used is provided in
Table 1 -1. All four sections of the landfill
were sampled to measure the emissions from
each major emission source at the landfill,
determine the heterogeneity of the
emissions, and determine the composition of
the gas below the surface within the landfill.
The emission estimates were
produced by measuring emissions at the
passive gas vents, as well as the soil flux of
landfill gases at representative locations
across the landfill. Measurements also were
taken of samples from the landfill gas
recovery system and landfill gas monitoring
wells to characterize the composition of the
gas below the surface within the landfill.
Samples of the condensed liquid from the
gas collection system also were collected, as
were a limited number of samples of surface
soils and liquid seeps from the landfill.
The emission estimates are based on:
• Flow rate and composition of gas
released from the passive vent
pipes;
• Flux rate and composition of gas
released at the landfill surface; and
• Composition and flow rate of landfill
gas and condensate from the gas
collection system.
The limitations inherent in this study
included logistical constraints on sample
size. Spatial variability was considered to
be the most important variable in this study
related to representative sampling because
landfills are known to exhibit a large
variation in gas production from one area to
the next. The focus of the sampling design
therefore was to maximize the spatial
coverage. Passive vents allow a "path of
least resistance" for the landfill gases to
escape the landfill, so the emissions from
these sources were expected to be
significantly higher (where they exist) than
the emissions of landfill gases through the
landfill surface. In areas without either
passive vents or landfill gas collection, the
landfill gases are emitted through the surface
based on the subsurface obstructions and
available natural pathways. The surface flux
emissions were expected to be highly
variable across the site, so the landfill
surface areas were divided into features and
each feature was initially screened to locate
"hot spots" for placing flux chambers. The
flux chamber measurements thus are
conservative; i.e., they are biased such that
they are higher than the average emission
flux for a given area. The total number of
flux chamber canisters were apportioned
most heavily on landfill Section 6/7, which
has no geomembrane, passive vents, or gas
collection system and which is currently
accepting waste.
The short-term temporal variability
of the gas composition and emission rate
also were evaluated. This study did not
address long-term variability, but rather was
intended to characterize emissions under the
Radian Corporation
1-5
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Table 1-1
Summary of Sampling Approach
Emission
Source
Passive vents
Soil surfaces
Landfill gas
collection
system
Surface seej>s
Measured
Parameter
Gas flow
Gas composition
Off-gas "hot spots"
Off-gas flow
Gas composition
Soil physical
properties
Soil composition
Gas flow
Gas composition
Liquid (condensate)
composition
Liquid composition
On-Site
Analysis
Flow rate and temperature
Fixed gases, Hg, H2S
THC
Flow rate (derived from
flux chamber data) and
temperature
H2S
—
—
Flow rate and temperature
Fixed gases, Hg, H2S
__
—
Off-Site
Analysis
—
VOCs, TNMOC,
Fixed gases
—
~~
VOCs, TNMOC,
Fixed gases
% moisture, bulk
density, particle
density, PSD
VOCs
—
VOCs, TNMOC,
Fixed gases
VOCs
VOCs
Fixed gases = CH4, CO2, and O2
VOCs = Speciation for > 100 compounds for canister samples, = EPA Method 8240 list
plus other major chromatographic peaks for soil and liquid samples
TNMOC = Total non-methane organic compounds
THC = Total hydrocarbons
PSD = Particle size distribution
1-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
current conditions (i.e., during the three
weeks of testing in the summer of 1995). A
statistical analysis of the measurement data
was performed to characterize certain
sources of variability. Sources of variability
addressed in the sampling strategy included
sampling, analytical, short-term temporal,
and spatial components of variability.
Diurnal variation from the passive vents was
assessed from on-site measurements of flow,
H2S, and fixed gases made at the beginning
and end of each sampling day.
The data from each individual
measurement location were used to generate
emission factors in terms of mass per time
per area or per number of units or per mass
of waste. For example, the measurements at
the passive vents resulted in an emission
factor of the average g/sec per vent for a
given pollutant, while the measurements of
the soil flux resulted in an emission factor of
average g/sec per m2 of emitting surface.
These emission factors were multiplied by
activity factors, such as the total number of
vents or the total m2 of emitting surface, to
yield an emission rate in terms of mass/time.
1.5 Uses and Limitations of the Data
The purpose of this study was to
measure air emission rates from the landfill
and characterize the composition of the
landfill gas. The data are valid for those
purposes. The report provides information
about the types of gas-phase pollutants both
emitted and found within the landfill as well
as the absolute amounts of various pollutants
that are emitted. The report provides
information about the relative strength of
various emission sources; i.e., the
percentage of the total emissions emitted
from each section, from various landfill
features, and from point versus area sources.
Finally, the report provides information on
the variability in the emissions.
Sections 2/8 and 3/4 of the landfill
currently are undergoing closure and
installation of a gas collection system, so the
emission measurements made this summer
are not necessarily representative of past or
future emissions. Measurements were made
only during summer months, and no attempt
was made to determine the long-term
variation in emissions from the various
sources. Nevertheless, the emission factors
developed in this study can be used to
estimate past and future emissions at the
landfill.
The activity factors may significantly
change over time as the landfill undergoes
closure and the physical layout of the Fresh
Kills landfill changes, but the emission
factors developed in this study should
remain the best estimate of unit emissions;
i.e., the number of vents may change or the
amount of emitting soil surface may change,
but the g/sec per vent or per m2 of soil for a
given feature (top, side, toe) and a given
cover material (soil or liner) will remain
unchanged over the next several years. This
is true even if the passive vent gas ultimately
is collected and routed to a gas plant. The
amount of landfill gas produced per ton of
waste is essentially constant over a several
year period and, once produced, this gas will
find a route to exit the landfill. Emission
estimates can be made by updating the
activity factor data and multiplying the
updated activity factors by the emission
factors given in this report. Over longer
timeframes, (e.g. 5+years), the gas
production rate will vary significantly as a
function of the age of the waste and the
emission factors in this report will be less
reliable.
Radian Corporation
1-7
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
It was not the objective of this study
to characterize the local air quality,
determine the relative contribution of air
emissions from the Fresh Kills landfill to the
pollutant levels in the ambient air, or
evaluate the impacts on human health and
the environment of air emissions from the
landfill. The data presented in this report do
not directly address any of the above
questions, but the data set generated in this
study could be used to develop answers to
those questions. For example, the emission
rates, locations of emission sources, and
release parameters (i.e., stack heights, flow
rates, and temperatures) given in this report
could be used as inputs to an atmospheric
dispersion model to estimate short-term and
long-term ambient concentrations at various
locations within the community. These data
then could be compared to existing
regulatory and health standards as part of an
air pathway assessment.
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Air Emissions Study
2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
A comprehensive landfill gas
measurement program was performed over a
3-week period at the Fresh Kills landfill.
Emission rates of landfill gases were
determined from concentration and flow
measurements made at the two major
emission sources: passive vents and the
surface of the landfill. In addition, the mass
flow rates to the gas collection system at
Section 1/9 were determined. Traditional
sample collection and sample analysis
methods were employed. Some
consideration was given to using an open
path monitoring approach employing Fourier
Transform Infrared (FTTR) spectroscopy, but
this approach was rejected due to concerns
about the number of compounds that could
be detected, the detection limits that could
be achieved, and the difficulty in converting
measured ambient concentrations to
emission rates (Eklund, 1995).
The landfill contains four sections as
shown in Figure 1-1 and each section can be
subdivided into three features (top, side, and
toe). The surface of the landfill is covered
by either soil, clay, or a polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) membrane. There are many possible
combinations of features and cover material
(e.g., top with soil cover, side with clay
cover, etc.) The surface areas, number of
passive vents, and other activity factors used
to extrapolate the measured emissions to the
entire landfill are summarized in Table 2-1
(all tables appear at the end of the section
following the text).
The individual measurement data
were compiled and evaluated to determine
the typical composition of landfill gas at
Fresh Kills. These data are shown in Table
2-2 for selected compounds. These
compounds were selected based on their
frequency of occurrence in the samples and
their average concentration. The estimate is
based on measurements made of the gas
collection system. These represent
integrated samples drawn from over 200
extraction wells that withdraw gas over a
wide area and from a significant depth
interval. The landfill gas composition was
found to be fairly consistent from one
emission source to another. Approximately
75 to 80% of the mass of VOCs in the
samples was identified as specific VOCs.
The overall emission rates from the
landfill were determined by summing the
emissions from the passive vents and the
emissions from the landfill surface. Of the
two data sets, the emission rates for the
passive vents are considered to be more
accurate because volatile organic compound
(VOC) measurements were made at about
25% of the vents. The emissions from the
landfill surface, in contrast, are based on
extrapolations from a limited number of
measurements that cover only a small
fraction of the total emitting surface.
For the surface emissions, emission
factors were developed and emission rates
were calculated based on surface areas. The
surface area data were readily available and
the surface area to volume ratio for the tops
of the sections, where 90% of the surface
emissions occur, was believed to be
relatively constant across a given section.
Similarly, the MSW density is assumed to
be relatively constant across the landfill.
Therefore, the surface area data were used as
a surrogate for MSW mass. No attempt was
made to correlate emissions to the age of the
underlying waste.
Radian Corporation
2-1
-------
Fresh Kills Air Emissions Study
The overall emission rates from the
landfill for selected compounds are given in
Table 2-3. An estimated 52.7 g/sec of total
non-methane hydrocarbons (TNMHC) is
being emitted. Emission rates for individual
VOCs were up to 1.82 g/sec, with many
VOCs in the 0.1 to 1.0 g/sec range.
Hydrogen sulfide emissions are estimated to
be 0.46 g/sec. An estimated 28,100 g/sec of
methane is being emitted, along with 39,600
g/sec of carbon dioxide. The methane
number is an upper limit based, in part, on
the analytical detection limit of methane flux
frorr --urfaces covered by PVC cover. In
gene.id, the emission estimates are
conservative (i.e., they are more likely to be
biased high than biased low).
As a check of the emission rate
estimates, the measurements from the gas
collection system were used to develop
emission rates for the entire landfill. The
emission rates were developed by
multiplying the total mass flow rate to the
gas collection plant (north header + south
header) by a factor of 9.1, which is based on
the ratio of the total mass of MSW in the
landfill to the mass of MSW within the area
of in: ence of all gas extraction wells. The
agre 'snt between the two estimation
approaches was better than expected.
The efficiency of the gas collection
system was evaluated from the measured
mass flow rates. The mass flow rate of
methane to the gas collection plant is 2,0.90
g/sec. The measured methane emission flux
from the surface of Section 1/9 in areas
where active gas collection is taking place
averaged 0.143 g/m2-min over a surface area
of 192,900 m2. This flux equals an emission
rate from the landfill surface of 460 g/sec of
methane. Therefore, 82% of the landfill gas
is being captured by the gas collection
system.
Sections 2/8 and 3/4 of the landfill
currently are being retrofitted with a PVC
cover, passive vents, and extraction wells.
Eventually the passive vents will be plugged
and all collected gas will be routed to gas
collection plants similar to the plant in
operation at Section 1/9 (Gleason, 1995).
2.1 Conclusions
Several conclusions can be drawn
from these data and the data presented
elsewhere in this document:
• The measurement approaches used in
this study were successful for the
determination of emission rates and
gas composition at the landfill;
• The emissions from the passive vents
are relatively insignificant compared
with emissions from the surface of
the landfill on an absolute basis (due
to the relatively small number of
vents and the large amount of surface
area);
• The gas extraction and collection
system in place at Section 1/9 does a
good job of controlling air emissions
from the areas within the radius of
influence of the gas extraction wells;
• The on-going retrofit of a PVC
cover, passive vents, and extraction
wells will ultimately result in
reduced air emissions of VOCs from
the landfill, once the gas is routed to
a collection and processing system;
and
2-2
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Air Emissions Study
• Measurements performed at the gas
collection headers can be used to
provide estimates of emissions from
the overall landfill for many
compounds, thereby providing
reliable information in a very cost-
effective manner.
2.2 Recommendations
The on-going retrofit of the landfill
shows great promise for reducing air
emissions. The completion of capping the
landfill with a PVC cover, installing passive
vents, and installing a facility-wide gas
extraction and collection system would be
beneficial from an air pollution standpoint.
A large and detailed data set was
produced during this project and only certain
key data trends and relationships were
examined during the limited time available
to review the data and produce this report.
A more thorough analysis of the data is
recommended before the data set is used for
regulatory analysis and compliance issues,
human health risk assessments, etc.
The mercury measurements were
performed using a portable analyzer rather
than the standard EPA reference method. In
addition, mercury concentrations were
measured at only a subset of the sampling
locations. Therefore, the data set for
mercury emissions generated in this study
should not be considered to be definitive.
Several areas of work could help
answer questions that still remain:
Additional measurements of the
mercury flux from the landfill
surface would improve the existing
knowledge of overall mercury
emissions from the landfill;
The anaerobic environment within
the landfill is likely to result in some
of the mercury being present as
organo-mercury compounds. These
compounds are generally more
volatile and more toxic than
elemental mercury. Speciation of the
mercury emissions would provide
useful information for any human
health risk assessment work to be
performed in the future.
Measurements should be conducted
at the gas processing plant to
determine the fate of mercury
entering the gas plant and the amount
of mercury contained in the gas sold
to the utility.
Radian Corporation
2-3
-------
Table 2-1
Summary of Activity Factor Information
E
i
-a
o
I
Feature
Passive Vents
Entire Section
Entire Section
"Top" of Section
"Side" of Section
"Toe" of Section
Active Face
Landfill Gas Collection System
Cracks'
Seeps (wet)
Seeps (wet + dried)b
Perimeter Vent Trenchd
Perimeter pipes
Parameter
Total count
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass of Waste0
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface Area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Surface area
Surface area
Surface area
Total
Units
#
hectare
kg
hectare
kg
hectare
kg
hectare
kg
hectare
kg
hectare
kg
m2
m2
m2
m2
#
Landfill Section
1/9
36
175.57
3.70 xlO10
68.95
2.12 xlO10
56.24
8.16x10'
30.02
1.70x10"
1.07
NA
19.29
7.82 x 109
1,756
55.74
55.74
2,546
0
6/7
0
75.44
1.15x10'°
39.52
7.54 x 109
20.31
2.70 xlO9
13.33
1.27x10'
2.28
NA
0.0
0.0
754.4
37.16
37.16
790
0
3/4
119
57.17
1.21 x 10'°
13.02
4.98 x 109
22.10
4.92 x 109
22.05
2.16xl09
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
571.7
9.29
9.29
2,231
0
2/8
102
58.05
1.05x10'°
11.77
4.31 x 109
21.70
4.23 x 109
24.58
1.97 x 10'
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
580.5
4.64
4.64
1,004
0
• Cracks were estimated to cover approximately 0.1% of entire surface area.
b Only wet seep areas were identified. Therefore, wet + dried seep area is set equal to wet seep area.
c Top of Section mass includes mass of active face which is located on the top of Section 1/9 and 6/7
d Assumed width of vent trenches was 1.5 m (5 ft). Note: Vent trenches were not found during field
NA = N ot Available
Were unable to accurately measure mass of active face.
investigation, but were found on autocad maps of each section.
-------
Table 2-2
Average Landfill Gas Composition (ppm)
Compound
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
TNMHC
Ethane
Total Unidentified VOCs
Limonene
Toluene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
p-Isopropyltoluene
Propane
Isobutane
a-Pinene
3-Methylpentane
Acetone
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
n-Undecane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Ethylbenzene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
Isopentane
n-Nonane
Concentration
(ppm)
55.63%
37.14%
0.99%
438.09
222.61
134.55
35.38
14.57
13.97
13.14
13.03
8.24
7.85
7.75
6.09
5.97
5.50
5.06
4.71
3.98
3.80
3.76
3.57
Compound
o-Ethyltoluene
p-Diethylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
t-2-Pentene
o-Xylene
o-Dichlorobenzene
n-Propylbenzene
Styrene
1-Undecene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 3 ,5-Trimethylbenzene
n-Butylbenzene
m-Diethylbenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Chlorobenzene
Dichlorotoluene
n-Octane
n-Pentane
Benzene
n-Hexane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Concentration
(ppm)
3.43
2.67
2.49
2.37
2.17
2.17
2.09
2.02
2.02
2.01
1.90
1.88
1.76
1.50
1.46
1.27
1.15
1.15
0.99
0.97
0.93
0.92
0.92
Note: Values are given for all compounds detected above an average concentration of 0.90 ppm or greater in
the landfill gas collection system headers. See Section 5 for complete data for all compounds.
Radian Corporation
2-5
-------
Table 2-3
Landfill Gas Production and Emissin Rates for Fresh Kills Landfill
Compound
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
TNMHC
Total Unidentified VOCs
Ethane
Isopentane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
Isobutane
Limonene
Toluene
Acetone
n-Propylbenzene
p/m-Xylene
Ethylbenzene
Propane
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
n-Butane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
n-Nonane
Hydrogen Sulfide
Methylene Chloride
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
o-Xylene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
Styrene
Chlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Tetrachloroethylene
Mass Emission Rates (g/sec)
Emissions Captured by
Landfill Gas
Collection System*
3.83e+03
2.09e+03
8.02e400
2.45e400
1.42e+00
5.01e-02
4.27e-01
1.03e-01
1.03e+00
2.94e-01
8.74e-02
5.40e-02
1.39e-01
1.06e-01
1.25e-01
4.75e-02
4.70e-02
1.34e-01
l.OOe-01
6.51e-01
9.14e-03
2.33e-01
4.99e-02
9.33e-03
4.70e-02
2.88e-02
5.38e-02
2.20e-02
Total
Landfill Gas
Production Rate*
4.34e+04
2.39e+04
4.14e+01
1.71e+01
3.24e+00
1.55e+00
1.87e+00
1.15e+00
1.91e+00
1.10e+00
7.98e-01
7.34e-01
7.59e-01
7.00e-01
7.11e-01
6.27e-01
6.01e-01
6.29e-01
5.81e-01
1.10e+00
3.09e-01
2.95e-01
2.98e-01
2.25e-01
2.59e-01
1.88e-01
1.68e-01
1.31e-01
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions1
3.96e+04
2.18e+04
3.34e+01
1.46e+01
1.81e+00
1.50e+00
1.44e+00
1.05e+00
8.82e-01
8.02e-01
7.10e-01
6.80e-01
6.21e-01
5.94e-01
5.85e-01
5.79e-01
5.54e-01
4.96e-01
4.81e-01
4.53e-01
3.00e-01
2.95e-01
2.48e-01
2.16e-01
2.12e-01
1.59e-01
1.14e-01
1.09e-01
2-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 2-3
(Continued)
Compound
b-Pinene
Vinyl Chloride
Benzene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
Mercurv
Mass Emission Rates (g/sec)
Emissions Captured by
Landfill Gas
Collection System*
1.79e-02
3.88e-03
1.60e-02
5.02e-03
1.20e-02
O.OOe+00
3.28e-02
7.12e-03
2.84e-02
Total
Landfill Gas
Production Rateb
1.06e-01
5.39e-02
5.97e-02
4.85e-02
5.18e-02
3.61e-02
5.02e-02
1.41e-02
3.38e-02
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions0
8.85e-02
5.00e-02
4.37e-02
4.35e-02
3.97e-02
3.61e-02
1.74e-02
6.98e-03
5.45e-03
a Emission to Landfill Gas Collection System include emissions from landfill gas condensate
collected.
b Total landfill gas production = emissions from landfill surface + emissions from passive vents +
emissions captured by landfill gas collection system.
c Total landfill gas air emissions = emissions from landfill surface + emissions from passive
vents. Emissions captured by landfill gas collection system are incinerated.
Radian Corporation
2-7
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
3.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH
This section describes the technical
approach employed during the Fresh Kills
landfill gas characterization study. The
monitoring program consisted of measuring
the composition, concentrations, and flow
rate of the landfill gas exiting the landfill
(both passive vents and active landfill gas
extraction being performed by Air Products)
as well as collecting emission flux samples
of the gas being emitted through the landfill
surface. In addition, condensate samples
from the landfill gas collection system,
samples of the liquid (mud) coming from
seeps at the landfill, and soil samples from
the surface of the landfill were collected.
Table 3-1 presents an overview of the
sampling and analytical approaches used
during the monitoring program.
A more detailed description of the
project objectives, experimental design,
sampling and analytical methods, and
quality assurance and quality control
procedures were presented in the Quality
Assurance Project Plan/Sampling Plan for
this project (Anderson, Burrows, and
Eklund, 1995).
3.1 Sampling Strategy
This section briefly discusses the
sampling strategy used during the
monitoring program. Gas samples from
three distinct sources of the landfill were
collected:
• Sampling of the passive vent system;
• Flux chamber sampling of the soil
emissions; and
• Sampling of the landfill gas
collection system (both individual
gas extraction wells and combined
headers).
The site contains a number of
passive vents, which are goose necked pipes
open to the ambient air. These vents are
used to provide "pathways of least
resistance" of the landfill gas near the
surface to avoid large gas pockets from
building up under the landfill cover (liner).
These vents were monitored for flow rate,
fixed gases (i.e., CH4, CO2, and O2), H2S,
mercury, and speciated hydrocarbons. Only
three of the four landfill sections (3/4, 2/8,
and 1/9) had passive vents installed, and
those on 1/9 only covered a small portion of
the section.
The gaseous emissions emanating
from the landfill surface were measured
using an emission isolation flux chamber
(flux chamber). Fixed gases, H2S, and
speciated hydrocarbons were measured in air
samples collected from the flux chambers.
Mercury measurements were made at five
locations. Flux measurements were made on
all four sections of the landfill, however, the
majority of the monitoring was performed
on section 6/7. This section does not have
an impermeable liner, passive vents, or a gas
collection system, therefore it was expected
to have the highest soil emissions from the
soil surface. Limited numbers of flux
measurements were made on the other three
landfill sections, so that overall releases of
landfill gas pollutants from the site could be
estimated.
The third sample type was gas
samples taken from the landfill gas
collection system. Air Products is
Radian Corporation
3-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Table 3-1
Summary of Sampling and Analytical Techniques
Measurement
Sampling Technique
Analytical Technique
Passive Vents
Flow Rate
Fixed Gases (i.e., CH4, CO2, and O2)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
Speciated VOCs, Fixed Gases (i.e.,
CH4, CO2, and O2), and TNMOC
Direct Reading
Direct Reading
Tedlar Bag
Gold Foil Dosimeter
SUMMA® Canisters
Vane Anemometer
Geo Group GA90 Infrared Analyzer
Jerome Model 631 H2S Analyzer
Jerome Model 43 1 Analyzer
GC/MD (fixed loop) for speciated VOCs
and TNMOC and TCD (fixed gas)
Flux Chamber Monitoring of Emissions from Landfill Surface
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
Speciated VOCs, Fixed Gases (i.e.,
CH4, CO2, and O2), and TNMOC
Tedlar Bag
Tedlar Bag
SUMMA® Canisters
Jerome Model 631 H2S Analyzer
Jerome Model 431 Analyzer
GC/MD (fixed loop) for speciated VOCs
and TNMOC and TCD (fixed gas)
Surface Soil/Liquid Samples
Speciated VOCs
Grab
SW-846 Method 8240
Individual Extraction Wells
Flow Rate
Fixed Gases (i.e., CH4, CO2, and O2)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
Speciated VOCs, Fixed Gases (i.e.,
CH4, CO2, and O2), and TNMOC
Orifice Plate
Direct Reading
Tedlar Bag
Tedlar Bag
SUMMA® Canisters
Orifice Plate Calculation
Geo Group 6A90 Infrared Analyzer
Jerome Model 631 H2S Analyzer
Jerome Model 431 Hg Analyzer
GC/MD (fixed loop) for speciated VOCs
and TNMOC and TCD (fixed gas)
Combined Landfill Gas Recovery Headers
Flow Rate
Fixed Gases (i.e., CH4, CO2, and O2)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
Speciated VOCs, Fixed Gases (i.e.,
CH4, CO2, and O2), and TNMOC
VOCs in Condensate
Standard Pilot
Direct Reading
Tedlar Bag
Tedlar Bag
SUMMA® Canisters
Grab
Pilot Calculation
Geo Group 6A90 Infrared Analyzer
Jerome Model 631 H2S Analyzer
Jerome Model 431 Hg Analyzer
GC/MD (fixed loop) for specialed VOCs
and TNMOC and TCD (fixed gas)
SW-846 Melhod 8240
3-2
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
collecting landfill gas from approximately
two-thirds of Section 1/9, treating the gas to
remove impurities, and selling the product
gas.
This system is made up of over 250
individual extraction wells manifolded
together. Samples were collected from the
combined flow entering the gas plant as well
as from individual wells. Over a third of
these individual wells, however, were
underground, making access to them
impossible. Therefore, the wells that were
sampled were selected from those above
ground. All individual wells were
manifolded into two well headers designated
North or South field. Each of the two
headers was 0.46m (18 in.) diameter and
combined they carried approximated 350
mVmin (10,000 CFM) of landfill gas. These
two well field headers were sampled six
times during the monitoring program. These
data were used to determine the
representative landfill gas composition, the
mass flow rate and short term temporal
variability in the landfill gas composition.
A major objective of the monitoring
program was to assess the components and
degree of variability for the data set.
Potential sources of variability include:
Sampling variability;
Analytical variability;
Temporal variability; and
Spatial variability.
The monitoring program was designed to
assess each of these various sources of
variability.
In order to collect representative
samples, the sampling and analytical
methods must be reproducible. To measure
the ability of the sampling and analytical
method to accurately reproduce the
measurement results, duplicate samples for
each measurement technique were collected
and those samples were then analyzed in
duplicate (nested duplicates); i.e., for certain
locations, two samples were collected and a
total of four analyses were performed. This
type of a design allowed the sampling and
analytical variability to be estimated. The
magnitude of these two components must be
known before other components of
variability can be assessed.
Temporal variability defines the
degree to which a measurement varies over a
period of time. This time period may be
within the same day (diurnal), between
different days, or over an annual period.
Since this program only lasted three weeks,
changes in concentration or mass emission
rate due to temperature or seasonal changes
could not be assessed. The design did
evaluate the degree of variability of
concentrations and emission rates over the
period of the study. This was accomplished
by sampling individual passive vents,
extraction wells, and flux chamber locations
multiple times over the course of the field
study. The sampling and analytical
duplicate samples were also collected as part
of the temporal assessment.
Spatial variability defines the degree
to which a measurement varies over area or
space. This component is used to assess the
degree of uniformity (or non-uniformity) in
emissions from a given area. It is assumed
that the general types of MSW accepted by
all four sections of the landfill are similar,
however, the exact composition of MSW
buried at any given location may vary
widely. Therefore, the overall emissions
(both qualitatively and quantitatively) from a
Radian Corporation
3-3
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
given landfill section would be expected to
be fairly similar given equal areas, volume,
and age. The emissions from point to point,
however, could vary significantly. The
spatial variability was assessed by sampling
many different points from each section (or
in the case of the passive vents, all
locations). The spatial variability estimate
also considers the differences in cover (e.g.,
liner, clay cap, or soil cover), feature (e.g.,
top, sides, or toe of landfill), and control
devices (e.g., passive vents or landfill gas
collection).
3.2 Sampling Procedures
This section describes the sampling
approaches that were used to collect the
various samples. This discussion is
organized by type of sampling location (i.e.,
passive vents, flux chamber, and landfill gas
collection system) with the various sampling
techniques for each analyte described
therein.
3.2.1 Passive Vent Gas Sampling
Landfill Sections 2/8, 3/4, and 1/9
have numerous passive vents that allow
landfill gas to escape from the landfill.
Every vent in these three landfill sections
was sampled to determine the flow rate, the
concentration of fixed gases (i.e., CH4, CO2,
and O2), and the concentration of H2S. In
addition, a subset of these vents were
sampled for vapor phase mercury, TNMOC,
and speciated VOCs. Section 2/8 contained
102 vents, Section 3/4 contained 119 vents,
and Section 1/9 contained 36 vents.
Approximately 10% of the vents did not
have flow, so their location was noted, but
no concentration data were collected.
Temporal and diurnal variability
were evaluated by monitoring five vents
over several days. These vents were
sampled three times during the program for
flow rate, H2S, and landfill gases. During
one of the sampling days, the vents were
sampled morning and afternoon to help
assess the extent of diurnal variability. Four
of these vents were sampled for speciated
VOCs using SUMMA® canisters. The
VOC sampling (which included speciated
VOCs, TNMOC, and fixed gases) also
occurred on three occasions during the
program. A duplicate canister was collected
at each of the four vents. The duplicate
canisters were analyzed in duplicate to allow
for a "nested" statistical design. A detailed
description of the sampling scheme used
during the monitoring program was
described in the QAPP/Sampling Plan.
The passive vent flow rates were
determined using a 0.10m (4 in.) diameter
vane anemometer. The anemometer was
integrated into a section of tubing that
attached directly to each passive vent,
thereby forcing all gas exiting the vent to
pass though the vane anemometer so that the
total linear feet of landfill gas flow was
measured. The period of time that gas was
allowed to flow through the anemometer
was measured so that the total linear feet of
gas per unit time could be calculated. Since
the cross-sectional area of the anemometer
was known, the volumetric flow rate
(mVmin) could subsequently be calculated.
The temperature of the gas exiting each vent
also was measured.
The concentration of the fixed gases
(i.e., CH4, CO2, and O2) was determined
using a hand-held direct reading instrument
manufactured by Geo Group. This
instrument has an internal sampling pump
3-4
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
and measures the analyte concentrations
using infrared spectroscopy. To determine
the gas concentrations, a stainless steel
probe was inserted at least 50 cm inside each
vent and the analyzer was allowed to sample
the vent gas until a steady value was
displayed on the instrument. This value was
then recorded.
The H2S concentrations were
determined using a Jerome model 631 H2S
analyzer. This is a real-time analyzer
capable of monitoring H2S concentrations
from the 3 ppb to 50 ppm range. With the
addition of a dilution system, the upper
range of the analyzer was increased to
approximately 350 ppm. Samples were
collected from each vent in one-liter
Tedlar® bags and analyzed in the on-site
laboratory. Tedlar® bag samples were
transported to the laboratory approximately
every hour so that analysis could be
completed within four hours. Samples were
allowed to equilibrate to the laboratory
temperature prior to analysis.
Mercury samples from the passive
vents were collected with Jerome gold-film
dosimeters and analyzed using a Jerome
Model 431 mercury analyzer. A teflon
sampling probe was placed approximately
50 cm inside each vent, and sample gas was
pulled at 100 mL/minute through the gold
dosimeter for approximately one hour. A
Dupont personal sampling pump, located
downstream of the dosimeter, was used to
control the flow through the dosimeter,
while a calibrated rotameter was used to
monitor the flow. Following sample
collection, the samples were analyzed on-
site using the Jerome mercury analyzer. All
samples were analyzed within four hours of
collection.
The canister samples were collected
by inserting a teflon line about 50 cm into
each vent and using the canister vacuum to
collect the gas sample. Prior to sample
collection, the sample line was purged with
a hand-held pump. The canisters were not
completely filled and were kept under
vacuum (e.g., 6-10 inches Hg) to help
prevent condensation inside the canister
from the saturated gas stream and to allow
greater dilutions to be made in the
laboratory.
3.2.2 Flux Chamber Monitoring
The concentration of landfill gas
being emitted from the surface of the landfill
was estimated using the emission isolation
flux chamber (flux chamber). The flux
chamber is an enclosure device used to
sample gaseous emissions from a defined
surface area. The flux chamber method is an
accepted standard EPA sampling method
(Kienbusch, 1986) which has previously
been used for measuring VOC emission
rates from a variety of solid and liquid
sources (Eklund, 1992).
The flux chamber was used to
measure emission fluxes (mass/time per
area) of individual VOCs, H2S, and fixed
gases. These data are used as inputs to
develop an overall landfill emission rate
(mass/time) for each area. All four landfill
sections were characterized. Sections 2/8
and 3/4 are undergoing closure with geo-
textile liners and passive vents. The strategy
for these two sections was to sample points
located over the liner, the clay cap, and the
unlined/uncapped section, and to collect
samples over various features (i.e., the top,
sides, and toe) of the section. A total of ten
points were sampled in each of these two
sections.
Radian Corporation
3-5
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Section 1/9 has an active face and
contains a landfill gas recovery system that
covers approximately two thirds of this
section. This section contains three distinct
regions: the area under the landfill gas
recovery, the closed area without landfill gas
recovery, and the active landfill. The
sampling over this section was designed
primarily to confirm that flux emissions
were low where landfill gas was being
recovered. A total of 10 flux chamber
samples were collected from this section.
Section 6/7 has no cover, no passive
vents, and no landfill gas collection system.
In addition, this section also has an active
face. Because there are no other ready
pathways for the gas to exit the landfill, the
gas generated in this section will tend to exit
the soil surface, primarily through cracks
and fissures in the landfill. Flux
measurements were made at a total of 43
locations in this section.
In Section 6/7 sampling was
conducted so that the three major features
(i.e., tops, sides, and toes of the Section)
could be characterized. This more intensive
sampling of Section 6/7 was used to
determine how emission rates are affected
on the basis of geometry and construction of
the landfill features. In addition, three flux
measurements were made on "fresh" garbage
areas of Section 6/7 (i.e., that portion where
garbage has been covered less than one
week). Flux samples were also collected
where other significant landfill features,
such as cracks and seeps were identified. As
a quality control check and to assess short-
term temporal variability, four sampling
points were sampled three to four times
during the study.
On a land surface this large,
completely surveying the entire area was not
feasible. Therefore, the strategy used to
locate the flux points consisted of going to at
least two widely-separated areas of the
Section and using an OVA to survey
emissions. The strategy was to locate "hot-
spots" for flux chamber sampling on the top,
sides, and toe of each area. This strategy
was considered a conservative approach for
estimating these surface emissions and
therefore, should tend to bias the emission
estimates high. While there may be
locations of high emissions that were not
sampled, this approach should result in the
average of the measured values exceeding
the actual average. The bias should be much
less at the other sections where passive vents
and gas collection are present.
The flux chambers were placed
directly over the area to be monitored and
pressed into the soil to a depth of 2-4 cm.
Sweep air (helium) was initiated
(approximately 10 L/min) using the sweep
air regulator and the sweep air rotameter.
The flux chamber was equilibrated, and after
four chamber residence times (12 minutes),
a short length of teflon tubing was
connected to the flux chamber and the
samples collected (either canister or bags
samples).
Emission rates determined from the
flux chamber sampling were calculated
based on the flow rate of gases exiting the
flux chamber (FE: mVmin), the concentration
of each compound in the exiting gases (CE:
micrograms/m3), and the flux chamber
surface area (0.13 m2), using the following
equation:
Emission
(Eq.
3-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Figure 3-1 depicts the relationship of
compound mass and landfill gas flow rates
entering and exiting the flux chamber at
steady-state conditions (i.e., the compound
mass and volumetric flow rates into the
chamber equals those exiting the chamber).
The formulas for calculating the mass
balance and the flow balance are:
FL =
(Eq.3-4)
Mass Balance
(Eq. 3-2)
Flow Balance
= F + F
L s
(Eq. 3-3)
where:
Fs = Flow rate of sweep
air;
FL = Flow rate of landfill
gas;
FE = Flow rate of flux
chamber exhaust; etc.
Cs = Concentration of
sweep air;
CL = Concentration of
landfill gas; and
CE = Concentration of flux
chamber exhaust.
Since the sweep air used was ultra high-
purity helium, the concentration of target
compounds in the sweep air, Cs, is zero.
Substituting for FE in the first equation and
rearranging yields the landfill gas flow rate
into the chamber:
This equation, along with the sweep air flow
rate, can be used to calculate the flux
chamber exhaust flow rate, FE. In most
instances, the landfill gas flow rate (FJ is
much less than the sweep air flow rate (Fs),
so the flux chamber exhaust flow rate (F^ is
essentially equal to the sweep air flow rate
(Fs). Several of the points sampled,
however, had significant gas flow to the
surface. Therefore, to calculate the landfill
gas flow rate (FJ for these points, the
methane concentration in the landfill gas
(CJ was assumed to be 50%. This value
was based on methane concentrations found
in the landfill gas extraction wells and
passive vents (i.e., raw landfill gas). This
value was then substituted into equation 3-4
to determine FL.
3.2.3 Landfill Gas Recovery System
Sample Collection
The landfill gas (LFG) recovery
system was sampled for gas flow rate, H2S,
mercury, fixed gases (CH4, CO2, and O2),
and speciated VOCs. The well field headers
(north field and south field) were monitored
just prior to entering the gas plant. In
addition, 25 individual gas extraction wells
were sampled. The 25 individual extraction
wells were sampled to assess spatial
variability of landfill gas composition and
concentration. A number of the individual
extraction wells were underground and
manifolded together, making the sampling
of certain individual wells impossible. As
many as two dozen of these wells were
manifolded together. Because sampling
these headers provided an integrated sample
Radian Corporation
3-7
-------
s?
V)
!=r
w
On
t/i
1'
On
SWEEP
AIR -
1 Fs- cs
FLUX
CHAMBER
FE,CE ^
CHAMBER
EXHAUST
LANDFILL
SURFACE
"L-°L
6
I
o
i.
o
NC0505 8/16/95
Figure 3-1 Mass and Flow Rates Entering and Exiting the Flux Chamber
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
representing all wells, no attempt was made
to try to characterize individual lines.
The gas flow rate of the landfill gas
collection system was determined using
standard pitot tubes installed in the two
header lines. The individual well flow rates
were determined using an orifice plate
installed in the system between the well
head and the vacuum line. The pressure
drop across the orifice plate or pitot tube, the
duct diameter, gas moisture content
(assumed to be at saturation), orifice plate
calibration factor, and gas molecular weight
were used to determine the volumetric flow
rate.
Fixed gases, H2S, and mercury
samples were collected in Tedlar® bags and
analyzed in the on-site laboratory. Gas was
extracted from the wells and well headers
using a vacuum pump. The analysis
technique used for these samples was the
same as those used for the passive vents,
except that the fixed gases had to be
extracted into a bag because the instrument
could not overcome the high vacuums inside
the wells and headers.
The mercury samples from the gas
collection system were collected differently
than the samples from the passive vents. An
initial attempt at using a mercury dosimeter
to collect the mercury demonstrated that the
mercury concentrations in the gas collection
system were far higher than the dosimeter
was designed to measure. Once this was
known, a bag sample was injected directly
into the instrument. This sample was also
well above the range the instrument was able
to measure. The method finally used to
quantitate the mercury concentrations was to
use the Jerome Analyzer's calibration
device, which consisted of a glass manifold,
an air purification cartridge, and a rubber
septum. This system works by pulling room
air through a zero air filter to remove
potential interferences. In the calibration
mode, 1 mL of a saturated mercury
headspace is injected through the septum
and into the analyzer. The approach
developed in the field was to use this
apparatus and inject 1 mL of the sample gas
from the gas collection system into the
analyzer.
Samples for speciated hydrocarbon
analysis were collected in SUMMA®
polished stainless steel canisters. The
samples were collected by first purging the
sample line using a vacuum pump. After the
line had been conditioned, a ball valve
installed on the sample line was closed and
the canister was attached. This prevented
backflow of ambient air into the sample line,
which would have then been sampled by the
canister. The canister vacuum was used to
collect the samples. Therefore, final canister
vacuums were greater than or equal to the
vacuum of the wells and headers (e.g., 0.25-
0.30m [10-12 in.] Hg). Using canister
vacuum to collect the samples minimizes the
potential for sample contamination due to
carryover that can occur in pumped systems.
The samples were analyzed in Radian's
Austin, Texas laboratories for fixed gases
(CH4, CO2, and O2), TNMOC, and speciated
hydrocarbons.
3.2.4 Liquid and Soil Sampling
In addition to the gas sampling, a
small number of landfill condensate, liquid
seep, and soil samples were collected. The
landfill condensate samples were collected
from one of two sources. The first source
was the North and South Field headers.
Samples were collected directly from this
Radian Corporation
3-9
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
source using a vacuum pump to extract the
condensate from the bottom of the header
pipes. This was the preferred method;
however, there were several sampling
periods when this was not possible because
of problems with access to the headers.
When this occurred, the samples were
collected from the air/water separator
located immediately downstream of the two
headers. Condensate samples were
collected during a total of eight sampling
episodes. Condensate samples were
collected in 40-mL VOA vials and analyzed
for volatile organics compounds using SW-
846 Method 8240. Samples were collected
with zero headspace and cooled to 4°C
immediately following sample collection.
Samples were kept cool until they were
analyzed, which occurred within seven days
from sample collection.
Three seep samples were collected,
one each from Sections 3/4, 2/8, and 6/7.
The seep samples were collected at points
where liquid was leaking out of the landfill.
Since there were no pools of this liquid, the
samples were more of a slurry than a liquid.
These samples were collected in 100 mL
wide-mouthed VOA vials. These samples
also were stored at 4°C, and analyzed by
SW-846 Method 8240 within seven days of
sample collection.
Soil samples were collected from 12
locations across the landfill to evaluate the
concentrations of VOCs in the surface cover
matrix. Samples were collected at a depth of
8-10 cm (3-4 in.) below the landfill surface.
Samples were collected in 100-mL wide-
mouthed VOA vials and packed as tightly as
possible to minimize headspace inside the
vial. These samples were stored at 4°C and
analyzed by SW-846 Method 8240 within
seven days of sample collection.
Additional soil samples were
collected at these same 12 locations and
analyzed for physical parameters: moisture,
bulk density, and particle density. These
samples were collected using 0.46 m (18 in.)
Shelby tubes.
3.3 Analytical Procedures
The analytical procedures for this
program are divided into on-site analyses
(H2S, mercury, flow rate measurements, and
landfill gases) and off-site analyses (VOC
canisters and SW-846 Method 8240
Analysis). Details of the analytical methods
are presented in the following subsections.
3.3.1 VOC Analytical Methods
Samples for speciated VOC analysis
were collected in evacuated, SUMMA®
polished stainless steel canisters. The VOCs
were then analyzed using a gas chromato-
graph (GC) equipped with dual columns and
multiple detectors (GC/MD). The detectors
included a flame ionization detector (FID), a
photoionization detector (PID), and an
electrolytic conductivity detector (ELCD).
The fixed gas (i.e., O2, CO2, and CH4)
analysis was performed using a thermal
conductivity detector (TCD). Selected
samples were also analyzed using gas
chromatography with mass spectroscopy
(GC/MS) to help identify compounds not
identified by GC/MD. GC/MS analysis was
performed on 25% of the passive vent and
active landfill gas collection samples and
20% of the flux chamber samples.
When the canisters arrived in the
laboratory, the final field pressures were
checked to verify that the canisters did not
leak during transit. Following pressure
checks, the canisters were pressurized with
3-10
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
UHP-grade helium both to dilute the sample
and facilitate its removal from the canister.
The speciated VOC sample analysis
was performed using cryogenic trapping
(flux chamber samples) or fixed loop
injection (passive vent and landfill gas
collection system samples). The GC/MD
system was configured for this program
without a Nation dryer. For the samples
analyzed using the cryogenic concentration
technique, the traps were thermally desorbed
and the material cryogenically focused onto
a capillary column for separation of the
compounds. One column eluent was
analyzed by the FID and PID detectors
arranged in series configuration with the
eluent from the second column being
analyzed by the ELCD. The FID/PID were
used to quantitate the aromatic and aliphatic
hydrocarbons. The ELCD was used to
quantitate most of the halogenated
hydrocarbon species. For the samples
analyzed using the fixed loop system, the
sample loops were purged with the sample
gas, filled, and then injected onto the two
columns described above. The fixed loop
system was also calibrated using a fixed
loop injection technique. A description of
the various instruments used to analyze the
samples was contained in the
QAPP/Sampling Plan [Ref 2].
The peak identification was based on
normalized retention times, detector
responses, and individual compound
response from the daily calibration standard.
The retention time of each peak on the FID
was calculated relative to the retention time
of toluene (RRT). The PID data then were
scanned for any peaks that matched the FID
retention times. The corresponding PDD/FID
response ratio was then compared with the
sample's PID/FID response for toluene to
generate a toluene-normalized response
(TNR) factor. Different compound classes
and individual compounds produce
characteristic TNRs. The RRT and TNR
data were compared with the compound
database parameters and the daily calibration
standard analysis for potential matches. The
potential matches were reviewed and
validated by experienced personnel to ensure
data quality.
During this program, the
chromatograms were first validated for the
major compounds (i.e., those contained in
the calibration standard) found in the sample
followed by evaluating the sample
chromatograms for other major peaks. The
quantitation of the major compounds was
based on individual response factors for the
calibrated compounds and an average
carbon-based response for the non-calibrated
compounds. The identification of non-
calibrated compounds was based on Radian's
extensive library of compounds.
3.3.2 Fixed Gas Analysis
The percent level analysis of the
fixed gases (i.e., methane, carbon dioxide,
oxygen, and carbon monoxide) were
performed using a Hewlett-Packard Model
5710A gas chromatograph equipped with
dual packed columns, a fixed loop injection
system, and a thermal conductivity detector
(TCD). Sample quantitation was based on
individual compound response factors.
Fixed gas analysis was performed on all
canister samples.
3.3.3 Volatile Organic Compounds in
Liquid and Soil Samples
Volatile organic compound analyses
were performed on landfill condensate,
Radian Corporation
3-11
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
landfill seep, and soil samples using SW-
846 Method 8240. The samples were
extracted with organic solvent, concentrated,
and introduced to the instrument via a purge
and trap device. The method uses scanning
gas chromatography with mass spectroscopy
(GC/MS). The laboratory used a Hewlett
Packard Model 4500 GC/MS system.
Samples were quantitated for a list of
common VOCs (8240 list), plus ten
tentatively identified compounds, based on
concentration, from the GC/MS library.
33.4 Mercury Analysis
The vapor-phase mercury samples
were either collected on gold foil dosimeters
or analyzed directly from a Tedlar® bag.
The mercury samples were analyzed on-site
using a Jerome Model 431 Gold Film
Mercury Vapor Analyzer. This system
works (for dosimeter samples) by thermally
desorbing the amalgamated mercury from
the dosimeter onto the gold film detector
inside the Jerome analyzer. For the bag
samples, the air was injected directly into the
analyzer where the mercury in the air sample
was amalgamated to the gold foil. The
analyzer then compared the increase in
electrical resistance of the gold foil before
and after the mercury amalgamation. The
change in resistance was directly
.proportional to the mass of mercury in the
sample. The analyzer's detection limit is
approximately 0.3 ng of mercury.
3.3.5 Hydrogen Sulfide Analysis
The hydrogen sulfide (H2S) analysis
was performed on-site using a Jerome 631-X
analyzer. This analyzer also uses a gold film
technology to measure H2S. Both the H2S
and mercury analyzers contain internal
scrubbers so that H2S does not interfere with
the mercury analysis and vice-versa (see
Section 6.2.1). This instrument has a
detection limit of approximately 3 ppb.
33.6 Landfill Gas Analyzer
A Geo Group landfill gas analyzer
was used on-site to measure the
concentrations of methane, carbon dioxide,
and oxygen. This instrument uses an
infrared measurement technique to
determine the concentrations of the gases.
The analyzer was calibrated using methane
and carbon dioxide standards; for oxygen,
ambient air was used.
3.3.7 Soil Analyses
Bulk density measurements were
made on the Shelby tubes samples. During
this program, bulk density was determined
using the method described in Methods of
Soil Analysis. American Society of
Agronomy, 1965. Using this method, the
mass of the samples was calculated by
difference using a top loading balance. The
dimensions of the cube or cylinder were
measured using a ruler. The bulk density
was calculated by dividing the mass by the
volume.
The particle density was determined
by measuring the mass of liquid required to
fill a closed container of known volume
containing a known mass of solids. The
volume of the liquid was calculated from the
mass of the liquid and the known density of
the liquid at the temperature at which the
measurements are made. The volume of the
solids is the difference between the volume
of the container and the volume of the
liquid. Particle density is the mass of the
solids divided by the volume of the solids.
In ASTM Method D 854, specific gravity is
3-12
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
defined as "the ratio of the weight in air of a
given volume of a material at a stated
temperature to the weight in air of an equal
volume of distilled water at a stated
temperature." The water content or moisture
content of the soil samples was determined
using ATSM Method D 2216. Using this
method, a measured mass of soil was dried
in an oven at 110 ±5°C until the sample
reached a constant mass. The water content,
expressed as a percentage, was then
calculated as the ratio of the mass of water
present to the mass of soil, multiplied by
100.
The particle size distribution of the
soil samples was determined using ASTM
D422-63. This procedure was performed in
two steps. The first step, for particulates
above 75 um (retained on a Number 200
sieve), used a number of sieves of various
sizes to achieve fractionation down to 75 um
(Number 200 sieve). In the second step, the
size distribution of the material that passes
the Number 200 sieve (i.e., less than 75 um)
was determined by using a sedimentation
process and a hydrometer.
Radian Corporation
3-13
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
4.0 RESULTS
This section contains tabulated
results for the measurement program. The
tabulated values have not been corrected for
field, method, or system blank values, nor
have they been corrected for bias, as
determined from percent recovery of
laboratory control samples. The results are
further reduced and discussed in Section 5
and the results of quality control checks are
summarized in Section 6. Additional
information pertinent to the interpretation of
the results is contained in the Appendices to
this report. Master logs of all sample
collection and measurement efforts are
presented in Appendix A. The UTM
coordinates for the sampling locations and
for all of the monitoring wells present at
Section 1/9 are given in Appendix B.
Example calculations are shown in
Appendix C.
The master logs are divided into
separate logs for different types of
measurements and these contain the
following information:
Flux Chamber Master Log:
Sample location, date, time, and description;
THC screening values; flux chamber and
ambient air temperature; sweep air, landfill
gas, and flux chamber exhaust flow rates;
sample ID and SUMMA canister #.
Passive Vent, Gas Extraction Well,
and LFG Collection System Master Logs:
Passive vent #, gas extraction well #, landfill
gas collection header; flow rate; landfill
section; sample date, time, and sample ID.
Landfill Gas Monitoring Well,
Condensate Sample, and Soil Master
Logs: Sample location, date, time, and ID.
The number and type of
measurements made during the course of
this program are summarized in Table 4-1
(all tables are located after the text and
figures at the end of the section). As
discussed in Section 6, the overall data set
met the QA/QC criteria outlined in the
QAPP. Certain qualifications to the data,
however, still should be considered when
reviewing the tabulated data. The data that
did not meet the QA/QC acceptance criteria
are presented in Table 4-2.
The analysis of landfill gas samples
resulted in the identification of
approximately 130 volatile organic
compounds. Given the very large amount of
VOC data generated during this program,
only a subset of the VOC data are given in
this section. The 20 or so VOCs included in
the tables in this section were selected based
on their frequency of occurrence and average
concentration in the samples. An additional
selection criterion was to include those
compounds commonly reported in landfill
gases. A complete list of VOC
concentration measurements by GC/MD are
presented in Appendix D and the
corresponding emission and mass flow rates
calculated from these data are presented in
Appendix E. A complete list of GC/MS
results are given in Appendix F.
4.1 Results of Sampling at Passive
Vents
Measurements were made at every
passive vent at the Fresh Kills landfill. The
locations of the passive vents sampled on
Sections 2/8, 3/4, and 1/9 are shown in
Figures 4-1,4-2, and 4-3, respectively (all
figures are located after the text at the end of
the section). The UTM coordinates of the
passive vents on Sections 2/8 and 3/4 were
Radian Corporation
4-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
supplied by NYC DOS. The exact
coordinates of the passive vents on Section
1/9 were not available, so these locations are
approximate.
Canister samples were collected at a
subset of the passive vents with positive
flow and analyzed in Radian's Austin
laboratories by GC/MD for individual
VOCs, CH4) CO2, and O2. Table 4-3
presents a summary of the concentration
results for all compounds from all vents and
contains: compound specific detection
limits; percent of samples in which the
compound was detected; the minimum,
maximum, median, average, standard
deviation, and upper and lower 95%
confidence intervals. Over 75 compounds
were routinely identified in the passive vent
samples. The flowrate and concentration
data were used to calculate emission rates
for each species from each vent (See
Appendix C for example calculations). The
concentration and emission rates of selected
VOCs are given in Tables 4-4,4-5, and 4-6
for landfill Sections 2/8, 3/4, and 1/9,
respectively. The concentration data provide
information about the composition of the
landfill gas and the emission rate data
provide information about the amount of
landfill gas exiting through the vents.
Flowrate measurements were made
at every vent. For those vents which landfill
gas was flowing, the following were
measured: temperature; hydrogen sulfide
(H2S), methane (CH4), carbon dioxide
(CO2), and oxygen (O2) concentrations. In
addition, on-site mercury (Hg)
measurements were made on a subset of
these passive vents. The measured flow
rate, concentration and emissions of these
compounds are given in Tables 4-7,4-8, and
4-9 for landfill Sections 2/8, 3/4, and 1/9,
respectively. Whenever the sum of the CH4,
CO2, and O2 concentrations for a given
measurement is less than 100%, the
remainder of the landfill gas can be assumed
to consist of nitrogen (N2) plus roughly 1 %
VOCs.
Multiple measurements were made at
five passive vents over a one week period on
both Sections 2/8 and 3/4 to assess the short-
term, temporal variability in emissions from
these vents. The concentration and emission
rate data for selected VOCs are presented in
Tables 4-10 and 4-11 for landfill Sections
2/8 and 3/4, respectively. Concentration and
emission rate data for Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2,
and O2 are presented in Tables 4-12 and 4-
13 for landfill Sections 2/8 and 3/4,
respectively.
During the course of the
measurement program approximately 25%
of the SUMMA canister samples also were
analyzed by GC/MS to identify additional
compounds present in the samples. The
complete results for the GC/MS analysis of
canister samples are given in Appendix F.
The GC/MD and GC/MS results for one
vent sample with reasonably high
concentrations of VOCs are compared in
Appendix G.
Data for fixed gases was obtained
from on-site analysis of samples from every
vent with positive flow and off—site analysis
of canister samples which were collected at
approximately 24% of the vents. Only the
on-site data were used to calculate emission
and mass flow rates. For informational
purposes only, the results of the fixed gas
analysis for the canister samples are given in
Appendix H.
4-2
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
4.2 Results of Sampling at Soil
Surfaces
Sampling the soil surface included:
1) flux chamber measurements to determine
emission flux of VOCs, H2S, CH4, CO2, and
O2, 2) collection of soil samples for analysis
of VOCs, and 3) collection of landfill seep
samples for analysis of VOCs.
4.2.1 Flux Chamber Sampling
Landfill gas emissions through the
surface of landfill were measured at all four
sections of the landfill. The locations of the
sampling points are shown in Figures 4-4
through 4-7 for Sections 2/8, 3/4,1/9, and
6/7, respectively. The locations of flux
chamber samples were determined on-site
using a portable global positioning system
(GPS) with a stated accuracy of + 10 meters.
The majority of the flux measurements were
performed at Section 6/7 as previously
discussed in Section 3.2.2.
Canister samples were collected
from every flux chamber sample and
analyzed off site for VOCs, CH4, CO2, and
O2. Tedlar bag samples also were collected
from every flux chamber sampling location
and used for on-site measurements of
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentrations.
Table 4-14 presents a summary of the VOC
emission fluxes for all compounds from all
flux chamber samples and contains:
compound specific detection limits; percent
of samples in which the compound was
detected; the minimum, maximum, median,
mean, standard deviation, and upper and
lower 95% confidence intervals. The
complete results of the concentration
measurements for all VOCs are given in
Appendix D (canisters by GC), Appendix F
(canisters by GC/MS), and Appendix H
(canisters for fixed gases). In each case, the
stated concentrations are those in the flux
chamber exhaust gas. The GC/MD and
GC/MS results for one flux chamber sample
with reasonably high concentrations of
VOCs are compared in Appendix G.
Emission fluxes were calculated
from the concentration data as follows:
Emission Flux
m2-minj 0.13 m2
where:
CE = Concentration in flux
chamber exhaust gas (ug/m3);
and
FE = Flux chamber exhaust flow
rate (m3/min).
The flux chamber exhaust flow rate is the
sum of the sweep air flow rate and the
landfill gas flow rate into flux chamber).
The value in the denominator (0.13 m2)
represents the landfill surface area enclosed
by the flux chamber. The sweep air flow
rate typically was about 0.010 m3/min.
The measured emission fluxes for
select VOCs, H2S, CH4, and CO2 are
presented in Tables 4-15 through 4-18 for
Sections 2/8, 3/4,1/9, and 6/7, respectively.
Complete emission flux results are given in
Appendix E. The emission flux of mercury
was measured at five locations, and the
resulting emission fluxes are shown in Table
4-19. Also, included in Table 4-19 are the
emission flux of mercury measured in field
blank samples.
Radian Corporation
4-3
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Multiple emission flux
measurements were taken at four locations
on Section 6/7 over a one week period to
assess the short-term, temporal variability in
emission fluxes at these locations. The
temporal emission fluxes for select VOCs
are presented in Table 4-20. The emission
flux of CO2, CH4, and H2S are given in
Table 4-21.
4.2.2 Surface Soil Sampling
Soil samples were collected at 12
locations across the landfill and shipped off
site for analysis of VOC content by GC/MS
and physical properties by various standard
methods. The results of the GC/MS analysis
for all of the VOCs detected in soil samples
are given in Table 4-22. The complete
GC/V Analytical results for the soil
samp,.:, iue given in Appendix I. The
results of the physical property tests are
given in Table 4-23. The results of particle
size distribution tests are given in Appendix
J. The physical property data were not used
in this study, but were collected to assist any
future emission modeling studies.
4.2.3 Seep Sampling
Samples were collected of the liquid
(slurry) from landfill seeps at three locations
and shipped off site for analysis of VOC
content by GC/MS. The results of these
analyses for all of the VOCs detected in the
seep samples are given in Table 4-24. The
complete analytical results for the liquid
seep samples are given in Appendix K.
4.3 Results of Sampling at the Gas
Collection System
Over 200 gas extraction wells are
present at Section 1/9. The flow from these
wells are combined into a north field and a
south field and the extracted gas enters the
treatment plant through two headers.
Therefore, the landfill gas flow in the
headers is the combined flow from all of the
flowing gas extraction wells. Sampling the
landfill gas collection system on Section 1/9
consisted of: 1) sampling a subset of the
flowing gas extraction wells, and 2)
sampling the north and south gas collection
headers over several days.
4.3.1 Gas Collection Headers
Measurements were made at the
north and south headers of the gas collection
system. Table 4-25 presents a summary of
the concentration results for all compounds
from all gas collection header samples and
contains: compound specific detection
limits; percent of samples in which the
compound was detected; the minimum,
maximum, median, average, standard
deviation, and upper and lower 95%
confidence intervals. The concentration and
emission rates of selected VOCs are given in
Table 4-26. Complete results are given in
Appendix D.
Flowrate, temperature, hydrogen
sulfide (H2S), mercury (Hg), methane (CH4),
carbon dioxide (CO2), and oxygen (O2)
concentration measurements were made at
both the south and north headers over
several days to assess short-term, temporal
variability in emissions from the gas
collection system. All of these analyses
were performed on site and the results are
given in Table 4-27. As previously
discussed, whenever the sum of the CH4,
CO2, and O2 concentrations for a given
measurement is less than 100%, the
remainder of the landfill gas can be assumed
to consist of nitrogen (N2) plus roughly 1%
4-4
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
VOCs. The flowrate and concentration data
were used to calculate mass flow rates for
each species (See Appendix C for example
calculations).
43.2 Gas Extraction Wells
The landfill gas extraction wells
present on Section 1/9 are shown in Figure
4-8. The average radius of influence of the
gas extraction wells, 23m (75 ft), was
provided by Air Products and is shown in
Figure 4-9. The location of the wells was
provided by NYC DOS and Air Products.
Measurements were made at 25 of the gas
extraction wells to assess the spatial
variability in landfill gas composition. The
same measurements and analyses were
performed for the individual wells as for the
combined headers.
Table 4-28 presents a summary of
the VOC concentration results for all
compounds from the gas extraction well
samples and contains: compound specific
detection limits; percent of samples in which
the compound was detected; the minimum,
maximum, median, average, standard
deviation, and upper and lower 95%
confidence intervals. The concentration and
emission rates of selected VOCs are given in
Table 4-29. Table 4-30 presents Hg, H2S,
CH4, CO2, and O2 concentration and
emission rates, and measured landfill gas
flow rates from each extraction well. The
individual compound emission rates are
based on the measured flow rates and
concentrations (See Appendix C for
example calculations).
Multiple measurements were made at
selected gas extraction wells over several
days to assess the short-term, temporal
variability in emissions from these wells.
The concentration and emission rates of
select VOCs, and the landfill gas flow rates
from each extraction well are given in Table
4-31. The landfill gas flow rate, and Hg,
H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2 concentrations and
emissions are given in Tables 4-32.
About 25% of the canister samples
also were analyzed by GC/MS to identify
additional compounds present in the
samples. The complete results for the
GC/MS analysis of canister samples are
given in Appendix F. The results of the
fixed gas analysis for the canister samples
are given in Appendix H. As previously
mentioned, the off-site fixed gas results were
not used in this report.
4.3.3 Landfill Gas Condensate
As the landfill gas travels from the
interior of the landfill to the gas processing
plant, the gas cools causing water and some
VOCs to condense. In addition, as the water
condenses it will tend remove water soluble
(i.e., polar) VOCs such as ethanol and
methanol from the gas phase. Therefore, the
total mass flow of VOCs through the gas
extraction system is a combination of the
gas-phase and liquid-phase VOC flows.
Samples of condensate were
collected at three locations: 1) south field
header, 2) north field header, and 3)
following the air/water separator. The
condensate in the headers was found on the
bottom of the headers (i.e., both landfill gas
and condensate were flowing in the header
lines). Both the headers merge into one line
prior to the air/water separator. Therefore,
the VOC concentrations in the air/water
separator samples are a composite of: 1)
VOC concentrations and condensate
volumes in both header lines and 2) VOC
Radian Corporation
4-5
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
concentrations and condensate volume
produced by the air/water separator. All
condensate samples were analyzed off-site
by GC/MS for VOCs. The concentrations of
all VOCs detected in the condensate are
presented in Table 4-33. The complete
results for the GC/MS analysis of
condensate samples are given in Appendix
L.
The mass flow rate of VOCs
detected in the condensate samples are
presented in Table 4-34. The emissions
were determined by multiplying the average
condensate VOC concentrations in the
air/water separator samples by the amount of
condensate produced. Air Products, which
operates the landfill gas collection system,
estimates that 45,000 to 53,000 L/day
(12,000 to 14,000 gallons/day) of
condensate are produced at the air/water
separator. The emissions presented in Table
4-34 is based on the average VOC
concentrations found in the condensate from
the air/water separator and an average
condensate production rate of 49,000 L/day
(13,000 gallons/day).
4.4 Results of Sampling at Vapor
Monitoring Wells
Gas samples were collected at three
vapor monitoring wells on Section 3/4.
Within each well, samples were collected
from three discrete depths (deep, medium
and shallow depths). Samples were
collected for VOCs, hydrogen sulfide (H2S),
mercury (Hg), methane (CH4), carbon
dioxide (CO2), and oxygen (O2). The
measured concentrations of selected VOCs
are given in Tables 4-35 and the measured
concentrations of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2 and O2
are presented in Table 4-36.
4.5 Results of Activity Factor
Determinations
To develop emission rate estimates
for each section and for the entire landfill,
activity factor data were collected from on-
site observations, information provided by
the NYC DOS, and calculations based on
site topographical maps. The site
topographical maps were used to determine
surface areas and volumes of waste under
the various feature/liner combinations. The
topographical maps provided by NYC DOS
were dated 07/19/95. The mass of waste
under a given feature/liner combination was
determined by multiplying the volume of
waste determined from the topographical
maps by an in-place density of waste of 881
kg/m3 (1,485 lb/yd3). The in-place density
was determined by Woodward-Clyde
Consultants. The activity factors are given
in Table 4-37 and 4-38. The activity factors
in Table 4-38 are further subdivided based
on the type of cover present (clay, PVC
liner, or soil) and the feature (toe, side, top,
active face, and presence of landfill gas
collection system).
4-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Studv
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 180
SCALE:FEET
0 360
SECTi'ON2/8
NOTE Topographic contour lirm iabe/j am in fo«1
JVG0290 06/15/95
Figure 4-1. Location of Passive Vents on Section 2/8
Radian Corporation
4-7
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Stud\
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE:METERS
0 1J
SCALE:FEET
0 300
SECTION3/4
M3TE Topographic confour lin» /a£>«i3 jn» /n f
JVG0289
Figure 4-2. Location of Passive Vents on Section 3/4
Radian Corporation
4-8
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Studv
NORTH
&PW1
W~££$£ •' -^^'•-? ••'}.•} fl #*fi /'!>'
::''-^S7//F^^z£-
-?.:<;. :•- ,l/- . '•-.,- "'• SJfef- ^':=^'
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 250
SCALE:FEET
0 500
SECTION 1/9
NOTE Topographic contour tine labtfte an in
JVG0292 Oa/15/95
Figure 4-3. Location of Passive Vents on Section 1/9
Radian Corporation
4-9
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
LEGEND
. FC-2/8-7TP .-. _,
A Flux Chamber
frf
/
15
Toe
Side
Top
Clay Cover
PVC Cover
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 180
SCALE FEET
0 360
SECT! ON 2/8
NOTE Topogrmphic contour lri« 'Abtus arv in t»et
JVG0290
Figure 4-4. Location of Flux Chamber Sampling Points on Section 2/8
Radian Corporation
4-10
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Studv
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE:METERS
0 150
SCALE FEET
0 300
SECT!ON 3/4
.VOTE Toeoqraphic contour tine labals an in loot
JVG0289 08/15/95
Figure 4-5. Location of Flux Chamber Sampling Points on Section 3/4
Radian Corporation
4-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Stud\
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 250
SCALE FEET
0 500
LEGEND
FC-1/9-45 ,-. _.
i Flux Chamber
Toe
Side
Top
Clay Cover
'/fj Active Face
SECTION 1/9
VOTE Topographic contour itn« labels any in loot
JVGOS2
Figure 4-6. Location of Flux Chamber Sampling Points on Section 1/9
Radian Corporation
4-12
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Stuck
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE METERS
0 200
SCALE FEET
0 400
SECT! ON 6/7
Topographrc contour line labels arc m toot
JVGOJ91 08/1195
Figure 4-7. Location of Flux Chamber Sampling Points on Section 6/7
Radian Corporation
4-13
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas StucJv
NORTH
X^
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 250
SCALE:FEET
0 500
SECTION 1/9
iVOTE Topographic coofour hne labels are in feet
Active Face
S&SZJt
JVGO292 08/1 SflS
Figure 4-8. Location of Gas Extraction Wells Sampled at Section 1/9
Radian Corporation
4-14
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Studv
NORTH
HORIZONTAL SCALE
SCALE : METERS
0 250
SCALE:FEET
0 500
Well Influence
Area
Toe
Side
Top
Clay Cover
Active Face
SECTION 1/9
JF Topographic contour lin« labels an in l
JVG0292 08/15/95
Figure 4-9. Area of Influence of Extraction Wells Sampled at Section 1/9
Radian Corporation
4-15
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Table 4-1
Number and Type of Measurements Performed
Passive Vents
Rux Chambers
Soil
Seepage
Landfill Gas Collection System Headers
Condensate
Extraction Wells
Monitoring Wells
flow
Rate
231
N/A
N/A
N/A
19
0
34
N/A
VOCs
95
93b
14
3
12
18
34
9
H2S
215
88
0
0
19
0
31
9
Hg
61
8
0
0
19
0
31
9
THC
0
9
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
0
0
Fixed
Gases*
202
0
N/A
N/A
19
N/A
34
9
Note: Totals include samples for temporal variability, duplicate samples, and blank samples.
"Totals for only on-site measurements are shown.
bFixed gas measurements done off-site.
4-16
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 4-2
Summary of QA/QC Criteria Exceedances
Type of Sample
and Analysis
Landfill Gas
Collection System
Header Flow ROTC
Measurements
VOC Analysis of
Canisters from Passive
Vents
VOC Analysis of
Canisters from Gas
Collection System
VOC Analysis of
Canisters from Flux
Chambers
Compound
flow rate
Propane
Styrene
1-Hexene
Ethane
Exceedances of QA/QC Criteria
No QA/QC criteria. However, measured flow
rates of landfill gas was roughly double the
values reported by the gas plant. Flow rate
estimates were based on a duct diameter of 18"
and a moisture content equal to the saturation
levels of the landfill gas at the measured
temperatures.
The recovery of propane was high (317%) in
one audit sample.
None
The average styrene % recovery from laboratory
control samples was 41.8% compared with
acceptance criteria was 70% to 1 30%.
The average 1-hexene method blank value was
0.73 ppb compared with the acceptance criteria
for 1-hexene was 0.3 ppb.
The recovery of ethane was low (3 1 % recovery)
in one audit sample.
Implication
If flow rates are based high, then all emissions
rates would be based high.
The field data for propane at low-ppm levels may
have a positive bias.
Styrene values are biased low.
The average value of 1 -hexene found in flux
chamber samples (9.8 ppb) is well above the blank
value, so the measured 1 -hexene values are not
significantly affected.
Potential low bias for ethane measurements.
-------
Table 4-2
(Continued)
Type of Sample
and Analysis
Compound
Exceedances of QA/QC Criteria
Implication
Voc Analysis of
Canisters from Flux
Chambers (Continued)
Acetone
Cyclopentane
Diethyl ether + 2-propanol
Ethanol + acetonitrile
Methanol
Isobutane
Isobutene + 1-butene
Isopentane
Limonene
Nitrogen
Oxygen
Propylene
Toluene
The field blank values were well above the
detection limits for these compounds. However,
the high level concentrations of nitrogen (5.36%
to 6.70%) and oxygen (1.45% to 1.92%) found
in all three field blanks suggest that ambient air
leaked into the flux chamber during sampling;
the ratio of nitrogen to oxygen in ambient air is
3.76 and that found in the field blanks ranged
from 3.40 to 3.70.
The field blank data is of little value to asses
contamination from the flux chamber. However,
the filed blank concentrations for all compounds
except Diethyl ether + 2-Propanol, are
significantly below the average values found in
flux chamber samples.
VOC Analysis of
Surface Soil Samples
Acetone
Acetone concentrations in trip blank samples
ranged from 4.27 to 7.03 ug/L (detection limit
are 1.6 ug/L) compared with acetone values for
soil samples of 5.47 to 7.84 ug/kg.
Acetone values are suspect.
VOC Analysis of
Liquid Samples of
Seeps and Condensate
Acetone
2-Butanone
Acetone and 2-butanone concentrations in trip
blank samples ranged from 4.27 to 7.03 ug/L
and 21.6 to 27.6 ug/L, respectively (detection
limits are 1.6 ug/L and 2.87 ug/L for acetone
and 2-butanone).
Acetone and 2-butanone values found in liquid
seep and condensate samples were either not-
detected or were three orders of magnitude greater
than the trip blank values. Sample contamination
does not significantly affect the results for either of
these compounds
Fixed Gas Analysis of
Canister Samples
Carbon dioxide
None. However, based on mass balance
closures and ratios of fixed gases, the carbon
dioxide values in the field samples appear to be
high for vents in Section 3/4.
None. On-site analytical results were used in lieu
of off-site results.
-------
Table 4-3
Summary Statistics for Passive Vent Concentration Data
Compound
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Oxygen
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
3-Melhylheptane
3-MethyIhexane
Cumene
Ethane
Hexanal
Limonene
Methylcyclohexane
b-Pinene
a-Pinene
Total Unidentified VOCs
Toluene
TNMHC
Styrene
Propane
Ethyl benzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
p-Diethylbenzene
o-Xylene
o-Ethyltoluene
n-Undecane
n-Propylbenzene
n-Pentane
n-Octatie
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.20%
0.08%
0.14%
0.25
0.07
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.02
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.04
0.2
0.25
0.05
0.25
0.25
0.25
O.25
O.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Number of
Observations
172
172
172
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
~7O
Minimum
(ppm)
2.70%
1.50%
ND
0.11
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.10
116.48
0.14
0.36
0.14
0.09
0.16
3.09
0.09
63.85
0.20
1.52
0.10
0.03
0.06
0.19
0.10
0.05
0.11
0.13
0. 18
Maximum
(ppm)
48.40%
69.10%
18.30%
11.26
6.35
1.20
2.49
1.77
309.05
1.94
57.26
2.44
7.94
25.54
368.54
56.38
1046
6.49
41.45
16.43
30.15
6.73
14.76
9.75
7.55
5.83
7.71
S.1O
Median
(ppm)
41.20%
58.55%
2.29%
4.98
2.48
0.40
0.40
0.69
218.53
0.73
12.11
0.59
1.41
7.93
119.93
18.39
429.5
2.28
14.07
7.04
9.70
2.34
3.52
4.21
2.35
2.82
0.40
1.42
Average
(ppm)
37.68%
53.39%
4.12%
4.73
2.51
0.43
0.56
0.71
217.02
0.75
15.13
0.70
1.74
8.50
122.21
19.85
417.18
2.46
15.92
7.09
10.42
2.49
3.79
4.32
2.45
2.74
0.87
1.63
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
9.54%
14.12%
1.66%
2.70
1.34
0.22
0.50
0.42
42.13
0.40
12.44
0.44
1.48
6.12
72.33
15.14
191.55
1.43
8.13
4.43
7.48
1.54
2.64
2.17
1.73
1.32
1.40
1.O6
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
36.25%
51.26%
2.91%
4.09
2.19
0.38
0.44
0.61
206.98
0.66
12.16
0.60
1.39
7.04
104.96
16.24
371.50
2.12
13.98
6.04
8.64
2.12
3.16
3.80
2.03
2.43
0.53
1-38
Upper
(ppm)
39.12%
55.52%
5.33%
5.38
2.83
0.48
0.68
0.81
227.07
0.85
18.09
0.81
2.09
9.96
139.46
23.46
462.85
2.80
17.86
8.15
12.20
2.85
4.42
4.84
2.86
3.06
1.20
1.88
-------
-p.
o
Table 4-3
(Continued)
Compound
n-Nonane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Butanc
Cyclohexane
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
n-Hcptane
m-Dicthylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
Benzene
Methylcyclopentane
Isobutane
1-Oclene
p-Ethyltoluene
Benzyl Chloride
&m-Dichlorobenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
2-Methyl-2-Butene
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isoheptane + 2,3-Dimethylpentane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
Isobutylbenzene
Isopentane
Naphthalene
Vinyl Chloride
n-Hexane
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.25
0.1
0.25
0.25
0.03
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.07
0.16
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.32
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
98.6
98.6
98.6
98.6
98.6
98.6
98.6
97.1
97.1
97.1
97.1
95.7
95.7
95.7
95.7
95.7
94.3
94.3
94.3
94.3
90.0
90.0
Number of
Observations
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
Minimum
(ppm)
0.17
0.19
0.44
0.11
0.24
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Maximum
(ppm)
15.49
28.68
11.92
4.25
4.57
2.82
3.29
3.86
8.47
1.46
2.21
32.41
1.05
6.97
4.23
1.76
3.23
2.79
4.27
4.27
5.23
2.85
6.51
18.66
0.72
11.01
31.78
Median
(ppm)
5.75
12.96
3.37
0.53
2.04
1.27
0.77
1.23
3.32
0.51
0.30
8.38
0.34
2.11
1.56
0.33
0.18
0.22
1.05
0.46
1.20
0.43
0.75
0.59
0.12
1.60
0.61
Average
(ppm)
5.84
12.18
4.02
0.76
2.08
1.29
0.91
1.26
3.59
0.53
0.43
9.08
0.37
2.32
1.67
0.40
0.34
0.37
1.15
0.84
1.52
0.58
0.80
2.06
0.18
1.97
1.70
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
3.31
7.30
2.32
0.72
0.87
0.71
0.59
0.75
2.00
0.27
0.42
6.23
0.20
1.63
1.10
0.26
0.48
0.48
0.80
0.90
1.22
0.52
0.79
3.82
0.14
1.98
5.14
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
5.05
10.44
3.46
0.59
1.87
1.12
0.76
1.08
3.11
0.47
0.33
7.59
0.32
1.93
1.41
0.34
0.22
0.26
0.96
0.62
1.23
0.46
0.61
1.15
0.15
1.50
0.48
Upper '
(ppm)
6.63
13.93
4.57
0.93
2.28
1.46
1.05
1.44
4.07
0.60
0.53
10.56
0.41
2.71
1.93
0.46
0.45
0.49
1.34
1.05
1.81
0.70
0.98
2.97
0.21
2.44
2.93
f
o
-------
I
a
o
Table 4-3
(Continued)
Compound
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Bulylbenzene
1,1-Dichloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
Trichlorofluoromethane
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
Trichloroethene
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 114
tsohexane
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Meohexanc
Cyclopentane
Chloroethane
1-Undecene
3-Methylpentane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1-Hexene
Methylene Chloride
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
t-2-Pentene
Isoprene
Dichlorotoluene
Indan
Acetone
2,5-Dimethylhexane
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.22
0.25
0.19
0.36
0.25
0.14
0.18
0.25
0.33
0.44
0.25
0.18
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.25
0.32
0.25
0.31
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
87.1
87.1
85.7
85.7
84.3
84.3
82.9
80.0
78.6
77.1
77. 1
72.9
71.4
71.4
68.6
67.1
65.7
65.7
64.3
62.9
62.9
61.4
61.4
61.4
60.0
55.7
50.0
45.7
Number of
Observations
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
Minimum
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Maximum
(ppm)
8.94
2.86
4.35
5.03
0.73
3.18
1.73
0.54
2.71
2.60
1.90
0.66
0.46
0.60
2.23
1.57
2.17
19.08
0.44
2.05
11.08
0.48
2.79
0.91
1.05
6.44
20.99
0.51
Median
(ppm)
0.49
1.14
0.24
0.25
0.19
1.80
0.15
0.18
0.15
0.11
0.20
0.06
0.13
0.10
0.17
0.17
0.47
0.18
0.02
0.12
0.06
0.07
0.11
0.12
0.21
0.55
0.04
NC
Average
(ppm)
1.10
1.17
0.59
0.73
0.23
1.59
0.30
0.22
0.40
0.25
0.31
0.13
0.15
0.16
0.35
0.30
0.72
0.56
0.09
0.32
0.90
0.16
0.39
0.17
0.30
1.17
2.25
0.15
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
1.69
0.78
0.93
1.01
0.14
0.96
0.39
0.11
0.48
0.32
0.33
0.13
0.06
0.11
0.43
0.30
0.67
2.28
0.09
0.37
2.32
0.11
0.53
0.14
0.23
1.40
4.52
0.10
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.70
0.98
0.37
0.49
0.19
1.36
0.21
0.19
0.29
0.17
0.23
0.10
0.13
0.14
0.25
0.23
0.56
0.02
0.07
0.23
0.35
0.13
0.26
0.13
0.24
0.84
1.17
0.13
Upper : ;
(ppm)
1.51
1.35
0.81
0.97
0.26
1.82
0.40
0.25
0.52
0.33
0.39
0.17
0.16
0.19
0.45
0.37
0.88
1.11
0.11 |
0.41 I
1.45
0.19
0.51
0.20 |
0.35 !
1.51 |
3.32 [•
0.18
N>
-------
t-
»0
N)
Table 4-3
(Continued)
Compound
2,4-Dimethylpentane
t-2-Butene
Hexachloro-l,3-Butadiene
c-2-Butene
2-Methylheptane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1-Decene
c-2-Octene
t-3-Heptene
3,5,5-Trimethylhexene
t-2-Heptene
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Methylisobutylketone
1 ,4-Dioxane
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Heptanal
Bromodichloromethane
2-Methyl-2-Pentene
1-Pentene
1-Heptene
Cyclopentene
Freon 113
c-3-Heptene
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1 -Methylcyclohexene
Bromomethane
c-2-Pentene
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
3.15
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.77
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.87
0.25
0.37
0.25
0.37
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
44.3
44.3
42.9
42.9
38.6
32.9
32.9
32.9
28.6
27.1
25.7
24.3
24.3
20.0
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.6
14.3
12.9
12.9
11.4
11.4
10.0
10.0
Number of
Observations
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
Minimum
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Maximum
(ppm)
2.86
2.73
1.75
0.36
1.00
0.10
0.82
0.39
1.13
0.86
1.65
468.30
0.19
0.80
0.47
0.14
1.07
0.14
6.86
0.56
0.26
0.45
0.14
3.38
0.08
0.62
2.31
3.02
Median
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(ppm)
0.18
0.24
0.16
0.13
0.15
1.06
0.26
0.16
0.18
0.15
0.14
18.89
0.11
0.14
0.16
0.33
0.22
0.12
0.31
0.16
0.13
0.13
0.40
0.27
0.19
0.17
0.30
0.18
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
0.34
0.42
0.21
0.07
0.14
1.00
0.24
0.10
0.16
0.12
0.21
62.43
0.07
0.11
0.10
0.23
0.21
0.07
0.93
0.09
0.07
0.08
0.26
0.47
0.12
0.12
0.40
0.36
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.10
0.14
0.11
0.11
0.12
0.82
0.20
0.13
0.14
0.13
0.09
4.00
0.09
0.11
0.13
0.28
0.17
0.11
0.09
0.14
0.11
0.11
0.33
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.20
0.09
Upper
(ppm)
0.26
0.34
0.21
0.14
0.19
1.30
0.32
0.18
0.22
0.18
0.19
33.77
0.13
0.16
0.18
0.39
0.27
0.14
0.53
0.18
0.15
0.15
0.46
0.38
0.22
0.20
0.39
0.26
8;
I'
n
o
i.
o
-------
Table 4-3
(Continued)
. Compound
2,4,4-Trimethyl-l-Pentene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
p-Isopropyltoluene
Methyl t-Bulylether
c-3-Hexene
m-Chlorotoluene
1-Butanol
Benzaldehyde
4-Nonene
c-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
o-Chlorotoluene
2,3-Dimethylbutane
t-2-Hexene
Diethyl Ether &2-Propanol
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
c-2-Hexene
Meopentane
Methanol
Chloroprene
Jromochloromethane
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
Vinyl Acetate
Cyclohexene
Carbon Tetrachloride
BuWraldetvyde
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.28
0.13
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.36
O.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.6
7.1
7.1
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
4.3
4.3
4.3
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
Number of
Observations
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
Minimum
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Maximum
(ppm)
0.08
0.51
21.52
28.51
1.47
1.91
9.08
0.98
1.53
0.21
1.99
0.22
0.20
1.44
0.05
0.12
3.10
0.14
0.75
0.16
0.27
0.23
0.04
0.34
0.42
1.19
0.02
O.I 8
Median
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(ppm)
0.12
0.14
0.54
0.99
0.15
0.18
0.30
0.17
0.17
0.14
0.18
0.13
0.12
0.16
0.14
0.07
0.16
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.11
0.14
0.14
0.18
0.13
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
0.07
0.08
2.58
4.02
0.18
0.25
1.11
0.18
0.25
0.07
0.33
0.07
0.07
0.19
0.08
0.04
0.37
0.07
0.12
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.15
0.10
O.O7
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.10
0.12
0.00
0.03
0.10
0.12
0.03
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.10
0.11
0.12
0.06
0.07
0.11
0.11
0.13
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.09
0.12
0.10
0.16
0.11
Upper
(ppm)
0.14
0.16
1.15
1.95
0.19
0.23
0.56
0.21
0.23
0.15
0.26
0.15
0.13
0.20
0.16
0.08
0.25
0.15
0.16
0.17
0.14
0.13
0.12
0.13
0.16
0.17
0.21
O.14
-------
Table 4-3
(Continued)
Compound
2-Butanone
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
1 , 1 ,2-TrichIoroethane
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
Vinyl Bromide
Trichlorocthylene
Methylcyclopcntcne
Indene
Freon 23
Ethylene
Dibromochloromethane
Chloroform
Chlorodifluoromethane
p-Chlorotoluene
Bromoform
Acrylonitrile
Acetaldehyde
1 -Propanol
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
1-Nonene
1 3-Butadiene
Detection
Limit (ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.19
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
1.4
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Number of
Observations
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
Minimum
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Maximum
(ppm)
5.63
3.02
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(ppm)
0.20
0.16
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
(ppm)
0.66
0.35
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.05
0.08
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
0.36
0.25
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
a.
i
n
T
Table 4-4
Concentration and Emission Rate Measurements for
Select VOCs from Section 2/8 Passive Vents
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbcnzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-002
(ppm)
1.16
ND
0.94
1.26
0.19
0.10
0.29
6.16
0.51
0.64
1.25
0.53
0.51
0.62
0.10
0.17
0.88
0.35
0.12
154.30
(ug/sec)
46.9
NC
51.6
80.8
12.2
8.71
15.0
368
37.0
43.8
86.4
36.0
35.1
51.3
9.71
14.7
82.2
28.5
9.87
8610
V-004
(ppm)
2.51
ND
0.39
0.75
0.54
0.11
0.27
8.95
1.16
1.12
1.70
0.88
0.58
1.23
0.20
0.32
1.27
0.54
0.27
155.40
(ug/sec)
113
NC
23.6
53.9
37.7
10.2
15.1
596
94.4
86.0
131
66.4
44.5
114
22.7
32.1
132
49.6
26.0
9660
V-007
(ppm)
3.23
ND
1.40
2.07
1.31
0.29
0.50
30.45
2.34
4.51
7.96
3.01
2.56
5.15
1.05
1.05
7.44
1.90
0.77
375.80
(ug/sec)
111
NC
65.4
113
69.6
21.2
21.6
1540
145
263
464
172
150
363
90.3
79.2
591
133
55.6
17800
V-011
(ppm)
0.89
ND
0.81
0.66
0.15
0.07
0.07
2.02
0.24
0.10
0.39
0.20
0.19
0.17
0.05
ND
0.32
0.11
0.19
87.64
(ug/sec)
25.1
NC
31.1
29.7
6.76
4.43
2.41
84.1
12.3
5.03
18.8
9.54
9.34
9.67
3.45
NC
21.1
6.40
11.5
3400
V«014
(ppm)
1.77
ND
0.76
1.11
0.91
0.34
0.24
11.21
1.26
1.24
2.48
1.15
0.78
2.00
0.18
0.48
2.40
0.81
0.96
195.00
(us/sec)
86.9
NC
50.9
86.1
69.1
35.8
14.5
810
112
103
207
94.2
65.2
202
21.9
51.5
273
81.1
99.3
13200
V-017
(ppm)
4.74
0.05
8.56
4.35
1.55
0.40
0.62
23.03
1.91
2.17
4.47
1.96
1.86
2.74
0.45
0.41
3.27
1.29
2.71
387.20
(ug/sec
250
4.1
614
364
127
44.5
41.0
1790
182
195
401
172
167
297
58.9
47.1
400
139
300
24500
-------
Table 4-4
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroelhane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylcne + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-019
(ppm)
4.37
0.03
11.08
3.65
0.88
0.45
0.40
13.03
1.34
1.01
2.10
1.20
1.48
1.81
0.25
0.33
2.09
0.77j
0.93
244.70
(iig/sec)
119
1.4
409
157
37.0
26.0
13.6
522
65.7
46.6
97.0
54.4
68.4
101
17.1
19.7
131
42.9
53.3
9160
V-027
(ppm)
0.44
ND
1.04
0.56
0.24
0.22
0.15
6.88
0.78
1.35
2.84
0.96
0.94
1.67
0.56
0.27
4.46
1.07
0.20
151.10
(us/sec)
17.8
NC
56.8
35.6
15.0
19.1
7.50
410
56.4
92.9
195
64.3
64.4
138
57.0
23.9
416
88.2
17.3
8400
V-028
(ppm)
1.91
ND
10.85
2.57
1.04
0.40
0.44
19.98
2.18
2.80
4.78
2.32
1.98
4.03
0.90
1.21
6.79
1.93
0.64
372.90
(lie/sec)
175
NC
1350
373
148
79.1
50.4
2700
360
436
743
353
307
757
206
242
1440
359
124
47000
V-031
(ppm)
3.02
0.10
9.38
4.34
2.44
0.43
0.92
45.56
3.36
5.30
7.90
4.21
1.93
6.78
1.02
0.52
8.58
2.51
1.97
509.20
(ug/sec)
130
6.73
548
296
163
39.4
49.4
2890
261
387
578
302
141
599
110
48.6
855
219
179
30200
V-033
(pprti)
0.52
ND
0.06
0.23
0.73
0.03
0.41
20.17
1.44
6.73
9.67
2.24
3.36
5.19
3.65
1.01
13.84
5.23
0.16
428.90
(UR/SCC)
27.2
NC
4.5
18.8
59.3
3.4
27.0
1550
135
596
856
194
298
555
475
115
1670
555
17.7
30800
V-036
(ppm)
0.57
ND
0.28
0.29
0.49
0.11
0.48
24.47
1.38
7.28
9.83
2.98
3.37
5.34
4.60
1.15
17.96
5.90
0.20
543.00
(ue/sec)
24.5
NC
16.2
19.4
32.8
9.74
25.7
1550
107
530
716
213
246
470
493
108
1780
515
17.7
32000
-------
Table 4-4
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylcne + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-038
(ppm)
2.42
0.02
0.41
0.58
1.19
0.07
0.45
22.30
2.36
6.73
8.00
2.66
2.97
5.93
2.65
1.55
12.51
4.37
0.28
437.78
(tig/sec)
60.8
0.850
14.1
23.0
46.4
4.01
14.2
825
107
287
341
111
127
306
166
85.0
727
224
14.9
15100
V>040
(ppm)
0.98
ND
ND
0.13
0.60
ND
0.44
24.79
1.57
7.66
11.69
2.13
3.71
5.01
6.41
2.84
17.46
6.99
0.13
511.80
(ug/sec)
29.5
NC
NC
5.96
28.2
NC
16.4
1100
85.0
392
598
107
190
309
482
187
1220
428
8.04
21200
V-050
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
ND
0.70
1.23
1.87
8.59
9.09
1.58
3.08
4.21
1.62
1.12
1.40
5.63
ND
264.70
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
2.95
NC
NC
27.7
57.1
107
462
488
83.1
165
273
128
77.5
103 '
362
NC
11500
V-052
(ppm)
1.02
0.08
1.14
1.38
1.54
0.41
0.61
40.98
2.96
6.84
10.17
5.10
5.87
6.99
1.48
0.73
12.04
4.17
0.84
612.00
(UR/SCC)
64.1
7.63
97.0
137
150
55.1
47.7
3800
336
731
1090
534
627
903
233
99.9
1750
534
111
52900
V-054
(ppm)
1.54
ND
0.11
0.46
0.43
0.13
0.32
28.21
1.94
7.39
11.22
3.56
3.85
6.58
2.99
2.57
2.44
5.24
0.14
517.70
(ug/sec)
32.2
NC
3.04
15.2
14.1
5.85
8.42
869
73.2
263
399
124
137
283
157
118
118
223
5.95
14900
V-058
(ppm)
5.01
0.05
0.12
0.19
8.94
ND
0.50
43.59
2.38
16.43
28.98
4.20
9.12
9.62
4.43
1.20
21.34
8.90
1.18
649.10
(ug/sec)
54.3
0.810
1.74
3.21
150
NC
6.74
695
46.5
302
533
75.7
168
214
120
28.3
534
196
26.8
9670
-------
Table 4-4
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichlorocthane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Bulylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-061
(ppm)
0.33
ND
ND
0.06
0.05
ND
0.53
7.23
2.40
7.95
8.51
1.92
3.45
5.04
2.95
1.81
11.78
4.99
ND
328.20
(UK/sec)
14.2
NC
NC
4.31
3.65
NC
29.1
464
188
588
630
139
255
451
322
172
1190
443
NC
19700
V-067
(ppm)
2.31
0.06
0.06
0.33
0.55
0.09
0.37
23.99
2.35
8.19
10.75
2.96
3.93
6.56
2.48
0.93
12.53
4.65
0.20
480.23
(ug/sec)
195
8.35
6.75
43.5
72.4
15.3
38.7
2980
357
1170
1540
415
563
1140
523
172
2440
797
36.0
55700
V-070
(ppm)
5.33
0.07
0.29
0.24
6.03
0.13
0.51
56.38
3.55
14.62
30.15
6.49
14.76
10.34
4.02
3.74
20.50
9.24
1.51
1046.00
(ug/sec)
201
3.89
14.8
14.2
353
10.9
24.2
3140
242
939
1940
409
948
802
380
309
1790
711
120
54400
V-083
(ppm)
4.04
ND
0.05
0.12
1.13
ND
0.62
28.37
2.03
14.10
20.06
2.73
6.61
7.72
4.19
2.78
20.07
8.01
0.14
514.10
(ug/sec)
139
NC
2.51
6.78
60.3
NC
26.6
1440
126
824
1170
156
386
545
360
209
1600
560
10.3
24300
V-085
(ppm)
1.61
0.07
1.49
1.73
2.17
0.29
1.18
39.82
3.12
7.10
10.87
5.41
3.36
7.88
2.06
0.66
13.65
4.00
1.08
645.20
(ug/sec)
95.5
6.64
120
163
200
36.4
87.9
3490
334
717
1100
536
339
960
306
85.2
1880
483
135
52700
V-086
(ppm)
1.87
0.04
0.88
1.23
2.29
0.10
0.54
30.83
2.72
6.87
9.50
4.93
4.01
7.44
2.34
2.56
14.39
5.89
0.73
648.00
(ug/sec)
97.2
2.91
62.3
101
185
11.3
35.3
2370
255
608
841
427
355
794
305
291
1730
624
79.7
46400
-------
s.
o
•3
o
i
o
a
Table 4-4
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichlorocthane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-087
(ppm)
1.58
ND
1.48
1.15
0.88
0.11
0.36
21.39
1.77
3.63
5.91
2.48
1.90
4.48
1.19
0.44
8.07
1.86
0.42
316.70
(ug/sec)
124
NC
158
144
108
18.1
35.5
2490
251
486
791
325
255
725
234
75.5
1470
299
69.2
34300
V-092
(ppm)
3.78
0.07
0.35
0.15
3.48
0.09
0.55
48.05
2.44
13.88
28.82
4.74
8.20
8.74
1.16
1.89
12.04
3.92
0.96
508.80
(ug/sec)
72.2
2.07
9.10
4.50
103
3.76
13.1
1350
84.0
451
936
151
266
343
55.2
79.1
532
152
38.5
13400
V-096
(ppm)
2.62
0.06
3.14
2.38
1.70
0.66
0.69
32.45
2.68
6.98
10.20
4.26
4.46
7.33
2.36
2.23
13.65
4.82
0.91
536.10
(ug/sec)
121
4.19
196
174
121
64.5
39.8
2200
222
546
797
326
349
692
271
225
1450
451
87.6
33900
V-099
(ppm)
6.69
0.07
0.06
0.16
3.17
ND
0.54
54.46
2.82
13.88
24.80
3.20
6.97
9.79
2.41
2.18
14.66
5.46
0.59
533.40
(ug/sec)
49.9
0.87
0.64
1.84
36.7
NC
5.00
599
38.0
176
315
39.8
88.4
150
45.0
35.6
253
82.9
9.29
5480
V-100
(ppm)
4.26
ND
0.08
0.11
2.67
0.03
0.62
32.20
3.81
11.35
16.75
2.80
4.61
8.13
1.29
1.28
9.70
2.91
0.28
366.60
(ug/sec)
115
NC
2.90
4.78
112
1.49
21.1
1290
186
522
771
126
212
452
87.2
76.2
613
161
15.8
13700
V-103
(ppm)
3.15
0.02
1.21
0.62
2.01
0.13
0.49
32.81
2.19
9.59
16.32
3.42
5.72
7.17
3.66
1.74
16.45
6.58
0.46
537.20
(ue/sec)
177
2.02
92.6
55.5
175
15.1
34.3
2720
222
916
1560
321
546
827
515
215
2140
753
54.8
41600
-------
Table 4-4
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-TrimethyIbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-107
(ppm)
2.66
0.03
0.80
0.78
3.80
0.23
0.66
44.86
2.96
11.73
22.83
5.19
8.71
9.16
2.88
2.35
18.42
6.22
0.93
659.98
(ug/sec)
123
2.42
50.1
56.9
272
23.2
38.0
3060
247
922
1790
400
685
869
333
238
1970
585
90.9
42000
V-112
(ppm)
5.68
0.06
0.19
0.15
7.66
0.07
0.38
38.71
1.93
8.36
15.00
2.82
4.08
5.45
1.29
0.39
8.18
3.22
0.85
371.10
(ug/sec)
117
2.07
5.29
4.86
245
3.26
9.69
1180
72.0
294
527
97.1
143
231
66.5
17.6
391
136
37.1
10600
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
S.
o
o
Table 4-5
Concentration and Emission Rate Measurements for
Select VOCs from Section 3/4 Passive Vents
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chloroben/ene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-009
(ppm)
2.13
ND
0.05
0.28
0.25
0.02
0.52
11.33
2.05
5.68
7.08
1.86
3.06
4.80
1.78
1.56
8.97
3.50
0.08
303.10
(ug/sec)
89.8
NC
3.05
18.9
16.4
1.86
27.3
705
156
407
508
131
220
415
187
144
876
300
6.73
17600
V-013
(ppm)
1.70
0.03
0.17
0.39
0.62
0.04
0.72
24.77
2.77
10.42
15.53
3.05
5.74
8.21
3.01
3.55
17.63
7.62
0.46
561.50
(ug/sec)
101.3
2.74
14.0
37.0
57.3
5.48
53.5
2180
298
1060
1580
303
583
1010
450
465
2440
927
58.1
46200
V-017
(ppm)
2.05
ND
0.05
0.34
0.44
0.10
0.36
17.56
2.32
6.33
7.78
1.80
2.74
5.57
2.09
1.52
10.25
3.31
0.14
344.70
(ug/sec)
114.7
NC
3.92
30.4
37.8
12.3
25.0
1450
235
602
740
168
261
641
293
186
1330
377
16.5
26600
V-020
(ppm)
1.94
ND
ND
ND
0.26
ND
0.81
17.14
1.63
13.37
18.42
1.81
6.77
7.62
3.89
2.82
21.53
9.29
0.03
486.83
(ug/sec)
75.9
NC
NC
NC
15.7
NC
39.5
986
115
887
1220
118
449
610
380
241
1940
738
2.08
26200
V-022
(ppm)
ND
0.03
0.18
0.38
0.58
0.06
0.73
29.46
2.90
11.10
14.45
3.40
6.30
10.20
3.83
3.67
21.51
6.71
0.27
655.30
(ug/sec)
ND
3.74
20.8
51.6
76.7
11.1
77.2
3680
443
1600
2080
481
908
1780
813
681
4220
1160
47.6
76500
V-027
(ppm)
1.14
ND
0.05
0.04
0.21
0.04
0.57
11.68
1.63
5.88
12.03
2.06
4.64
6.00
2.50
2.23
14.75
5.17
0.03
390.40
(ug/sec)
24.4
NC
1.44
1.42
6.95
1.98
15.2
367
62.8
213
437
73.3
168
263
134
104
728
225
1.24
11500
-------
Table 4-5
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1,1-Dichlorocthylene
Methylcne Chloride
1,1-Dichlorocthane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroelhylene
1 , 1 , 1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbcnzcne
p-Xylcne + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undccanc
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobeneene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimcthylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-028
(ppm)
1.93
ND
ND
0.53
0.34
0.38
0.43
19.22
2.21
7.79
9.72
2.18
3.59
7.04
2.86
2.59
14.51
4.97
0.11
420.40
(ug/sec)
171
NC
NC
75.0
46.7
72.1
47.6
2520
354
1180
1470
323
542
1280
636
503
2980
899
21.5
51400
V-034
(ppm)
2.43
ND
0.05
0.15
0.82
0.06
0.87
27.87
2.72
14.07
24.81
3.22
9.14
11.63
4.91
1.62
26.68
10.19
0.13
803.00
(ug/sec)
98.8
NC
2.90
9.59
51.8
4.94
43.9
1670
199
970
1710
218
630
969
498
144
2690
841
11.4
44800
V-039
(ppm)
11.01
0.07
0.08
0.10
4.34
ND
0.59
41.71
3.01
13.55
24.50
3.08
7.46
10.92
2.12
2.13
14.94
5.37
0.75
499.30
(ug/sec)
120
1.15
1.13
1.71
73.0
NC
7.94
668
58.9
250
452
55.8
138
243
57.5
50.6
375
119
17.2
7460
V-045
(ppm)
2.31
0.10
0.16
0.70
1.64
0.40
0.72
35.73
3.73
11.16
15.94
5.70
5.42
11.42
4.76
3.47
21.36
8.21
0.97
862.20
(ug/sec)
118
8.00
11.2
56.6
130
43.8
45.8
2690
344
970
1380
485
471
1200
609
389
2530
855
104
60700
V-052
(ppm)
1.81
ND
0.06
0.24
0.31
0.04
0.42
22.22
2.17
10.44
12.99
2.82
5.06
8.75
3.74
2.67
19.15
5.53
0.11
545.70
(ug/sec)
97.8
NC
4.10
20.4
26.1
4.42
28.1
1770
211
958
1190
254
465
970
505
316
2390
608
12.9
40600
V-055
(ppm)
6.74
ND
ND
0.06
0.48
ND
0.47
27.44
2.48
9.98
18.28
2.46
6.54
10.55
1.61
0.73
15.54
4.98
ND
440.60
(ug/sec)
650
NC
NC
9.74
71.1
NC
56.2
3900
432
1630
3000
394
1070
2090
388
155
3240
977
NC
58500
-------
Table 4-5
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-060
(ppm)
3.25
0.02
0.19
0.61
0.81
0.14
0.80
41.21
4.57
14.36
19.71
4.89
5.54
15.49
3.18
3.82
20.61
7.01
0.53
707.80
(ug/sec)
155
1.57
12.5
46.4
59.6
14.3
47.7
2890
392
1160
1600
388
448
1510
379
398
2270
680
52.7
46400
V-068
(ppm)
0.61
ND
ND
0.13
0.13
0.10
0.46
11.75
2.32
6.73
8.76
2.01
4.09
5.78
3.91
1.88
15.96
7.28
0.03
447.70
(ug/sec)
37.2
NC
NC
12.4
12.0
13.2
35.2
1050
254
696
906
204
424
722
595
251
2250
902
4.03
37500
V-070
(ppm)
1.10
ND
ND
0.04
0.04
ND
0.48
10.48
1.43
10.84
13.53
1.21
5.32
5.71
6.12
2.08
19.98
11.26
ND
430.10
(ug/sec)
26.4
NC
NC
1.33
1.36
NC
14.4
370
61.7
441
551
48.2
217
281
367
109
1110
549
NC
14200
V-075
(ppm)
2.96
ND
0.06
0.42
0.66
0.13
0.65
39.65
3.56
11.48
14.87
3.57
4.10
10.78
2.02
2.54
15.77
4.63
0.23
557.20
' (ug/sec)
117
NC
3.24
26.4
40.1
10.5
32.3
2300
253
770
997
235
275
873
199
220
1440
371
18.8
30200
V-076
(ppm)
2.02
ND
ND
0.27
0.28
0.02
0.27
13.98
1.60
6.15
7.32
1.54
2.44
5.04
3.31
2.14
12.03
4.55
0.04
331.10
(ug/sec)
210
NC
NC
45.0
44.6
4.74
35.0
2150
299
1090
1300
268
432
1080
862
487
2900
965
8.43
47500
V-083
(ppm)
0.81
0.06
0.06
0.31
0.24
0.17
0.30
11.21
1.26
4.38
5.75
1.66
2.31
3.55
2.11
0.70
9.28
3.59
0.08
293.70
(ug/sec)
32.2
3.76
3.02
19.8
14.7
14.6
15.2
660
90.5
297
390
110
157
291
210
61.6
857
291
6.30
16100
-------
Table 4-5
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethy lene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trich loroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylcne + m-Xylcnc
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undccane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-089
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
0.23
0.69
0.08
0.67
16.58
3.16
11.29
10.99
2.83
4.22
7.69
3.47
3.38
17.20
7.88
0.16
529.30
(ug/scc)
NC
NC
NC
14.3
42.6
6.54
33.5
975
227
766
746
188
287
631
346
295
1590
641
13.3
29100
V-093N
(ppm)
1.51
ND
0.12
0.28
0.56
0.15
0.14
7.73
1.77
2.23
3.31
1.59
1.20
3.40
0.64
0.27
5.47
1.27
0.16
210.30
(ug/sec)
23.5
NC
2.52
6.84
13.5
5.10
2.65
176
49.3
58.8
87.1
40.9
31.7
108
24.6
9.04
196
39.9
5.29
4480
V-097
(ppm)
2.04
ND
ND
0.34
0.34
0.02
0.84
9.90
2.98
11.33
12.89
3.12
5.12
9.65
4.90
3.86
23.69
7.86
0.07
540.08
(ug/sec)
47.9
NC
NC
12.7
12.4
1.08
24.7
342
126
452
514
122
204
465
287
198
1290
376
3.42
17400
V-106
(ppm)
0.85
ND
0.12
0.22
0.15
0.04
0.08
1.06
1.05
1.80
1.03
0.71
0.61
0.70
0.18
0.17
1.07
0.93
0.19
154.90
(ug/sec)
8.35
NC
1.66
3.44
2.24
0.83
0.99
15.3
18.6
30.0
17.2
11.7
10.1
14.1
4.49
3.65
24.2
18.5
3.83
2090
V-110
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.07
ND
0.20
1.30
1.02
1.22
2.13
0.92
1.11
1.30
0.26
1.45
2.99
2.03
ND
163.00
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
6.81
NC
16.0
123
119
134
233
98.9
122
173
42.3
204
447
267
NC
14500
V-113
(ppm)
0.75
ND
ND
0.13
0.12
0.04
0.50
11.80
1.88
8.54
11.36
1.53
4.52
6.37
5.42
1.83
22.94
8.86
ND
498.40
(ug/sec)
52.4
NC
NC
14.6
12.7
6.09
43.7
1220
237
1010
1350
178
537
915
947
280
3710
1260
NC
48000
-------
•a
o
o
Table 4-5
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethy lene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Elhylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
h-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-118
(ppm)
0.61
0.06
ND
0.12
0.15
0.05
0.58
11.72
1.89
10.03
11.07
2.00
4.27
7.25
3.18
1.16
19.49
6.16
0.04
456.40
(iig/sec)
38.2
5.71
NC
12.3
14.6
6.20
44.7
1070
212
1060
1170
207
451
924
494
158
2800
779
5.60
39000
V-120
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
0.03
ND
0.01
0.63
0.19
2.06
0.31
0.26
2.73
0.32
1.10
0.65
2.51
1.70
3.07
ND
229.00
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
1.87
NC
1.12
31.1
11.0
147
21.2
17.8
180
21.8
89.5
64.9
218
156
248
NC
12500
V-121
(ppm)
0.35
ND
0.04
0.15
0.32
0.03
0.66
13.72
2.22
9.54
11.41
2.34
4.57
7.18
4.37
1.27
20.29
7.16
0.09
478.40
(ug/sec)
3.07
NC
0.54
2.09
4.32
0.65
7.27
179
35.4
144
172
34.4
68.7
130
96.8
24.6
415
129
1.68
5830
V-123
(ppm)
0.73
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.05
1.06
20.47
2.60
11.21
13.94
2.84
4.97
8.59
7.55
4.23
25.74
8.37
ND
558.70
(ug/sec)
14.6
NC
NC
NC
NC
2.29
26.5
602
93.5
380
473
94.4
169
352
377
185
1190
340
NC
15300
V-131
(ppm)
0.26
ND
ND
0.06
ND
0.06
0.16
.72
.53
.24
.62
.44
.03
2.99
0.38
0.32
3.36
1.41
ND
170.10
(ug/sec)
2.07
NC
NC
0.72
NC
0.98
1.59
19.9
21.6
16.6
2L7
18.8
13.7
48.2
7.48
5.45
61.0
22.5
NC
1840
V-133
(ppm)
0.79
ND
ND
0.17
0.10
0.06
0.16
3.66
1.73
1.65
2.42
1.53
1.50
2.76
1.01
1.38
4.86
3.60
0.04
255.30
(uR/sec)
34.7
NC
NC
12.1
7.13
5.77
8.91
238
138
124
182
113
112
250
112
133
496
323
3.38
15500
-------
Table 4-5
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethy lene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-134
(ppm)
0.26
ND
ND
ND
0.05
ND
0.10
1.27
1.13
0.92
1.32
0.70
0.63
0.77
0.16
0.48
1.41
1.52
0.03
138.80
(ug/sec)
1.52
NC
NC
NC
0.42
NC
0.70
10.9
11.9
9.15
13.1
6.81
6.24
9.23
2.31
6.14
19.1
18.1
0.36
1120
V-139
(ppm)
0.10
ND
ND
ND
0.21
ND
ND
0.09
0.36
0.13
0.03
0.26
0.19
0.21
0.08
ND
0.19
0.26
0.11
63.85
(ug/sec)
1.23
NC
NC
NC
4.13
NC
NC
1.71
8.14
2.81
0.75
5.49
4.05
5.47
2.47
NC
5.67
6.59
3.03
1110
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
o
I
o
I
o
Table 4-6
Concentration and Emission Rate Measurements for
Select VOCs from Section 1/9 Passive Vents
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
V-902
(ppm)
0.19
ND
ND
0.02
0.05
ND
0.72
2.87
1.22
5.64
7.38
1.16
3.06
5.61
4.26
2.45
16.94
5.13
ND
332.00
(ug/sec)
4.33
NC
NC
0.62
1.69
NC
20.5
96.5
50.0
218
286
44.0
119
263
243
122
894
238
NC
10400
V-906
(ppm)
0.14
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.46
2.24
2.00
7.29
8.35
1.22
3.07
5.53
3.32
3.04
16.51
6.09
ND
333.70
(ug/sec)
1.82
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
23.8
42.9
46.7
161
184
26.3
67.7
147
108
86.4
496
161
NC
5970
V-914
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.99
1.6
1.44
4.65
4.63
0.88
2.05
2.95
2.76
1.44
13.39
5.82
ND
327.00
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
16.6
31.6
34.9
106
106
19.7
46.7
81.2
92.3
42.2
416
159
NC
6040
V-916
(ppm)
0.29
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.93
1.03
1.64
4.44
4.78
0.96
1.98
2.62
2.19
1.56
12.06
6.04
[ND
308.80
(ug/sec)
4.20
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
17.1
22.2
43.4
110
119
23.4
49.3
78.8
80.1
50.1
408
180
NC
6220
V-919
(ppm)
0.07
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.44
1.35
0.76
2.12
3.11
0.48
1.23
2.14
1.23
1.56
8.63
2.84
ND
180.00
(us/sec)
1.31
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
10.4
37.8
25.9
68.6
101
15.2
40.0
83,8
58.5
65.1
380
110
NC
4710
V-934
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.86
0.26
0.73
1.16
0.95
0.38
0.60
0.55
0.62
0.62
2.84
2.33
ND
153.80
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
3.50
1.26
4.30
6.46
5.29
2.06
3.33
3.70
5.06
4.40
21.5
15.5
NC
691
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
Table 4-7
Concentration and Emission Rates of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Section 2/8 Passive Vents
Passive
Vent#
V-001
V-002
V-004
V-005
V-007
V-009
V-011
V-014
V-016
V-017
V-018
V-019
V-025
V-027
V-028
V-031
V-032
V-033
V-034
V-035
V-036
V-037
V-038
V-040
V-041
V-043
V-044
Flow Rate
(acfm)
2.41
33.7
37.5
40.0
28.5
21.3
23.4
40.7
25.9
43.9
6.23
22.6
27.6
33.5
76.0
35.8
22.8
43.3
30.3
12.4
35.6
31.8
20.9
25.0
48.9
18.0
38.8
Temp
(DegF)
77.6
86.9
91.3
82.3
80.8
87.3
86.1
87.1
89.5
82.3
85.2
78.0
86.1
92.3
NM
83.9
87.5
85.4
83.7
78.8
83.9
83.7
84.6
87.0
85.9
91.6
82.9
CO,
(%)
2.7
23.5
22.2
44.5
43.2
11.5
8.0
34.2
13.8
40.1
31.0
30.2
7.8
17.9
41.7
44.4
41.3
43.2
43.7
41.5
40.9
41.8
45.5
40.5
40.5
40.7
41.8
(g/sec)
0.06
6.71
7.06
15.1
10.4
2.07
1.59
11.8
3.02
14.9
1.64
5.78
1.82
5.09
26.9
13.5
8.00
15.9
. 11.2
4.36
12.3
11.3
8.05
8.58
16.8
6.21
13.7
CH,
(%)
1.5
27.0
29.4
58.1
59.0
14.2
9.3
46.9
19.4
53.6
41.7
40.6
9.7
21.8
51.5
61.5
57.2
61.1
64.9
59.1
60.7
61.0
60.0
57.2
59.2
57.1
60.5
(g/sec)
0.01
2.80
3.40
7.16
5.19
0.93
0.67
5.89
1.55
7.25
0.80
2.83
0.82
2.25
12.1
6.78
4.03
8.15
6.07
2.26
6.67
5.98
3.86
4.41
8.93
3.17
7.24
O
(%)
18.3
9.5
7.8
0.3
0.5
14.0
15.9
3.8
13.4
1.6
5.1
6.0
16.6
10.9
0.7
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
(g/sec)
0.27
1.97
1.81
0.07
0.09
1.84
2.30
0.95
2.14
0.43
0.20
0.84
2.82
2.25
0.33
0
0.11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
H*S
(ppm)
1.21
1.60
1.20
29.00
24.65
1.25
0.29
3.80
1.40
7.60
^_ 1.40
4.50
47.40
1.45
16.00
41.00
10.30
43.00
18.00
53.20
83.80
50.00
44.40
73.30
64.80
61.60
43.20
(ug/set)
1.9
35.4
29.6
761.0
461.3
17.5
4.5
101.6
23.8
218.7
5.7
66.7
856.9
31.9
798.3
961.8
154.4
1221.5
358.4
432.5
1958.7
1042.7
607.7
1202.0
2080.1
728.0
1099.9
Hg
(ppm)
NM
NM
0.13
0.99
NM
NM
0.23
NM
NM
0.05
NM
NM
NM
0.40
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.17
NM
0.23
NM
NM
NM
NM
(us/see)
NM
NM
18.9
153.0
NM
NM
20.8
NM
NM
8.5
NM
NM
NM
51.9
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
23.4
NM
18.5
NM
NM
NM
NM
-------
Table 4-7
(Continued)
I
o
1
o
Passive
Vent#
V-045
V-046
V-047
V-050
V-051
V-052
V-054
V-055
V-056
V-057
V-058
V-059
V-060
V-061
V-062
V-063
V-067
V-068
V-069
V-070
V-072
V-073
V-074
V-076
V-077
V-078
V-079
V-080
Flow Rate
(acfm)
35.1
36.0
29.8
26.3
36.0
52.2
17.4
40.2
62.8
22.1
8.99
31.3
23.1
36.2
53.2
71.8
70.0
49.7
31.3
31.4
19.0
51.9
72.5
12.8
26.8
44.2
31.4
22.1
Temp
(DegF)
86.5
90.1
94.5
82.5
90.2
79.5
83.9
88.1
83.6
87.3
86.1
80.3
74.5
82.4
80.2
79.3
88.6
84.0
86.5
89.5
81.5
92.5
84.5
80.6
88.2
87.5
89.3
82.1
cot
(%)
42.2
41.3
40.3
43.5
40.4
41.3
41.3
42.2
41.5
44.2
45.5
46.7
46.1
40.0
41.9
40.5
42.6
46.0
46.8
48.4
44.2
42.3
41.9
41.0
45.5
46.2
47.2
47.8
(R/sec)
12.5
12.6
10.2
9.69
12.3
•18.3
6.08
14.4
22.1
8.28
3.47
12 A
9.02
12.3
18.9
24.7
25.3
19.4
12.4
12.9
7.13
18.6
25.8
4.45
10.3
17.3
12.5
8.93
CH,
(%)
58.4
57.5
57.4
56.3
57.7
63.2
57.0
62.2
65.3
63.3
61.6
64.6
60.2
59.0
60.8
59.8
56.8
63.5
64.5
68.8
56.1
65.1
58.7
55.5
62.1
66.5
66.8
64.3
(jj/sec)
6.31
6.37
5.28
4.56
6.40
10.2
3.05
7.71
12.6
4.31
1.71
6.23
4.28
6.58
9.96
13.2
12.3
9.73
6.22
6.66
3.29
10.4
13.1
2.19
5.12
9.06
6.46
4.37
0
(%)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
(B/sec)
0
0
0
0
0
0.03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.02
0
0
0
0
H,S
(ppm)
47.20
84.60
104.00
49.80
52.60
27.80
66.00
64.40
54.70
65.60
92.70
18.20
30.50
61.90
80.80
42.00
70.80
27.00
21.00
19.30
21.35
46.20
46.00
22.30
45.00
28.00
21.00
17.50
(ug/sec)
1085.6
1996.2
2035.0
858.4
1242.2
952.6
752.3
1700.0
2255.2
951.7
546.8
373.8
461.7
1469.9
2818.5
1979.3
3251.6
880.7
430.9
397.5
266.5
1572.2
2188.4
187.2
790.2
812.5
432.1
253.2
Hg
(ppm)
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.59
0.49
NM
NM
NM
0.27
NM
NM
0.04
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.27
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.27
NM
NM
0.85
(ug/sec)
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
119.1
32.9
NM
NM
NM
9.4
NM
NM
5.6
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
32.8
NM
NM
NM
NM
27.9
NM
NM
72.4
-------
Table 4-7
(Continued)
Passive
Vent#
V-083
V-084
V-085
V-086
V-087
V-088
V-089
V-090
V-092
V-093
V-095
V-096
V-098
V-099
V-100
V-101
V-103
V-104
V-106
V-107
V-109
V-110
V-112
V-113
Flow Rate
(acfnt)
28.5
53.9
493
43.2
65.5
63.7
22.4
16.5
15.9
25.4
35.4
38.2
35.4
6.20
22.5
38.9
46.7
67.2
34.0
38.4
28.9
63.1
17.2
42.9
Temp
(DeeF)
84.2
82.8
81.6
78.5
82.5
91.6
89.2
85.2
83.2
83.7
84.2
86.2
80.7
87.3
79.4
77.3
91.3
81.8
89.3
86.3
82.2
86.2
80.9
87.2
CO,
(%)
44.5
41.6
41.1
40.9
44.2
45.3
46.9
42.9
44.0
43.9
40.0
40.8
43.6
43.8
44.5
42.5
44.6
45.2
18.1
45.6
44.5
45.3
44.8
46.1
(g/sec)
10.8
19.0
17.2
15.0
24.5
24.5
8.91
6.01
5.92
9.44
12.0
13.2
13.1
2.30
8.49
14.0
17.7
25.7
5.22
14.8
10.9
24.2
6.52
16.7
CH,
(%)
55.5
59.1
60.6
60.8
62.6
68.7
64.6
45.0
56.5
56.1
54.2
59.1
58.3
56.3
56.8
57.8
58.0
63.1
24.2
60.7
61.2
61.4
61.2
62.0
(g/sec)
4.88
9.82
9.22
8.10
12.6
13.5
4.46
2.29
2.76
4.39
5.91
6.96
6.36
1.08
3.94
6.93
8.35
13.1
2.54
7.19
5.45
11.9
3.24
8.19
O
(%)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.3
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
(e/sec)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.74
0
0
0.20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.39
0.05
0
0
0
0
HtS
(ppm)
94.80
64.80
38.00
28.70
72.00
17.30
22.00
13.50
26.00
40.80
11.00
50.15
19.70
35.70
17.80
33.50
46.50
41.40
5.40
19.65
17.30
29.70
35.00
39.80
(iig/sec)
1775.4
2292.7
1230.0
814.1
3092.2
723.2
323.4
146.3
270.8
678.9
255.3
1256.7
457.7
145.2
262.8
854.9
1424.6
1825.5
120.6
495.1
328.0
1230.3
394.1
1119.1
- . •• • '• HR .;-,>
(ppm)
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.00
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.05
NM
NM
0.74
NM
0.22
NM
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
NM
NM
(ug/sec)
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.0
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
7.4
NM
NM
64.3
NM
39.7
NM
NM
0.0
NM
0.0
NM
NM
NM = Not Measured
-------
-
a.
§
Table 4-8
Concentration and Emission Rates of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Section 3/4 Passive Vents
Passive
Vent*
V-005
V-007
V-008
V-009
V-012
V-013
V-016
V-017
V-019
V-020
V-021
V-022
V-027
V-028
V-030
V-031
V-032
V-033
V-034
V-035
V-036
V-038
V-039
V-040
V-044
V-045
V-052
Flow Rate
(acfm)
26.2
16.1
58.0
35.1
7.92
49.6
40.0
46.5
15.4
32.4
33.7
70.5
17.7
73.8
14.1
12.1
27.0
61.6
33.7
31.6
20.1
38.7
9.02
26.3
21.7
42.5
44.9
Temp
(DefiF)
80.3
NM
86.3
83.0
91.3
80.1
84.7
81.9
85.1
82.9
87.1
82.7
90.2
83.4
83.6
81.4
88.3
87.2
82.4
81.7
81.7
75.7
78.3
75.7
92.0
87.2
79.4
CO,
(%)
31.5
38.9
27.9
38.8
43.4
40.0
24.2
41.2
45.1
45.2
45.2
40.2
40.6
40.8
43.4
44.5
43.5
44.0
41.2
24.8
44.0
42.8
34.4
44.0
41.2
42.2
40.4
(g/sec)
6.98
5.31
13.7
11.5
2.91
16.8
8.20
16.2
5.88
12.4
12.9
24.0
6.10
25.5
5.18
4.57
9.94
23.0
11.8
6.65
7.49
14.0
2.63
9.82
7.58
15.2
15.4
CH.
(%)
43.0
50.2
36.1
56.7
56.3
60.5
35.0
62.1
59.0
60.2
59.8
67.0
51.3
64.8
61.3
61.0
58.1
57.3
61.3
36.8
60.6
61.7
51.7
63.6
61.0
68.0
65.8
(E/sec)
3.47
2.49
6.46
6.13
1.37
9.25
4.31
8.90
2.80
6.02
6.21
14.6
2.80
14.7
2.66
2.28
4.83
10.9
6.37
3.59
3.75
7.35
1.44
5.16
4.08
8.90
9.10
0,
(%)
4.8
3.1
6.1
0.6
0.3
1.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
7.7
0.0
0.0
3.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
(E/sec)
0.77
0.31
2.18
0.13
0.02
0.31
1.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.00
1.50
0.00
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
H,S
(ppm)
77.20
13.00
5.10
39.80
88.00
35.80
9.30
71.90
81.30
88.00
61.80
53.70
7.70
53.60
220.00
120.00
82.60
59.00
47.30
15.80
93.50
61.60
30.00
35.20
16.80
25.10
80.80
(ug/sec)
1330
137
194
915
457
1170
244
2190
820
1870
1370
2480
89.6
2600
2030
954
1460
2380
1050
328
1230
1560
178
608
239
699
2380
••' - ' Jfc • £?f^C.:
(ppm)
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.00
0.00
0.10
NM
0.07
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.16
NM
0.12
NM,
NM
(iiBfcec)
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.0
0.0
18.0
NM
8.77
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.58
NM
10.1
NM
NM
-------
Table 4-8
(Continued)
Passive
Vent#
V-053
V-055
V-059
V-060
V-068
V-070
V-073
V-074
V-075
V-076
V-083
V-084
V-087
V-088
V-089
V-091
V-093N
V-095
V-096E
V-096W
V-097
V-098
V-099
V-100
V-103
V-106
V-108 _^
V-110
Flow Rate
(acfm)
33.4
80.1
31.0
39.6
50.6
19.9
22.8
75.6
32.8
86.5
33.2
15.4
30.0
22.5
33.2
26.2
12.9
11.7
57.7
25.0
19.5
36.0
32.6
2.92
17.7
8.14
14.9
53.6
Temp
(DeRF)
82.7
71.3
91.7
86.8
87.1
83.7
86.4
84.1
80.6
87.3
89.0
91.7
81.5
86.5
89.1
86.1
90.8
72.0
89.5
91.2
88.2
88.9
84.8
76.2
81.7
74.2
81.3
77.2
CO,
(%)
41.0
44.8
33.1
42.4
36.1
47.4
43.7
41.6
42.2
43.2
38.7
23.3
45.4
43.0
43.2
24.6
39.1
33.1
36.4
33.7
43.1
43.4
43.4
36.7
17.1
29.6
35.8
35.7
(R/sec)
11.6
30.4
8.69
14.2
15.5
8.00
8.46
26.6
11.7
31.7
10.9
3.03
11.5
8.20
12.1
5.47
4.26
3.29
17.8
7.13
7.12
13.2
12.0
0.91
2.56
2.04
4.51
16.2
CH,
(%)
61.0
60.4
49.6
63.6
49.4
61.4
69.1
68.5
63.3
62.4
51.3
31.3
62.1
59.6
62.6
35.4
55.6
49.1
57.3
48.3
63.1
64.3
64.1
54.3
23.8
48.4
44.2
49.3
(g/sec)
6.29
14.9
4.74
7.76
7.70
3.77
4.87
16.0
6.39
16.6
5.24
1.48
5.74
4.13
6.40
2.86
2.20
1.77
10.2
3.72
3.79
7.13
6.44
0.49
1.30
1.21
2.03
8.14
os
'(%)
0.4
0.0
5.1
0.2
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.8
9.1
0.1
0.9
0.2
8.8
0.2
2.6
0.7
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
12.3
4.4
6.7
3.9
(e/sec)
0.08
0.00
0.97
0.05
1.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.57
0.86
0.02
0.13
0.04
1.42
0.02
0.19
0.25
0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
1.34
0.22
0.61
1.29
H,S
(ppm)
8.30
19.00
26.30
70.00
37.00
96.80
23.50
51.70
71.75
84.00
28.80
11.10
112.00
156.00
194.00
10.10
60.80
0.02
32.00
2.30
49.60
164.80
71.20
29.80
0.11
20.60
3.40
1.20
(ug/sec)
182
998
535
1820
1230
1270
352
2560
1540 .
4770
627
112
2200
2300
4220
174
513
0
1210
37.7
634
3890
1520
57.1
1.30
110
33.2
42.2
HB
(ppm)
NM
0.28
0.27
NM
NM
0.80
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.18
NM
NM
0.33
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.11
0.38
NM
(ufi/jiec)
NM
86.7
32.3
NM
NM
61.5
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
8.15
NM
NM
24.9
NM
NM
NM
NM
3.5
21.8
NM
-------
s.
i
o
• a
o
Table 4-8
(Continued)
Passive
Vent#
V-lll
V-112
V-113
V-114
V-115
V-116
V-117
V-118
V-119
V-120
V-121
V-122
V-123
V-126
V-127
V-128
V-131
V-132
V-133
V-134
V-136
V-137
V-139
Flow Rate
(acfm)
63.9
28.9
58.1
61.5
37.9
0.44
18.8
51.6
34.4
32.9
7.35
11.5
16.6
6.72
9.93
27.4
6.52
39.6
36.6
4.85
14.5
11.3
10.5
Temp
(Deg F)
89.0
70.3
80.0
80.3
87.2
75.4
83.0
79.5
85.1
70.2
80.2
79.7
83.1
83.9
81.9
85.7
78.4
87.9
85.1
74.2
84.7
80.5
82.0
CO,
(%)
43.4
40.0
44.1
43.9
40.7
35.5
45.3
43.0
43.7
34.2
36.7
38.4
40.2
24.1
28.9
40.8
21.6
32.3
35.5
32.2
. 8.3
15.1
11.6
(B/sec)
23.5
9.81
21.7
22.9
13.1
0.13
7.23
18.8
12.7
9.55
2.29
3.75
5.65
1.37
2.43
9.47
1.19
10.8
11.0
1.32
1.02
1.45
1.04
CH.
(%)
62.6
62.7
62.6
64.7
63.1
65.0
62.4
62.8
63.0
65.6
65.9
66.0
64.9
39.9
45.4
57.7
32.4
42.3
52.2
44.2
10.2
20.2
12.8
(g/sec)
12.3
5.59
11.2
12.3
7.36
0.09
3.62
9.99
6.67
6.66
1.49
2.34
3.32
0.83
1.39
4.87
0.65
5.17
5.90
0.66
0.46
0.70
0.42
o*
(%)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.8
5.0
0.9
8.2
3.3
1.4
0.6
14.5
12.5
10.7
(B/sec)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.32
0.31
0.15
0.33
0.81
0.32
0.02
1.29
0.87
0.70
H,S
(ppm)
35.50
31.70
43.60
59.40
65.30
43.30
66.10
75.00
82.40
22.00
53.80
74.35
68.00
17.80
10.40
20.80
0.30
2.50
5.80
0.58
0.13
0.24
0.14
(ug/sec)
1490
602
1660
2400
1620
12.5
816
2540
1860
476
259
562
740
78.5
67.8
374
1.28
65.0
139
1.9
1.2
1.8
1.0
Hg
(ppm)
NM
NM
0.50
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.22
NM
1.85
1.02
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.37
0.48
NM
NM
NM
0.00
(ug/sec)
NM
NM
112
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
29.2
NM
52.6
45.4
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
56.7
68.0
NM
NM
NM
0.0
NM = Not Measured
4^
t L>
-------
Table 4-9
Concentration and Emission Rates of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Section 1/9 Passive Vents
• Passive
Veitttf
V-901
V-902
V-905
V-906
V-913
V-914
V-916
V-918
V-919
V-923
V-924
V-927
V-928
V-932
V-934
Flow Rate
(acfm)
15.0
18.9
38.2
10.8
23.7
11.2
12.2
19.7
15.8
16.3
17.1
7.9
16.2
24.6
2.94
Temp
(Deg F)
81.2
81.8
82.0
80.3
82.3
84.2
80.2
79.4
77.9
80.9
83.3
85.0
84.8
89.3
89.5
cot
(%)
37.0
34.7
39.5
35.6
37.4
39.0
40.7
21.3
21.5
23.2
22.1
21.4
16.8
16.8
39.1
(R/SCC)
4.70
5.57
12.8
3.26
7.51
3.69
4.19
3.56
2.88
3.20
3.20
1.44
2.31
3.51
0.97
CH4
(%)
51.6
48.2
56.0
50.0
55.7
57.3
60.8
31.7
32.0
34.6
32.0
26.5
22.0
20.7
52.5
(g/sec)
2.38
2.81
6.60
1.66
4.07
1.97
2.28
1.93
1.56
1.73
1.68
0.65
1.10
1.57
0.48
0,
(%)
2.0
3.4
0.9
2.5
0.8
0.3
0.0
9.0
8.8
8.2
9.5
9.0
12.4
12.3
1.1
(ft/sec)
0.19
0.40
0.21
0.17
0.12
0.02
0.00
1.09
0.86
0.82
1.00
0.44
1.24
1.87
0.02
H,S
(ppm)
31.70
30.50
35.00
26.30
21.70
18.00
26.00
10.80
8.60
17.30
20.00
7.30
10.80
5.30
25.00
(ug/sec)
312
379
878
186
337
132
207
140
89.2
184
224
37.9
115
85.6
48.2
Ha
(ppm)
NM
0.12
NM
NM
NM
NM
1.03
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.53
(ufi/sec)
NM
8.78
NM
NM
NM
NM
48.4
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
6.02
NM = Not Measured
-------
Table 4-10
Concentration and Emission Results for Select VOCs from
Temporal Sampling of Passive Vents in Section 2/8
Date
Flow
Rate
facfm)
Vinyl Chloride
(DDITI)
(us/sec)
1,1-Dichloroethylene
(DOM)
(u&/sec)
Methylene Chloride
(com)
(ue/scc)
1,1-Dichloroethane
(own)
(UB/SCc)
c-l,2-Dichloroethy!ene
(DDIT»>
V-011
07/03/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
23.4
22.5
7.20
0.89
0.42
ND
25.1
11.5
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.81
0.30
0.67
31.1
11.2
7.85
0.66
0.34
0.49
29.7
14.5
6.75
0.15
0.05
0.09
fi/2/secl
6.76
2.23
1.20
V-038
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/25^^
20.9
51.3
34.8
2.42
2.88
0.45
60.8
178
18.8
0.02
0.04
ND
0.85
3.73
NC
0.41
0.36
0.45
14.1
30.5
25.7
0.58
0.80
0.56
23.0
78.4
37.5
1.19
2.34
1.08
46.4
224
702
V-058
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95^
8.99
16.2
5.76
5.01
6.23
5.68
54.3
122
39.4
0.05
0.11
0.06
0.81
3.44
0.63
0.12
0.11
0.12
1.74
2.96
1.10
0.19
0.21
0.22
3.21
6.60
2.40
8.94
9.18
6.66
150
278
71.6
V-107
07/06/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
38.4
38.1
46.1
2.66
3.60
4.49
123
165
249
0.03
0.06
0.06
2.42
4.22
4.74
0.80
1.22
0.72
50.1
75.7
54.4
0.78
0.98
0,74
56.9
70.9
64.7
3.80
4.21
3.69
272
300
317
-------
Table 4-10
(Continued)
Date
Flow
Rate
facfm)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
(onm)
(ue/stc)
Benzene
(DDItl)
rue/sec)
Toluene
(bom)
Cue/sec)
Chlorobenzene
(DDttl)
(ue/sec)
Ethylbenzene
CDDHI)
(ue/stc)
V-011
07/03/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
23.4
22.5
7.20
0.07
0.04
0.05
4.43
2.38
0.90
0.07
ND
ND
2.41
NC
NC
2.02
0.82
1.22
84.1
32.6
15.6
0.24
0.14
0.13
12.3
6.95
1.96
0.10
0.09
0.07
5.03
4.25
1.03
V-038
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
20.9
51.3
34.8
0.07
0.09
0.07
4.01
12.0
6.52
0.45
0.56
0.50
14.2
43.1
26.1
22.30
28.81
25.47
825
2620
1570
2.36
2.93
2.53
107
325
191
6.73
7.87
8.03
287
825
572
V-058
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
V-107
07/06/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
8.99
16.2
5.76
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.50
0.55
0.28
6.74
13.3
2.46
43.59
44.15
22.10
695
1270
226
2.38
2.48
1.23
46.5
87.2
15.4
16.43
17.50
8.92
38.4
38.1
46.1
0.23
0.30
0.20
23.2
29.6
23.3
0.66
0.80
0.74
38.0
45.6
51.4
44.86
52.76
52.44
3060
3570
4280
2.96
3.44
3.48
247
284
348
11.73
12.94
13.06
302
580
105
922
1010
1230
-------
Table 4-10
(Continued)
Date
V-011
07/03/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
Flow
Rate
(acfm)
23.4
22.5
7.20
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
(DDm)
0.39
0.21
0.27
(i/c/sec)
Styrene
(DDtn)
(ue/sec)
o-Xylene
fonni)
fue/sec)
n-Nonane
(oom)
18.8
9.89
3.99
0.20
0.09
0.14
9.54
4.29
1.98
0.19
0.11
0.13
9.34
5.30
1.98
0.17
0.09
0.11
(ueJsec)
9.67
5.02
2.03
n-Undecane
foDm)
0.05
0.04
0.09
fue/sec)
3.45
2.87
2.03
V-038
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
20.9
51.3
34.8
8.00
9.92
9.83
341
1040
700
2.66
3.75
3.22
111
386
225
2.97
3.24
3.67
127
340
261
5.93
7.14
6.75
306
905
580
2.65
2.92
3.40
V-058
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
V-107
07/06/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
8.99
16.2
5.76
28.98
30.29
15.43
533
1000
182
4.20
4.41
2.28
75.7
143
26.4
9.12
9.72
4.76
168
322
56.0
9.62
9.89
5.02
214
396
71.5
4.43
5.68
2.43
38.4
38.1
46.1
22.83
24.98
26.31
1790
1950
2480
5.19
5.80
5.99
400
443
554
8.71
9.25
10.79
685
721
1020
9.16
10.49
10.44
896
987
1190
2.88
3.25
3.14
166
451
356
120
277
42.1
333
373
435
-------
Table 4-10
(Continued)
_JQdi£_
Flow
Rate
facfnri
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobetizene
(oom)
(tie/sec)
n-Decane Si
p-Dichlorobenzene
(DDITI)
fuu/sec)
Trichloroethene
foDtn)
(UE/SCC)
1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
(oom)
(us/sec]
TNMHC
(imni)
(uelsec)
V-011
07/03/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
23.4
22.5
7.20
ND
ND
0.05
NC
NC
0.87
0.32
0.16
0.44
21.1
10.3
8.75
0.19
0.06
0.12
11.5
3.50
2.24
0.11
0.07
0.26
6.40
4.02
4.61
87.64
54.11
65.48
3400
2020
781
V-038
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
20.9
51.3
34.8
1.55
2.46
1.14
85.0
333
104
12.51
14.73
17.71
121
2100
1720
0.28
0.52
0.24
14.9
66.9
21.3
4.37
4.93
5.38
224
619
459
437.78
489.50
462.10
15100
41600
26600
V-058
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
8.99
16.2
5.76
1.20
2.54
0.60
28.3
109
9.11
21.34
23.04
11.42
534
1040
183
1.18
1.01
0.97
26.8
41.4
14.1
8.90
9.26
4.69
196
368
66.1
649.10
656.70
682.10
9670
17600
6510
V-107
07/06/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
38.4
38.1
46.1
2.35
3.02
1.39
238
303
169
18.42
20.21
22.62
1970
2140
2900
0.93
1.18
1.22
90.9
113
142
6.22
7.68
8.00
585
717
911
659.98
712.80
738.60
42000
45000
56400
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
9
•a
I
o
table 4-11
Concentration and Emission Results for Select VOCs
from Temporal Sampling of Passive Vents in Section 3/4
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
Vinyl Chloride
(ppm)
(Aig/sec)
1,1-Dichloroethylene
(ppm)
(^g/sec)
Methylene Chloride
(ppm)
fag/sec)
1,1-Dichloroe thane
. (PP"»)
fag/sec)
c-1,2-
Dichloroethylene
(ppm)
(^g/sec)
V-020
06/30/95
07/05/95
07/1 1/95
32.4
30.4
37.3
1.94
2.04
2.09
75.9
74.7
93.6
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.26
0.33
0.27
15.7
18.8
18.8
V05S
06/29/95
07/07/95
07/1 1/95
80.1
18.8
37.1
6.74
8.83
8.00
650
199
357
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.06
0.08
0.08
9.74
2.78
5.81
0.48
0.73
0.77
71.1
25.5
53.1
V-097
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
19.5
23.5
26.7
2.04
1.93
2.24
47.9
54.5
72.0
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.34
0.30
0.36
12.7
13.3
18.2
0.34
0.18
0.30
12.4
8.03
15.2
V-121
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
7.35
13.2
10.9
0.35
1.27
0.67
3.07
20.3
8.71
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.04
0.06
0.05
0.54
1.32
0.85
0.15
0.14
0.14
2.09
3.60
2.81
0.32
0.35
0.32
4.32
8.54
6.49
-------
Table 4-11
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
1,1,1-Trlchloroethane
(ppm)
C^g/sec)
Benzene
(ppm)
(A/g/sec)
Toluene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Chlorobenzene
(ppm)
(^g/sec)
Ethylbenzene
(ppm)
fag/sec)
V-020
06/30/95
07/05/95
07/11/95
32.4
30.4
37.3
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.81
0.86
0.85
39.5
39.1
47.7
17.14
20.09
18.48
986
1080
1220
1.63
1.68
1.70
114
110
138
13.37
13.98
14.09
887
869
1070
V055
06/29/95
07/07/95
07/11/95
80.1
18.8
37.1
ND
ND
0.03
NC
NC
2.58
0.47
0.63
0.61
56.2
17.7
34.2
27.44
34.36
30.66
3900
1140
2020
2.48
2.95
2.84
432
120
228
9.98
16.38
16.27
1630
629
1230
V-097
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/11/95
V-121
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
19.5
23.5
26.7
0.03
ND
ND
1.08
NC
NC
0.84
0.80
0.90
24.7
28.4
36.3
9.90
8.02
9.16
342
335
434
2.98
2.65
3.00
126
135
174
11.33
10.16
11.64
452
489
636
7.35
13.2
10.9
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.65
1.00
1.27
0.66
0.72
0.71
7.27
14.3
11.7
13.72
14.13
14.09
179
332
272
2.22
2.22
2.28
35.4
63.7
53.8
9.54
9.86
10.45
144
267
233
-------
JO
8.
n
o
o
Table 4-11
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
(ppm)
Oug/sec)
Styrene
(ppm)
fag/sec)
o-Xylene
(ppm)
fag/sec)
n-Nonane
(ppm)
0/g/sec)
n-Undecane
(ppm)
0/g/sec
)
V-020
06/30/95
07/05/95
07/1 1/95
32.4
30.4
37.3
18.42
19.03
19.93
1220
1180
1520
1.81
1.92
1.68
118
117
125
6.77
7.05
7.13
449
438
544
7.62
7.87
8.20
610
591
755
3.89
4.30
5.08
V05S
06/29/95
07/07/95
07/1 1/95
80.1
18.8
37.1
18.28
23.96
23.29
3000
920
1770
2.46
3.01
2.58
394
113
192
6.54
8.24
7.92
1070
316
600
10.55
12.52
12.20
2090
581
1120
1.61
1.86
2.38
380
394
570
388
105
265
V-097
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
19.5
23.5
26.7
12.89
11.71
13.69
514
564
748
3.12
2.86
3.17
122
135
170
5.12
4.69
5.30
204
226
290
9.65
8.44
9.83
465
491
649
4.90
5.63
16.73
287
399
541
V-121
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
7.35
13.2
10.9
11.41
11.57
12.38
172
313
276
2.34
2.35
2.58
34.4
62.5
56.2
4.57
4.67
5.01
68.7
126
112
7.18
7.55
7.87
130
247
212
4.37
5.27
5.04
96.8
210
165
-------
Table 4-11
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
(ppm)
(Mg/sec)
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
(ppm)
0/g/sec)
Trichldroethene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
(ppm)
dug/sec)
TNMHC
(ppm)
(^ig/sec)
V-020
06/30/95
07/05/95
07/11/95
32.4
30.4
37.3
2.82
2.60
1.90
241
208
187
21.53
21.52
23.58
1940
1820
2450
0.03
0.03
0.03
2.08
1.98
2.74
9.29
8.74
10.48
738
650
957
486.83
517.90
536.30
26200
26100
33100
V055
06/29/95
07/07/95
07/11/95
80.1
18.8
37.1
0.73
2.75
1.43
155
136
140
14.54
9.65
21.15
3240
504
2180
ND
0.06
0.05
NC
2.63
4.24
4.98
6.31
8.06
977
290
732
440.60
526.50
576.30
58500
16400
35400
V-097
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
V-121
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/11/95
19.5
23.5
26.7
3.86
3.29
1.97
198
204
139
23.69
21.65
28 H
1290
1420
2090
0.07
0.02
0.05
3.42
1.41
3.08
7.86
7.02
8.36
376
405
547
540.08
472.20
543.00
17400
18400
24000
7.35
13.2
10.9
1.27
3.55
2.15
24.6
124
61.8
20.29
21.19
26.08
415
782
791
0.09
0.09
0.08
1.68
3.01
2.29
7.16
7.81
8.96
129
253
239
478.40
555.53
555.60
5830
12200
10000
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
Table 4-12
Concentration and Emission Rates of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Temporal Sampling of Section 2/8 Passive Vents
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
CO,
(%)
(g/sec)
CH,
(%)
(g/sec)
0,
(%)
(B/SCC)
H,S
(ppm) 1 (ug/sec)
Hs
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
V-011
07/03/95
07/10/95
07/10/95-D
07/12/95
23.4
22.5
55.7
7.20
8.0
5.0
6.1
6.8
1.59
0.96
2.88
0.42
9.3
5.0
7.0
7.1
0.67
0.35
1.20
0.16
15.9
17.1
15.6
16.2
2.30
2.38
5.36
0.72
0.29
0.04
NM
0.20
4.46
0.64
NM
0.94
0.23
0.05
NM
0.21
20.8
4.36
NM
5.84
V-038
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/10/95-D
07/12/95
20.9
51.3
52.7
34.8
45.5
43.0
42.1
42.4
8.05
18.7
18.8
12.5
60.0
62.7
60.8
63.1
3.86
9.91
9.88
6.77
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
44.40
46.00
NM
52.25
608
1550
NM
1190
0.23
0.09
NM
0.07
18.5
17.8
NM
9.41
V-052
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/10/95-D
07/12/95
52.2
66.4
27.9
53.3
41.3
42.3
41.1
42.2
18.3
23.8
9.70
19.1
63.2
64.7
61.3
66.3
10.2
13.3
5.26
10.9
0.1
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.03
0.0
0.09
0.0
27.80
NM
NM
NM
953
NM
NM
NM
0.59
NM
NM
NM
119
NM
NM
NM
V-058
07/05/95
07/10/95
07/10/95-D
07/12/95
8.99
7.16
16.2
5.76
45.5
43.7
43.2
42.7
3.47
2.65
5.93
2.09
61.6
60.8
62.4
60.6
1.71
1.34
3.12
1.08
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
92.70
NM
81.40
54.00
547
NM
865
204
0.27
NM
NM
NM
9.38
NM
NM
NM
V-107
07/06/95
07/10/95
07/10/95-D
07/12/95
38.4
38.1
46.5
46.1
45.6
44.6
44.0
43.5
14.8
14.4
17.3
17.0
60.7
62.1
62.5
62.7
7.19
7.29
8.96
8.90
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.05
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.65
20.00
NM
19.50
495
500
NM
589
0.0
0.0
NM
0.06
0.0
0.0
NC
10.7
-------
Table 4-13
Concentration and Emission Results for Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Temporal Sampling of Passive Vents in Section 3/4
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
CO,
<%)
(e/sec)
CH4
(%)
fa/sec)
0,
(%)
(Wsec)
tiiS
(ppm)
luE/sec)
.• • : UK
(ppm)
(u E/SCC)
V-020
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/1 1/95
07/1 1/95-D
32.4
30.4
19.9
37.3
45.2
44.0
43.4
45.5
12.4
11.3
7.31
14.4
60.2
57.7
61.2
64.7
6.02
5.40
3.75
7.43
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
88.00
96.00
75.19
MM
1870
1910
980
NM
0.07
0.0
1.72
NM
8.77
0.0
132
NM
V-055
06/29/95
07/07/95
07/07/95-D
07/1 1/95
V-070
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/06/95-D
07/1 1/95
80.1
18.8
17.6
19.4
44.8
44.1
44.8
44.1
30.4
7.01
6.67
7.25
60.4
61.0
61.5
60.6
14.9
3.53
3.33
3.62
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.00
102.30
NM
64.70
998
1260
NM
824
0.28
0.52
NM
0.20
86.7
37.7
NM
15.0
19.9
20.4
51.1
37.5
47.4
43.7
44.2
42.4
8.00
7.54
19.1
13.5
61.4
61.4
55.8
60.8
3.77
3.85
8.78
7.03
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
96.80
92.00
NM
NM
1260
1230
NM
NM
0.80
NM
NM
NM
61.5
NM
NM
NM
-------
Table 4-13
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
CO,
(%)
fe/sec)
CHV
(%)
(a/sec)
o,
(%)
(a/sec)
. H,S -:.-;.;'. ;-..
(pDlti)
(tic/sec)
," -'• Hg V??
(pom)
fuc/sec)
V-097
06/30/95
07/06/95
07/06/95-D
07/11/95
V-121
06/29/95
07/06/95
07/06/95-D
07/11/95
19.5
23.5
28.5
23.3
43.1
42.1
39.0
41.8
7.12
8.40
9.42
8.25
63.1
64.2
60.5
63.9
3.79
4.66
5.31
4.58
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.60
37.70
NM
35.77
634
582
NM
546
0.33
NM
NM
NM
7.35
13.2
12.7
14.0
36.7
41.3
39.4
41.3
2.29
4.64
4.23
4.89
65.9
64.0
58.9
64.4
1.49
2.61
2.30
2.77
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.80
45.80
NM
48.20
259
398
NM
442
1.85
1.42
NA
1.41
24.9
NM
NM
NM
52.6
72.7
NM
76.1
NM = Not Measured
-------
Table 4-14
Summary of Emission Flux Data from Flux Chamber Sampling
Compound
TNMHC
Total Unidentified VOCs
Ethane
Propane
Toluene
Isopentane
n-Butane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
Tetrachloroethylene
Isobutene + 1-Butene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Propylene
Isobutane
n-Pentane
3-Methylhexane
Ethylene
Limonene
o-Xylene
Acetone
Ethylbenzene
Hexanal
Methylene Chloride
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Trichlorofluoromethane
n-Octane
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Detection
Limit
(ug/m2-mln)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
98.7
98.7
97.3
91.9
91.9
91.9
91.9
89.2
89.2
89.2
87.8
87.8
85.1
85.1
83.8
81.1
79.7
78.4
78.4
78.4
77.0
75.7
75.7
74.3
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(uR/m2-mln)
0.85
0.11
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(uR/m1-min)
2.94e+06
1.17e+06
3.50e+05
2.65e+04
5.37e+04
3.86e+03
1.27e+04
3.13e+05
1.81e+03
2.65e+03
7.65e+04
6.47e+01
3.41e+04
9.01 e+02
1.63e+03
2.30e+01
6.20e+04
3.35e+04
1.50e+03
7.15e+04
2.75e+03
1.84e+02
5.04e+02
3.75e+03
6.18e+03
8.34e+04
Median
(ug/m2-mln)
7.84e+01
1.51e+01
7.50e-01
9.10e-01
6.90e-01
4.77e+00
1.02e+00
6.00e-01
1.50e-01
8.60e-01
2.30e-01
4.40e-01
1.79e+00
1.15e+00
l.OOe-01
2.40e-01
8.50e-01
2.40e-01
5.60e-01
1.90e-01
1.70e-01
4.00e-02
5.00e-02
1.30e-01
1.10e-01
1.10e-01
Average
(ug/m*-min)
4.67e+04
1.87e+04
6.36e+03
5. 61 e+02
1.21e+03
1.10e+02
2.60e+02
4.71e+03
5.20e+01
4.56e+01
1.23e+03
3.20e+00
6.90e+02
3.33e+01
3.48e+01
9.80e-01
1.30e+03
5.30e+02
5.36e+01
l.lle+03
5.17e+01
1.16e+01
1.26e+01
7.61e+01
1.25e+02
1.24e+03
Standard
Deviation
(ug/m^min)
3.43e+05
1.36e+05
4.12e+04
3.15e+03
6.49e+03
4.70e+02
1.50e+03
3.64e+04
2.58e+02
3.09e+02
8.92e+03
8.91e+00
4.05e+03
1.25e+02
1.93e+02
3.12e+00
7.41e+03
3.90e+03
2.24e+02
8.32e+03
3.22e+02
3.51e+01
6.12e+01
4.41e+02
7.30e+02
9.70e+03
95% Confidence Interval
Lower
(uR/m1-mln)
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.40e-01
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.13e+00
O.OOe+00
4.40e+00
O.OOe+00
2.50e-01
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.64e+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.45e+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
tjppar.n?:
(ug/m'-tnln)
1.26e+05
5.01e+04
1.59e+04
1.29e+03
2.71e+03
2.19e+02
6.08e+02
1.3Ie+04
1.12e+02
1.17e+02
3.30e+03
5.26e+00
1.63e+03
6.21e+01
7.95e+01
1.70e+00
3.02e+03
1.43e+03
1.05e+02
3.04e+03
1.26e+02
1.97e+01
2.68e+01
1.78e+02
2.94e+02
3.48e+03
g
i'
n
-I
o
i.
o
-------
Table 4-14
(Continued)
Compound
n-Butylbenzene
Benzene
n-Hexane
Styrene
p-Elhyltoluene
n-Nonane
m-Ethyltoluene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Trichloroethylene
Methylcyclohexane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 ,3,5-TrimethyIbenzene
t-2-Butene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
Chloroethane
o-E(hyltoluene
Isoheptane +
2,3-Dimethylpentane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Indene
n-Heptane
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
n-Propylbenzene
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Cyclopentane
Methylcyclopentane
Chloromethane
3-Methvlheptane
Detection
Limit
(uE/m2-min)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
71.6
68.9
68.9
66.2
66.2
66.2
64.9
63.5
63.5
59.5
58.1
58.1
58.1
58.1
56.8
56.8
55.4
55.4
54.1
54.1
52.7
52.7
51.4
51.4
51.4
50.0
47.3
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(ug/m'-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(ug/m*-min)
2.17e+04
3.13e+03
1.98e+03
1.42e+04
3.51e+04
7.11e+04
3.34e+04
1.98e+04
2.04e+01
1.59e+03
4.08e+02
3.81e+04
3.73e+01
1.88e+04
1.38e+02
6.16e+04
2.15e+03
8.79e+02
6.00e+01
2.29e+03
3.65e+03
3.25e+04
9.78e+02
4.72e+02
5.87e+02
3.53e+01
1.57e+03
Median
(ug/m*-min)
1.70e-01
7.00e-02
1.20e-01
1.60e-01
1.90e-01
7.00e-02
7.00e-02
l.OOe-01
l.OOe-02
l.OOe-01
3.00e-02
7.00e-02
4.00e-02
8.00e-02
5.00e-02
4.00e-02
3.00e-02
l.OOe-02
3.00e-02
3.00e-02
3.00e-02
4.00e-02
3.00e-02
2.00e-02
3.00e-02
l.OOe-02
NC
Average
(uR/m'-min)
3.29e+02
5.04e+01
3.43e+01
2.77e+02
5.27e+02
1.14e+03
5.14e+02
3.39e+02
6.90e-01
3.866+01
1.63e+01
5.99e+02
2.43e+00
2.86e+02
4.88e+00
9.44e+02-
4.86e+01
2.95e+01
3.04e+00
4.86e+01
5.78e+01
5.14e+02
2.33e+01
l.Ole+01
1.43e+01
9.90e-01
2.96e+01
Standard
Deviation
(ug/m*-min)
2.53e+03
3.65e+02
2.30e+02
1.68e+03
4.08e+03
8.296+03
3.89e+03
2.31e+03
2.63e+00
1.94e+02
6.32e+01
4.44e+03
7.35e+00
2.19e+03
1.90e+01
7.17e+03
2.67e+02
1.24e+02
1.06e+01
2.72e+02
4.26e+02
3.79e+03
1.22e+02
5.60e+01
7.22e+01
4.18e+00
1.84e+02
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ug/m'-min)
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.00e-02
O.OOe+00
1.65e+00
O.OOe+00
7.30e-01
O.OOe+00
4.80e-01
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
7.30e-01
5.90e-01
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
2.00e-02
O.OOe+00
Ui>i»f£r ;;
(uR/m'-min)
9.15e+02
1.35e+02
8.77e+01
6.66e+02
1.47e+03
3.06e+03
1.42e+03
8.74e+02
1.30e+00
8.35e+01
3.09C+01
1.63e+03
4.14e+00
7.93e+02
9.28e+00
2.61e+03
1.10e+02
5.83e+01
5.49e+00
1.12e+02
1.57e+02
1.39e+03
5.15e+01
2.31e+01
3.10e+01
1.96e+00
7.22e+01
-------
Table 4-14
(Continued)
Compound
Neohexane
2-Methyl-l-Butcne
Freon 113
2-Methyl-2-Butene
2,2,3-Trimethylpenlane
c-2-Butene
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
3-Methyl-l-Butene
2,5-Dimethylhexane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethy lene
3-Methylpentane
Isoprene
t-2-Pentene
1-Hexene
Chloroform
Vinyl Chloride
Acetylene
1-Octene
1-Pentene
Chlorobenzene
Methanol
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
n-Undecane
2-Melhyl-2-Pentene
Cumene
Naphthalene
m-Diethylbenzene
Detection
Limit
(ug/m'-min)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
47.3
46.0
46.0
43.2
40.5
40.5
36.5
35.1
35.1
32.4
31.1
31.1
29.7
28.4
27.0
27.0
25.7
24.3
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
21.6
20.3
18.9
18.9
17.6
17.6
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(ug/m'-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(ug/m*-min)
4.10e+02
1.71e+03
3.18e+01
9.31e+02
2.71e+02
2.75e+01
4.53e+00
6.94e+02
6.80e+02
4.38e+02
1.32e+02
7.16e+02
7.00e+02
1.15e+02
1.18e+02
l.Ole+00
3.68e+03
8.15e+01
1.85e+03
3.71e+00
1.25e+04
1.24e+01
9.00e-01
7.48e+04
1.48e+00
9.76e+03
5.47e+03
2.30e+04
Median
(ue/m'-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(uB/m'-min)
7.38e+00
2.97e+01
1.20e+00
1.69e+01
7.14e+00
6.10e-01
2.20e-01
1.03e+01
l.Ole+01
l.lle+01
3.42e+00
1.14c+01
1.20e+01
3.18e+00
4.07e+00
7.00e-02
6.98e+01
2.07e+00
3.35e+01
1.80e-01
2.13e+02
6.50e-01
6.00e-02
1.10e+03
l.OOe-01
1.47e+02
7.79e+01
3.38e+02
Standard
Deviation
(ug/m'-min)
4.79e+01
2.00e+02
5.18e+00
1.09e+02
3.55e+01
3.39e+00
5.80e-01
8.08e+01
7.90e+01
5.79e+01
1.88e+01
8.34e+01
8.19e+01
1.66e+01
1.93e+01
1.40e-01
4.37e+02
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence tn^i&fe
Lower
(ug/m'-min)
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.00e-02
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.00e-02
O.OOe+00
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
' :':> 0p|lff
(ug/m2-min)
1.85e+01
7.606+01
2.40e+00
4.21e+01
1.54e+01
1.40e+00
3.50e-01
2.90e+01
2.85e+01
2.45e+0l
7.78e+00
3.07e+01
3.09e+01
7.02e+00
8.54e+00
l.OOe-01
1.71e+02
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-14
(Continued)
Compound
p-Diethylbenzene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Diethyl Ether &2-Propanol
c-3-Hexene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Methylisobutylketone
b-Pinene
t- 1 ,2-DichloroethyIene
Benzyl Chloride
&m-Dichlorobenzene
t-2-Hexene
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Carbon Tetrachloride
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dioxane &
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
o-Dichlorobenzene
c-2-Pentene
Isobutylbenzene
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
1,3-Butadiene
MTBE, Isohexane,
&c-4-Methyl-2-Pentane
Hexachloro-1 ,3-Butadiene
Trichloroethene
Detection
Limit
(ufi/m^-min)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
17.6
16.2
16.2
14.9
14.9
14.9
13.5
13.5
13.5
12.2
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.8
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
8.1
8.1
8.1
6.8
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
• 74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(ug/mz-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(ug/m'-min)
5.02e+04
8.76e+00
5.49e+03
1.48e+00
4.39e+02
8.00e-01
8.31e+02
4.22e+00
2.65e+04
6.80e-01
3.91e+04
5.50e-01
4.45e+00
2.23e+00
5.56e+03
2.90e+03
6.27e+04
3.34e+04
3.79e+00
1.35e+04
l.Ole+00
1.55e+00
6.77e+02
8.86e+03
2.95e+02
Median
(ug/m*-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(uR/m'-min)
7.49e+02
1.80e-01
1.54e+02
6.00e-02
8.30e+00
7.00e-02
1.13e+01
1.40e-01
3.87e+02
6.00e-02
5.84e+02
6.00e-02
1.20e-01
6.00e-02
8.71e+01
4.76e+01
1.10e+03
4.99e+02
1.10e-01
2.04e+02
6.00e-02
1.10e-01
1.51e+01
1.31e+02
1.09e+01
Standard
Deviation
(ue/m'-mln)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence intervals
Lower
(ug/m2-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
tipper
(UK/m'-mJrt)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-14
(Continued)
Compound
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Bromodichloromethane
Heptanal
1 -Methylcyclohexene
Bromomethane
Dichlorofluoromethane
Dichlorotolucne
Chlorodifluoromethane
1 -Undecene
1-Butanol & Cyclohexane
1 -Decene
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
t-3-Heptene
t-2-Heptene
p-Isopropyltoluene
p-Chlorotoluene
o-Chlorotoluene
m-Chlorotoluene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
c-2-Octene
c-2-Hexene
Vinyl Bromide
Vinyl Acetate
Neopentane
Methylcyclopentene
Butyraldehyde
Bromoform
c-3-Heptene
Detection
Limit
(ug/m^min)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
5.4
2.7
2.7
.4
.4
.4
.4
.4
.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(ue/m*-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(ug/mz-min)
1.54e+00
3.67e+01
4.00e-02
4.57e+01
6.10e-01
6.90e-01
5.24e+01
9.01e+02
1.27e+02
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
(ug/m2-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(ug/n^-mln)
6.00e-02
8.10e-01
4.00e-02
6.60e-01
5.00e-02
5.00e-02
7.50e-01
1.22e+01
1.76e+00
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
L_ NC
L NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
(uE/mJ-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ug/m'-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(uE/m'-mln)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-14
(Continued)
Compound
Bromochloromethane
Acrylonitrile
Acetaldehyde
4-Nonene
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
3,5,5-TrimethyIhexene
2-Methylheptane
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
Indan
Freon 23
Freon 1 14
Dibromochloromethane
Cyclopentene
Cyclohexene
Chloroprene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
2-Butanone
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
2,4,4-Trimethyl- 1 -Pentene
1-Propanol
1-Nonene
I-Heptene
Detection
Limit
(uR/m2-min)
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Percent
Detected
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Number of
Observations
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
Minimum
(ug/hi2-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
(ug/W-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
(ug/m'-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Average
(ug/hi*-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
(ug/m*>mln)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(uR/mz-min)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper s;
(uK/ml-minj
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC 1
NC = Not calculated. Concenration in flux chamber exhaust was below the detection limit.
Note: Limitations of the reported data are given in Table 4-2.
-------
Table 4-15
Results of Emission Flux Measurements for Select Compounds from Landfill Surface at Section 2/8
Compound
Hydrogen Sulfide
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butanc
Isopenlane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Melhylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroelhylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Telrachloroethylene
Elhylbcnzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4 Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (^g/m'-min) .
FC-2/8-IS
0.719
0.0767
<0.136
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.012
0.047
0.056
0.03
NC
0.033
NC
NC
NC
0.045
NC
3.09
FC-2/8-2TP
0.804
0.0255
<0.153
0.078
NC
0.039
0.024
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.027
0.124
0.01 1
0.037
0.072
0.070
0.037
NC
0.051
0.026
5.54
FC-2/8-3TP
0.521
NC
-------
Table 4-16
Results of Emission Flux Measurements for Selected Compounds from Landfill Surface at Section 3/4
Compound
Hydrogen Sulfide
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Melhylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroelhane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylcne + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (^g/m'-mln)
FC-3/4-1T
0.595
3.54
3.03
31.7
0.214
32.4
17.1
0.074
0.913
0.905
0.094
0.711
3.17
8.19
0.614
13.7
9.97
33.7
14.0
7.57
48.0
55.8
3340
FC-3/4-2S
0.104
1.13
1.58
30.5
0.896
17.5
2.31
0.126
0.028
0.097
0.632
0.009
4.33
125
0.270
69.2
76.8
6.85
33.7
35.0
178
73.0
2730
FC-3/4.3S
0.105
0.0254
<0.139
0.036
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.057
0.02
0.034
0.034
NC
NC
NC
0.089
0.027
2.00
FC-3/4-4S
0.834
0.0523
<0.139
0.978
NC
0.142
4.51
NC
0.078
NC
NC
0.123
0.072
0.762
0.152
0.099
0.130
NC
0.065
NC
0.843
0.078
14.4
FC-3/4-5TP
0.101
1.07
<0.134
0.086
NC
0.034
0.043
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.008
NC
0.082
0.010
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.171
0.034
6.41
FC-3/4-6S
0.0
2.83
-------
Table 4-17
Results of Emission Flux Measurements for Select Compounds from Landfill Surface at Section 1/9
Compound
Hydrogen Sulfide
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Isobulane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentanc
I.l-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichlorocthane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzcne
p-Xylene + m-Xvlene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4 Trimelhylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (^g/m'-min)
FC-1/9-1TP
0.201
0,0265
<0.134
0.051
NC
0.069
0.043
NC
0.0)8
0.015
0.011
NC
NC
0.135
0.098
NC
0.063
0.027
0.028
NC
0.044
NC
3.75
FCM/9-2TP
0.205
.560
0.149
38.9
0.531
24.7
30.4
0.029
0.232
2.97
1.21
0.405
0.355
9.92
1.01
1.74
2.64
2.72
1.29
3.15
9.17
1.78
297
FC-1/9-3TP
0.128
0.261
<0.170
1.61
NC
1.07
5.02
NC
0.016
0.483
0.218
0.020
0.058
1.49
0.249
0.361
0.121
0.469
0.399
0.095
0.652
0.334
42.6
FC-1/9-4S
1.95
.629
0.466
43.2
2.96
1.96
59.4
0.298
33.6
30.3
2.95
0.287
0.528
19.6
11.1
2.48
4.76
3.01
2.41
4.18
6.48
0.976
392
FC-1/9-5TP
0.130
.212
<0.172
O.il
NC
0.11
0.302
0.026
0.016
NC
NC
0.015
0.030
0.174
0.044
0.162
0.204
0.079
0.284
0.048
2.15
0.629
24.0
FO1/9-6TP
0.813
2.87
<0.l54
0.654
NC
0.3 1 7
O.I 97
0.023
0.014
NC
NC
0.04 1
NC
O.I 89
0.023
0.362
O.I 45
0.250
0.362
0.264
1. 48
1. 04
88.9
FC-1/9-7S
1. 23
.022
<0.l36
0.070
NC
0.035
0.370
NC
O.OIO
NC
NC
0.008
0.047
0.084
0.020
NC
0.033
0.063
0.023
NC
O.I 32
0.023
5.11
FC-1/9-8S
7.60
.0271
-------
Table 4-18
Results of Emission Flux of Select Compounds from Landfill Surface at Section 6/7
Compound Name
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Hydrogen Sulflde
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Mcthylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (^g/m'-min)
FC-6/7-1TP
1.80
<0.210
27.9
6.19
NC
3.93
23.8
NC
97.2
17.0
NC
3.96
1.48
47.8
0.768
NC
2.41
NC
NC
1.55
2.21
NC
873
FC-6/7-2TP
2.61
1.17
2.30
62.1
2.95
29.4
46.0
0.375
9.85
11.4
9.47
3.71
2.36
103
22.0
23.0
30.3
21.1
14.9
31.7
37.0
12.2
1800
FC-6/7-3TP
31.9
17.0
955
2750
50.0
1030
385
19.9
85.2
255
414
46.6
71.9
5320
1810
827
1390
971
387
1220
2340
555
67900
FC-6/7-4TP
59.4
29.6
2330
7110
103
2050
698
132
181
408
419
145
152
13000
716
2220
3640
2430
1700
2920
6040
1650
15200
FC-6/7-5TP
20.4
16.7
2540
831
29.4
361
143
94.0
75.3
258
232
53.9
33.1
2560
1120
499
906
580
297
657
1510
417
56200
FC-6/7-6TP
26.7
15.3
657
1185
515
445
770
NC
184
84.3
120
44.8
42.3
3020
112
651
1020
509
282
971
2220
389
49300
FC-6/7-7TP
151
80.1
1830
2480
653
771
90.0
NC
NC
NC
60.3
NC
236
9520
NC
5480
6880
1330
2690
6620
21000
4380
264000
FC-6/7-8TP
1530
832
7290
34100
3680
12700
860
NC
NC
NC
879
504
3130
53700
NC
71500
76500
14200
33500
71100
313000
83400
2940000
FC.6/74S
0.515
<0.139
1.04
0.356
NC
0.124
0.553
NC
0.0520
0.0270
0.148
0.0250
0.0720
0.902
0.355
0.520
0.424
1.12
0.879
0.315
8.50
2.84
173
-------
Table 4-18
(Continued)
Compound Name
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethy lene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Slyrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (/ig/m2-min)
FC-6/7-10S
0.0210
<0.139
0.834
0.0530
NC
0.0360
0.155
NC
0.0210
0.0300
0.0210
0.00800
NC
0.0850
0.203
0.0290
0.0340
NC
0.0210
0.0280
0.266
0.0390
5.25
FC-6/7-11S
NC
0.0739
1.26
27.7
32.8
15.9
26.6
0.131
0.373
1.77
4.56
0.180
2.22
65.7
3.20
17.0
12.4
8.80
6.65
11.2
10.9
5.03
946
FC-6/7-12S
0.212
<0.136
0.513
4.01
NC
2.59
25.2
0.0580
0.717
0.955
0.146
0.764
0.0710
2.28
0.350
0.192
0.417
0.346
0.128
0.115
0.830
0.0770
63.3
FC-6V7-13S
3.11
<0.153
0.459
25.9
NC
19.5
NC
0.850
2.15
4.31
0.784
7.74
1.08
2.80
1.57
1.90
1.83
0.421
0.753
0.347
1.37
0.558
467
FC-6/7-14T
0.490
<0.180
167
1.54
0.512
2.28
7.23
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.0810
0.380
26.9
0.151
6.00
3.87
0.855
1.52
3.23
12.7
4.98
232
FC-677-15S
0.320
<0.153
0.804
6.96
NC
0.568
31.2
NC
0.601
NC
0.0160
1.39
0.0790
3.63
1.85
0.324
0.539
0.0370
0.252
0.0860
9.17
0.472
101
FC-6V7-16T
16.3
9.07
6540
577
87.0
251
180
NC
NC
65.3
35.0
11.6
28.5
1810
20.3
479
636
337
228
612
1640
392
32800
FC-6/7-17S
0.817
<0.136
1.13
12.6
NC
10.1
56.1
NC
2.28
3.19
NC
4.06
NC
0.804
1.15
0.161
0.225
NC
0.128
NC
0.349
0.115
124
FC-6/M8S
0.0152
<0.0684
0.154
0.123
NC
0.0970
0.480
NC
0.0100
0.0450
0.00400
0.201
0.0120
0.111
0.0250
0.0320
0.0640
NC
NC
0.0190
0.175
0.0190
2.63
-------
Table 4-18
(Continued)
Compound Name
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trirnethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (jug/m'-min)
FC-6/7-19S
2.55
0.273
0.772
1430
NC
1170
3860
NC
88.0
12.4
0.778
42.9
NC
120
1.08
NC
4.78
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
7660
FC-6V7-20S
0.156
<0.136
1.03
12.6
NC
4.83
37.0
NC
0.307
0.627
0.0120
1.17
NC
0.194
0.350
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.0380
0.220
NC
69.3
FC-6/7-21S
NC
<0.139
0.730
2.45
NC
2.15
8.89
NC
0.104
0.182
0.0150
0.286
0.0470
0.395
0.812
0.0990
0.130
0.161
0.585
0.156
0.577
0.0390
46.1
FC-6/7-22S
0.299
<0.153
0.804
14.3
NC
12.0
65.0
0.0650
8.90
7.51
0.229
0.0180
0.343
27.0
5.82
3.40
5.95
3.72
3.80
1.52
5.90
3.43
465
FC-6V7-23S
0.257
0.0441
13.9
2.63
NC
5.36
18.2
NC
41.2
3.91
1.10
1.12
2.12
23.4
0.524
1.78
2.55
5.10
2.15
NC
1.10
NC
2700
FC-6V7-24S
3.04
<0.153
25.3
13.5
0.590
9.37
66.0
0.196
4.12
5.91
0.196
0.405
0.0790
1.37
2.40
0.358
0.358
1.40
0.645
0.0310
0.441
0.300
179
FC-6/7-25S
0.920
0.0680
1.03
15.5
0.106
6.92
37.6
0.197
8.15
9.94
1.05
1.71
0.158
3.55
2.47
0.325
0.396
0.670
0.431
0.0860
1.13
NC
132
FC-6/7-26S
0.365
0.0863
4.29
7.62
0.0690
3.67
16.1
0.0310
4.97
2.10
0.0610
0.233
0.0740
1.78
1.45
0.186
0.321
0.512
0.354
0.0400
1.54
0.101
63.6
FC-6/7.27S
0.0291
<0.0684
7.20
0.123
NC
0.0790
0.174
0.00600
0.0130
0.0450
0.0130
0.0180
0.0230
0.348
0.0750
0.0320
0.0640
0.0480
0.0320
NC
0.0660
NC
297
-------
Table 4-18
(Continued)
•
Compound Name
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Isobutanc
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethy lene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux (/ig/m'-niin)
FC-6/7-28S
0.417
<0.139
0.313
19.0
NC
7.73
33.9
0.120
1.60
8.90
0.510
2.95
0.0660
0.677 _
0.976
0.0910
0.0830
0.106
0.0660^
NC
0.303
0.0440
99.4
FC-6/7-29T
0.0424
<0.158
3.81
NC
NC
0.142
0.177
NC
0.0150
NC
NC
NC
0.110
0.225
0.012
0.187
0.223
NC
0.0390
0.0440
0.154
0.089
13.7
FC-6/7-30T
0.0541
<0.136
5.24
0.403
NC
0.175
0.283
NC
0.0260
NC
0.0290
0.0120
0.0950
0.416
0.0200
0.384
0.384
0.0330
0.128
0.0380
0.262
0.268
25.9
FC-6/7-31TP
0.0882
<0.139
0.730
3.74
NC
0.783
5.08
NC
0.156
0.121
0.0120
0.0160
NC
0.310
0.254
0.0340
0.0650
0.0330
0.0650
0.0390
0.223
0.0390
24.1
FC-6/7-32TP
0.0721
<0.139
0.834
0.320
NC
0.373
7.12
NC
NC
0.333
NC
0.123
NC
NC
0.102
NC
NC
NC
0.260
NC
NC
NC
12.8
FC-6/7-33TP
0.0271
<0.139
1.25
0.178
NC
0.124
0.199
NC
0.0230
0.0180
NC
0.0330
NC
0.112
0.102
0.0340
0.0650
NC
0.0340
0.0780
0.443
0.0780
5.53
FC-6/7-34TP
0.0186
<0.158
0.595
0.122
NC
0.142
0.706
NC
0.0150
NC
NC
0.0190
0.0280
0.0970
0.0170
NC
0.0390
NC
0.0740
0.0280
0.101
0.0220
5.37
FC-6/7-35TP
0.0201
<0.158
1.67
NC
NC
NC
0.328
NC
NC
0.311
NC
0.0930
NC
0.385
0.753
0.187
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.404
NC
74.3
FC-6V7-36TP
0.0781
<0.158
0.476
4.24
NC
1.32
5.93
1.76
0.0590
0.0280
NC
0.0470
0.0540
1.61
0.116
0.261
0.371
0.256
0.261
0.133
0.606
0.222
48.9
-------
Table 4-18
(Continued)
Compound Name
Carbon Dioxide (a)
Methane (a) (b)
Hydrogen Sulfide
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
Isopentane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
Emission Flux G/g/m^min) • ' ? "
FC-6/7-37TP
0.0381
<0.139
0.313
0.0890
NC
0.0530
0.111
NC
0.0260
NC
0.0120
0.0120
NC
0.0570
0.0510
NC
0.0340
NC
0.0260
0.0250
0.0350
NC
3.12
FC-6/7-38TP
0.218
<0.139
0.834
21.7
NC
20.5
248
NC
7.77
3.33
NC
24.3
0.119
2.82
0.254
0.845
1.95
0.607
0.325
0.509
1.42
NC
417
FC-6/7-39TP
0.0653
<0.158
2.02
1.97
NC
0.975
5.30
NC
1.48
1.66
0.102
1.82
NC
2.19
1.39
0.484
0.816
0.256
0.261
0.581
2.68
0.489
48.8
FC-677-40TP
0.0205
<0.158
0.595
NC
NC
NC
0.908
NC
0.0180
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.0230
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
167
FC-6/7-41F
0.0400
<0.139
1.04
0.445
0.0570
0.854
6.79
NC
0.130
0.0240
NC
0.204
0.0240
0.170
0.406
0.0650
0.130
0.161
0.0650
0.0780
0.489
0.234
82.4
FC-6V7-42F
0.0260
<0.153
0.459
2.47
NC
1.76
9.45
NC
0.487
0.868
NC
8.19
NC
0.217
0.112
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
26.1
FC-6V7-43F
2.12
<0.139
1.36
31.5
NC
69.5
198
NC
14.5
0.455
NC
15.3
NC
3.33
0.305
0.780
0.944
1.21
0.814
NC
2.26
3.93
741
• ••• -' ••.
o
•3
I
o
NC = Not Calculated
(a) Emission Flux in units of g/m2-min
(b) Methane emission flux with < indicates that CH4 in flux chamber exhaust was not detected and lower detection limit of 0.282% CH4 was used to calculate emission flux.
Note: Limitations of the reported data are given in Table 4-2.
-------
Table 4-19
Results of Mercury Flux Measurements at Landfill Surface
Landfill Section
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
3/4
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Sampling Location
16T
33TP
39TP
3TP
SMM-5
—
—
—
Mercury Flux Ozg/min-m2)
<0.363a
0.343
0.391
4.64
<0.257a
0.391
<0.257a
0.294
"Value based on mercury lower detection limit of 0.003 mg/m3 and flux chamber exhaust flow
rate.
4-70
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 4-20
Emission Flux for Select VOCs from Temporal Sampling of Landfill Surface at Section 6/7
Date
Isobutane
Vinyl Chloride
n-Butane
1,1-Dichloroethylene
Isopentane
FC-6/7-16T
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
577
609
804
87.0
150
106
251
240
319
NC
NC
NC
180
202
259
FC-6/7-28S
07/08/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
19.0
20.8
21.5
NC
0.015
0.057
7.73
9.00
9.66
0.120
0.170
NC
33.9
45.4
424
FC-6/7-3TP
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
2750
1940
3820
10500
50.0
NC
NC
277
1030
848
1630
5050
19.9
NC
NC
490
385
260
535
1590
FC-6/7-9S
07/05/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
0.356
0.638
3.27
NC
NC
NC
0.124
0.323
3.34
NC
0.087
0.089
0.553
0.814
1.28
-------
Table 4-20
(Continued)
Date
FC-6/7-16T
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-28S
07/08/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-3TP
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-9S
07/05/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
Methylene
Chloride
(uvltv? -min}
NC
NC
NC
1.60
3.55
4.11
85.2
NC
NC
299
0.052
0.696
0.546
1,1-Dlchloroethahe
( i/e/m* -min^
65.3
82.3
93.8
8.90
13.0
5.21
255
117
309
1000
0.027
1.53
1.55
c-l,2-Dichloroethylene
(utflrvf -mill)
35.0
36.1
42.1
0.510
0.613
0.682
414
322
494
1510
0.148
2.61
3.12
• Benzene
(ue/m1 -mln)
28.5
31.5
40.0
0.066
0.054
0.072
71.9
149
NC
a 335
0.072
NC
0.287
1,1,1-TrichIoroethane
(ue/m1 -mini
11.6
10.2
16.4
2.95
4.27
1.59
46.6
NC
NC
195
0.025
0.311
0.245
-------
Table 4-20
(Continued)
Date
FC-6/7-16T
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-28S
07/08/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-3TP
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-9S
07/05/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
Toluene
(ue/nf-mln)
1810
2000
2690
0.677
1.29
1 64
5320
3760
7750
24300
0.902
1.49
16.2
Tetrachloroethylene
(/ue/mz-min)
20.3
18.0
25.1
0.976
1.81
0.914
1810
1040
2720
9130
0.355
13.4
13.2
Ethylbenzene
(ue/mf-nun)
479
527
725
0.091
0.263
0.294
827
437
932
3850
0.520
0.536
4.36
Styrene
(ue/mf-nAn)
337
324
487
0.106
0.219
0255
971
416
934
4380
1.12
1.12
4.84
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
(uc/m1-min)
636
729
948
0.083
0.188
0455
1390
915
1960
6290
0.424
0.400
2.93
-------
Table 4-20
(Continued)
Date
FC-6/7-16T
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/11/95
FC-6/7-28S
07/08/95
07/10/95
07/11/95
FC-6/7-3TP
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
FC-6/7-9S
07/05/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
o-Xylene
(jUE/mz-min)
228
235
333
0.066
0.188
0.195
387
283
603
1860
0.879
0.734
4.00
n-Nonane
(ue/m2-nun)
612
660
921
NC
NC
0.198
1220
859
1810
5910
0.315
0.184
1.92
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene,
(we/mz-min)
1640
1730
2290
0.303
0.358
1.02
2340
1260
3170
11900
8.50
3.41
11.3
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
(we/m'-mln)
392
417
613
0.044
0.089
0.234
555
222
494
2290
2.84
0.612
5.30
TNMHC
(jue/m^mln)
32800
37100
45200
99.4
169
153
67900
90900
157000
303000
173
63.2
325
NC = Not Calculated
Note: Limitations of the reported data are given in Table 4-2.
-------
Table 4-21
Emission Flux for H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2 from
Temporal Sampling of Landfill Surface at Section 6/7
Date
FC-6/7-16T
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/11/95
FC-6/7-28S
07/08/95
07/10/95
07/11/95
FC-6/7-3TP
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/10/95
07/11/95
FC-6/7-9S
07/05/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
CH4
(g/m2-ntin)
9.46
10.1
11.6
0.140
0.150
0.139
17.0
13.2
31.8
70.5
0.139
0.136
0.139
€
-------
Table 4-22
Concentration of VOCs Detected in Surface Soils
Compound
Acetone"
Trichlorofluoromethane
Methylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Chlorobenzene
Dibromomethane
2-Hexanone
Concentration (ug/kg) >
Section 1/9
Ptl
7.84
ND
0.49
ND
2.64
ND
ND
Pt. 2
ND
ND
0.57
ND
ND
ND
ND
Pt. 3
ND
ND
1.81
ND
ND
ND
ND
Section 2/8
V-014
ND
ND
2.87
ND
ND
0.34
ND
V-043
ND
ND
1.28
ND
ND
ND
ND
V-077
ND
ND
1.88
ND
ND
ND
ND
Section 3/4
V-015
ND
ND
1.34
ND
ND
ND
ND
V-028
5.47
ND
0.60
ND
ND
0.36
2.51
V-068
ND
ND
2.33
ND
ND
ND
ND
Section 6/7 , ,
Ptl
ND
ND
1.56
ND
ND
ND
ND
Pt. 2
ND
1.43
1.10
1.91
ND
0.61
ND
Pi. 3
ND
ND
1.62
ND
ND
ND
ND
"Acetone values are suspect (see Table 4-2).
ND = Not Detected
Note: Soil samples from Sections 2/8 and 3/4 were collected near vents identified above each sample section. For other sections the
samples were collected as follows:
Section 1/9:
Pt. 1 - Collected near extraction well J-35
Pt. 2 - Collected above gas plant, approximately 50 feet from combined headers sampling locations.
Pt. 3 - Collected near vent 912, approximately 15 feet uphill from lower roadway.
Section 6/7:
Pt. 1 - Collected adjacent to Flux point FC-6/7-1TP.
Pt. 2 - Collected adjacent to Flux point FC-6/7-10S.
Pt. 3 - Collected adjacent to Flux point FC-6/7-13S.
-------
Table 4-23
Physical Property Measurement Data for Surface Soils
"Section
3/4
3/4
3/4
2/8
2/8
2/8
2/8
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
1/9
1/9
1/9
Sample
OS-53-070595-R-327
OS-53-070595-R-328
OS-53-070595-R-329
OS-52-070595-R-330
OS-52-070595-R-331
OS-52-070595-R-332
OS-52-070595-R-333
OS-56-070695-R-334
OS-56-070595-R-335
OS-56-070595-R-336
OS-56-070595-R-337
OS-51-070795-R-338
OS-51-070795-R-339
OS-51-070795-R-340
• •• • .. '•'•" — <;'"':' ••-''•• frope^^^v^'^^"' -. '?""•'"• ;";•••;
Bulk Density
: {g/cm3)
1.68
1.46
1.63
1.79
1.62
1.61
1.81
1.87
1.70
1.88
1.87
1.29
1.33
1.63
Particle Density
^/CBO3)
2.41
2.37
2.47
2.53
2.48
2.46
2.33
2.50
2.54
2.65
2.56
2.50
2.39
2.43
Moisture :•
(wt%) '•"•;>
14.72
14.40
11.38
12.10
16.58
11.47
11.44
15.66
17.01
11.29
10.14
12.29
16.26
10.93
3/4
2/8
6/7
1/9
Entire
Landfill
Averages
Averages
Averages
Averages
Averages
1.59
1.71
1.83
1.42
1.66
2.42
2.45
2.56
2.44
2.47
13.50
12.90
13.53
13.16
13.26
Note: Percent moisture data are on a dry weight basis.
Radian Corporation
4-77
-------
Table 4-24
Concentration of VOCs Detected in Landfill Seep Samples
Compound
Chloroethane
Acetone
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
2-Butanone
Methylisobutylketone
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Trichloroethene
Dibromomethane
Concentration (ag/kg) -
Section 2/8
ND
ND
0.87
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.65
Section 3/4
ND
ND
1.24
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.35
Section 6/7
4.33
508.00
39.43
5.02
1697.67
3.07
19.90
0.25
3.04
1.60
0.51
0.36
ND = Not Detected
4-78
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 4-25
Summary Statistics for Gas Collection Header Concentration Data
Compound
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Oxygen
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
1-Octene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2,3 ,4-Trimethyl pentane
2-Methyl-2-Butene
3-Methylhexane
Benzene
Acetone
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-Butadiene
Ethylbenzene
Ethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Cyclohexane
Cumene
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 1 14
Chlorobenzene
Isopentane
Isohexane
[soheptane +
2,3-Dimethylpentane
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.20%
0.08%
0.14%
0.18
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.?.'
0.44
0.03
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
61.1
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
No.
Samples
18
18
18
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
29.8%
44.0%
ND
0.13
1.64
4.76
0.17
0.20
0.10
0.24
0.29
0.72
0.58
0.38
3.75
180
0.70
0.29
0.55
0.17
0.89
1.97
0.20
0.35
Maximum
40.3%
60.0%
5.40%
0.34
2.19
5.77
• 0.31
0.40
0.19
0.43
0.47
1.29
11.6
0.61
5.54
251
1.89
0.70
0.68
0.32
1.45
7.47
0.28
0.56
Median
37.9%
57.3%
0.45%
0.17
1.90
4.97
0.23
0.31
0.10
0.28
0.38
0.95
5.31
0.48
4.64
219
1.41
0.46
0.63
0.21
1.14
3.30
0.26
0.51
pm)
Mean
37.1%
55.6%
0.99%
0.19
1.90
5.06
0.24
0.30
0.12
0.29
0.37
0.93
6.09
0.48
4.71
223
1.27
0.45
0.63
0.23
1.15
3.76
0.25
0.46
Standard
Deviation
3.13%
4.51%
1.51%
0.06
0.13
0.31
0.06
0.09
0.03
0.05
0.08
0.18
3.66
0.06
0.59
21.7
0.38
0.13
0.04
0.05
0.22
1.91
0.03
0.09
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
35.6%
53.4%
0.24%
0.15
1.82
4.87
0.20
0.24
0.10
0.26
0.32
0.82.
3.76
0.44
4.34
209
1.03
0.37
0.60
0.19
1.01
2.55
0.23
0.40
Upper
(ppm)
38.7%
57.9%
1.75%
0.23
1.98
5.26
0.27
0.36
0.13
0.32
0.42
1.04
8.41
0.52
5.09
236
1.51
0.53
0.66
0.26
1.30
4.98
0.26
0.52
-------
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
Isobutylbenzene
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isobutane
Hexanal
Benzyl Chloride
&m-Dichlorobcnzene
b-Pinenc
a-Pinene
Vinyl Chloride
Trichlorofluoromethane
Trichloroethene
Total Unidentified VOCs
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
t-2-Pentene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Dielhylbenzene
o-Xylene
o-Ethyltoluene
o-Dichlorobenzcne
n-Undecane
n-Propylbenzene
n-Pentane
n-Octane
n-Nonane
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.16
0.25
0.25
0.32
0.18
0.33
0.25
0.02
0.36
0.25
0.2
0.07
0.25
0.05
0.25
0.14
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
0.79
0.67
7.11
0.24
1.33
0.19
5.39
0.09
0.46
0.17
115
11.4
0.34
2.16
4.81
1.60
2.18
1.77
3.07
1.95
0.65
1.77
0.58
0.67
2.90
Maximum
0.90
1.14
9.55
0.61
2.23
1.67
9.70
0.39
1.16
0.33
156
17.8
0.84
3.25
6.91
2.14
3.45
2.68
3.70
2.29
7.98
2.36
1.70
1.31
4.15
Median
0.88
0.94
8.36
0.34
1.92
0.60
8.03
0.29
0.62
0.24
134
14.6
0.56
2.27
6.03
2.06
2.33
2.24
3.43
2.22
6.17
2.10
0.86
1.00
3.57
pm)
Mean
0.86
0.92
8.24
0.37
1.88
0.70
7.85
0.27
0.69
0.24
134
14.6
0.57
2.37
5.97
2.01
2.67
2.17
3.43
2.17
5.5
2.09
0.97
0.99
3.57
Standard
Deviation
0.04
0.18
0.73
0.13
0.23
0.39
1.32
0.10
0.24
0.06
12.2
2.77
0.22
0.30
0.91
0.16
0.52
0.29
0.22
0.11
2.30
0.22
0.42
0.29
0.55
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.84
0.80
7.78
0.28
1.73
0.45
7.02
0.21
0.54
0.20
127
12.80
0.43
2.18
5.39
1.91
2.34
1.98
3.29
2.10
4.04
1.95
0.70
0.81
3.22
Upper
(ppm)
0.89
1.03
8.71
0.45
2.03
0.95
8.69
0.34
0.84
0.28
142
16.30
0.71
2.56
6.55
2.11
3.01
2.35
3.57
2.23
6.96
2.23
1.23
1.18
3.92
-------
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
n-Hexane
n-Heptane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Butane
m-Ethyltoluene
m-Diethylbenzene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroelhylene
TNMHC
Styrene
Propane
Neohexane
Naphthalene
Methylene Chloride
Methylcyclohexane
Limonene
3-Methylheptane
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
Isoprene
n-Butylbenzene
1 , 1 ,2,2-TetrachIoroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
Methylcyclopentane
Cyclopentane
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.1
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.31
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.07
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.32
0.19
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
91.67
91.67
91.67
83.33
83.33
83.33
83.33
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
0.45
0.50
12.7
3.25
1.85
0.63
0.47
385
1.45
10.5
0.10
0.21
0.25
0.26
30.1
0.17
0.23
1.26
0.75
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
1.44
0.83
14.7
4.30
2.93
1.82
0.74
481
2.65
15.3
0.52
1.08
0.92
0.85
39.0
0.36
0.33
2.00
1.04
0.32
0.21
1.64
0.03
0.64
0.34
0.33
Median
1.00
0.75
14.2
3.96
2.51
1.51
0.55
445
2.10
13.3
0.12
0.82
0.53
0.41
36.0
0.22
0.29
1.78
0.89
0.22
0.17
1.47
0.02
0.19
0.21
0.24
pm)
Mean
0.92
0.67
14.0
3.80
2.49
1.46
0.57
438
2.02
13.0
0.17
0.80
0.55
0.52
35.4
0.23
0.29
1.76
0.88
0.22
0.17
1.38
0.03
0.34
0.23
0.24
Standard
Deviation
0.32
0.14
0.70
0.41
0.35
0.32
0.09
33.3
0.49
1.96
0.14
0.23
0.18
0.19
3.39
0.07
0.03
0.23
0.10
0.09
0.03
0.42
0.03
0.23
0.08
0.09
95 % Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.72
0.58
13.5
3.55
2.26
1.26
0.51
417
1.71
11.8
0.08
0.65
0.43
0.40
33.2
0.19
0.27
1.61
0.82
0.17
0.15
1.11
0.02
0.20
0.18
0.18
Upper
(ppm)
1.12
0.75
14.4
4.06
2.71
1.66
0.63
459
2.33
14.3
0.26
0.94
0.66
0.64
37.5
0.28
0.30
1.90
0.95
0.28
0.18
1.64
0.05
0.49
0.28
0.29
-------
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
Chloroethane
Dichlorotoluene
1-Hexene
1-Undecene
Freon 113
2,5-Dimethylhexane
3 -Methyl- 1-Butene
1 -Methylcyclohexene
t-2-Butene
t-3-Heptene
1,1-Dichloroethylene
t-2-Hexene
2-Methylheptane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
1 -Pentene
2-Methyl-2-Pentene
3-Melhylpentane
1 -Heptene
Neopentane
c-2-Butene
2,4-Dime(hylpentane
1,3-Buladiene
t-2-Heptene
p-Isopropyltoluene
c-2-Pentene
Methylisobutylketone
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.22
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.87
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
3.15
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
83.33
75
66.67
66.67
58.33
50
50
41.67
41.67
41.67
33.33
33.33
33.33
33.33
25
25
25
16.67
16.67
16.67
16.67
8.33
8.33
8.33
8.33
8.33
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
: Concentration (p
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
0.15
1.87
0.46
2.33
0.06
0.32
0.28
0.52
0.17
0.35
0.66
0.71
0.14
0.39
0.23
0.19
15.6
0.20
0.12
0.21
0.25
3.98
0.07
13.14
0.33
0.10
Median
0.12
0.98
0.15
1.89
0.03
0.05
0.05
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
pm)
Mean
0.13
0.89
0.17
1.37
0.25
0.18
0.13
0.19
0.12
0.19
1.27
0.24
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.12
2.03
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.12
0.44
0.15
1.22
0.14
0.13
Standard
Deviation
0.04
0.54
0.11
0.97
0.30
0.07
0.08
0.14
0.05
0.08
1.08
0.22
0.03
0.10
0.08
0.08
4.76
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.08
1.12
0.08
3.75
0.09
0.09
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.11
0.55
0.10
0.76
0.06
0.13
0.08
0.10
0.09
0.13
0.58
0.10
0.13
0.09
0.11
0.07
0.00
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.08
0.07
Upper
(ppm)
0.16
1.24
0.24
1.99
0.45
0.22
0.18
0.28
0.15
0.24
1.95
0.38
0.16
0.22
0.22
0.17
5.05
0.19
0.15
0.17
0.17
1.15
0.20
3.61
0.19
0.18
-------
B.
o
.
o
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
-Decene
, 1 ,2-TrichIoroethane
,2-Dibromoethane
,4-Dioxane
-Propanol
2,4,4-Trimethyl- 1 -Pentene
2-Butanone
2-Methy 1-1 -Pentene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Bromoform
Bromodichloromethane
Bromochloromethane
Benzaldehyde
Acrylonitrile
Acetaldehyde
4-Nonene
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
c-3-Hexene
c-3-Heptene
c-2-Octene
c-2-Hexene
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Vinyl Bromide
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.27
0.28
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.13
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.77
0.25
Percent
Detected
'(%)
8.33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
0.38
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
pm) •,;•••;.-, •'•:>'.
Mean
0.19
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
0.09
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.13
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
0.24
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
Vinyl Acetate
Trichloroethylene
p-Chlorotoluene
o-Chlorotoluene
m-Chlorotoluene
c-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
Indene
Indan
Hcptanal
Freon 23
Ethylene
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
Diethyl Ether &2-Propanol
Dibromochloromethane
Melhylcyclopentene
Methyl t-Butylether
Methanol (+)
Cyclopentene
Cyclohexene
Chloroprene
Chloroform
Chlorodifluoromethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Butyraldehyde
Bromomethane
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
02S
0.25
0.19
0.25
0.36
0.25
0.37
Percent
Detected
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
pm)
Mean
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
E
C
c
Table 4-25
(Continued)
Compound
3,5,5 -Trimethylhexene
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
2,3-Dimethylbutane
1-Nonene
1-Butanol
1 ;2-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.37
0.22
Percent
Detected
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Concentration (p
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
pm). :•, - ;'i.;-r:: •••....:••
Mean
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
oo
CT-
Table 4-26
Concentration and Emissions of Select VOCs from Temporal Sampling of
Landfill Gas Collection System Headers
Date
Flowrate
(m3/min)
Vinyl Chloride
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
1,1-DichIoroethyIene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Methylene Chloride
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
1,1-Dlchloroethane
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
c-l,2-Dichloroethylcne
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
North Held
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
125
100
113
106
111
109
0.25
0.21
0.21
0.09
0.12
0.25
1,300
911
1,020
409
583
1,170
ND
0.22
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
1,440
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.92
0.82
0.63
0.41
0.51
0.58
6,650
4,770
4,090
2,520
3,300
3,630
0.19
ND
0.18
0.19
0.19
0.18
1,620
NC
1,370
1,340
1,400
1,340
0.51
0.47
0.48
0.47
0.51
0.48
4,170
3,100
3,580
3,310
3,720
3,440
South Held
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
378
195
185
194
215
197 J
0.35
0.37
0.39
0.35
0.36
0.32
5,640
3,020
3,050
2,860
3,320
2,660
0.66
0.01
0.02
ND
ND
ND
16,300
172
216
NC
NC
NC
0.47
0.46
0.38
0.55
0.25
0.56
10,200
5,200
4,040
6,180
3,120
6,380
ND
0.60
0.64
0.62
0.57
0.56
NC
7,920
8,030
8,090
8,210
7,360
0.61
0.66
0.74
0.62
0.59
0.66
15,100
8,480
9,000
7,920
8,400
8,550
I
i'
.
o
-------
Table 4-26
(Continued)
Date
Flowrate
(m3/mln)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Benzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Toluene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Chlorobenzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Ethylbenzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
North field
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
125
100
113
106
111
109
0.34
0.25
0.19
0.21
0.20
0.17
3,810
2,240
1,940
2,000
1,990
1,640
0.85
0.74
0.98
0.73
0.72
0.80
5,610
3,930
5,880
4,140
4,250
4,610
11.98
11.72
12.32
11.38
12.00
12.24
93,500
73,800
87,300
75,900
83,500
83,400
0.96
0.94
0.96
0.89
0.94
0.96
9,160
7,240
8,340
7,300
7,980
8,030
4.16
4.60
4.75
3.75
4.03
4.50
37,400
33,400
38,800
28,900
32,300
35,400
South field
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
378
195
185
194
215
197
0.16
0.16
0.17
0.15
0.13
0.16
5,470
2,850
2,850
2,670
2,630
2,780
0.99
0.99
1.00
1.17
0.92
1.29
19,800
10,300
9,840
12,000
10,500
13,500
17.84
16.98
17.12
16.82
17.45
16.95
422,000
207,000
199,000
205,000
235,000
209,000
1.32
1.37
1.45
1.36
1.33
1.37
38,200
20,500
20,700
20,200
21,800
20,600
5.49
5.54
5.01
5.50
4.56
4.67
150,000
78,000
67,100
77,200
70,700
66,500
-------
Table 4-26
(Continued)
Date
Flowrate
(m3/min)
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Styrene
(ppm)
(ug/scc)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
(ppm)
(tig/sec)
o-Xylene
(ppm)
(uR/sec)
n-Nonane
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
North field
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
125
100
113
106
111
109
5.14
5.01
5.38
4.81
5.14
5.16
46,300
36,400
44,000
37,000
41,200
40,600
.50
.52
.81
.45
.57
.55
13,200
10,800
14,500
10,900
12,300
12,000
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
337
263
362
238
206
311
1.89
1.86
2.15
1.77
1.90
1.93
17,100
13,500
17,500
13,700
15,200
15,100
3.03
3.03
3.17
2.90
3.06
3.10
33,000
26,600
31,300
26,900
29,700
29,400
South field
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
378
195
185
194
215
197
6.75
6.91
6.89
6.91
6.67
6.88
184,000
97,300
92,300
97,100
103,000
97,900
2.46
2.48
2.65
2.38
2.52
2.39
65,800
34,200
34,700
32,800
38,300
33,300
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
ND
ND
733
507
459
435
NC
NC
2.35
2.40
2.68
2.36
2.32
2.38
64,200
33,700
35,900
33,100
35,900
33,800
4.07
4.15
4.11
4.13
3.96
4.15
134,000
70,500
66,400
70,000
74,200
71,300
-------
Table 4-26
(Continued)
Date
Flowrate
(m3/min)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
1,2,4-TrImethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
Trichloroethene
(ppm)
(ug/sec)
TNMHC
(ppm)
(g/sec)
North Held
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
125
100
113
106
111
109
0.92
0.90
1.01
1.03
0.92
1.04
14,200
11,100
14,100
13,500
12,600
13,900
1.75
1.77
2.23
1.71
1.85
2.09
20,300
16,600
23,500
17,000
19,100
21,200
5.04
4.96
5.77
4.79
5.07
5.58
54,300
43,100
56,500
44,200
48,700
52,500
0.20
0.19
0.17
0.18
0.18
0.19
2240
1690
1750
1760
1790
1880
400
406
449
385
410
414
2.92
2.39
2.97
2.40
2.66
2.64
South field
07/03/95
07/05/95
07/06/95
07/07/95
07/08/95
07/10/95
378
195
185
194
215
197
0.79
0.75
0.82
0.78
0.88
0.77
36,900
18,100
18,900
18,700
23,300
18,700
1.89
1.97
1.33
1.95
1.96
2.07
66,600
35,800
22,900
35,300
39,100
38,000
4.98
5.07
4.90
4.90
4.76
4.91
163,000
85,400
78,600
82,500
88,300
83,700
0.27
0.28
0.32
0.33
0.27
0.30
8980
4870
5320
5680
5110
5360
470
481
470
466
441
465
10.4
5.48
5.09
5.30
5.53
5.36
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
Table 4-27
Concentration and Emissions of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2
from Temporal Sampling of Landfill Gas Collection System Headers
Date
Flow Rate
(mVmin)
CO,
(%)
(g/sec)
CHV
(%)
(g/sec)
-------
Table 4-28
Summary Statistics for Gas Extraction Wells - Section 1/9
Compound
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Oxygen
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Bulylbenzene
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride &tn-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Chlorobenzene
Ethane
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-Butadiene
Ethylbenzene
n-Heptane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
m-Diethylbenzene
b-Pinene
a-Pinene
Total Unidentified VOCs
Toluene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Diethylbenzene
o-Xylene
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.20%
0.08%
0.14%
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.16
0.07
0.03
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.10
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.02
0.20
0.07
0.25
0.05
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
13.0%
16.9%
0.60%
0.09
1.24
0.16
0.32
0.10
0.13
124
0.11
1.00
0.06
3.46
0.64
0.53
0.06
1.36
24.1
2.29
1.00
0.41
0.46
0.41
Maximum
43.4%
56.9%
14.9%
1.84
10.1
4.06
4.91
3.70
4.26
311
0.89
10.1
3.11
32.9
3.64
6.25
3.37
19.8
324
L_ 41.1
13.2
4.66
6.91
5.29
Median
30.0%
44.1%
5.20%
0.55
3.20
0.63
0.87
1.63
0.60
218
0.36
3.60
0.32
10.2
1.57
1.23
0.71
6.38
115
9.27
3.69
1.42
1.50
1.44
Mean
30.0%
42.0%
5.72%
0.61
3.71
0.83
1.17
1.50
1.18
210
0.38
3.79
0.72
11.4
1.76
1.63
0.89
6.67
120
15.4
5.02
1.49
2.10
1.95
Standard
Deviation
9.65%
12.1%
4.32%
0.45
1.88
0.75
0.97
0.89
1.07
39
0.18
2.08
0.77
5.89
0.77
1.43
0.88
4.10
71.4
11.8
3.24
0.83
1.73
1.44
95% Confidence
Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
26.0%
37.0%
3.94%
0.42
2.94
0.52
0.77
1.13
0.74
193
0.30
2.93
0.40
8.92
1.45
1.04
0.52
4.97
90.6
10.5
3.68
1.15
1.39
1.35
Upper
(ppm)
34.0%
47.0%
7.51%
0.79
4.49
1.14
1.56
1.87
1.62
226
0.45
4.65
1.04
13.8
2.08
2.22
1.25
8.36
150
20.3
6.36
1.84
2.82
2.54
-------
.£.
JO
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
o-Ethyltoluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
n-Undecane
n-Propylbenzene
n-Octane
n-Nonane
TNMHC
Styrene
Propane
Naphthalene
Limonene
Isobutylbenzene
Cutnene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
Isobutane
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
3-Methylhexane
Methylcyclohexane
n-Butane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isoheptane + 2,3-Dimethylpentane
c-1 ,2-DichloroethyIene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
t-2-Pentene
Detection
Limit
(ppin)
0.25
0.14
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
96
92
92
92
92
88
88
88
80
80
80
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
0.58
0.42
1.25
0.26
0.08
0.50
127
0.23
0.88
0.05
7.63
0.12
0.11
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
7.73
3.91
13.10
4.54
4.63
8.84
969
6.50
34.8
2.05
105
1.56
1.59
3.79
37.5
0.57
1.85
2.34
15.8
4.85
3.09
2.48
5.07
1.06
25.3
Median
2.31
1.24
3.97
1.45
0.39
2.66
363
1.00
5.36
0.33
26.1
0.55
0.37
0.97
3.30
0.16
0.17
0.16
1.32
0.53
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.28
Mean
2.54
1.41
4.75
1.54
1.14
3.27
395
2.11
11.4
0.52
31.2
0.59
0.43
1.23
8.79
0.21
0.56
0.64
4.06
0.74
0.65
0.53
0.48
0.27
2.27
Standard
Deviation
1.49
0.84
3.27
0.93
1.22
2.31
188
1.95
9.93
0.51
18.7
0.32
0.29
0.76
10.6
0.14
0.55
0.74
4.77
0.91
0.77
0.68
0.99
0.26
6.04
95% Confidence
: Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
1.93
1.07
3.40
1.16
0.64
2.32
317
1.30
7.32
0.31
23.5
0.46
0.31
0.92
4.43
0.15
0.33
0.34
2.10
0.36
0.34
0.25
0.07
0.17
0.00
Upper
(ppm)
3.16
1.76
6.10
1.93
1.64
4.22
472
2.91
15.50
0.73
38.9
0.72
0.55
1.55
13.1
0.27
0.78
0.95
6.03
1.11
0.97
0.82
0.89
0.38
4.76
•a
o
1.
o
-------
o
•a
c.
o
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
Isoprene
Cyclohexane
1-Hexene
Dichlorotoluene
Hcxanal
3-MethyIheptane
1 -Undecene
Tetrachloroethylene
n-Pentane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
Trichloroethene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
2,5-DimethyIhexane
1-Octene
n-Butylbenzene
n-Hexane
Methylcyclopentane
Isopentane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 1 14
1 -Methylcyclohexene
Neohexane
Isohexane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
Vinyl Chloride
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.36
0.25
0.25
0.33
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.44
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.32
Percent
Detected
(%)
80
80
76
76
76
76
72
68
68
64
64
64
64
60
60
60
60
60
56
56
52
52
52
48
48
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Concentration (ppm) .
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
4.59
1.65
10.3
3.79
2.12
1.06
4.54
2.71
2.37
1.47
0.94
6.46
0.56
0.78
2.03
2.16
0.99
8.51
0.32
0.97
1.01
0.88
0.76
2.00
0.94
Median
0.18
0.21
0.26
0.28
0.15
0.10
0.55
0.05
0.18
L 0.20
0.03
0.08
0.14
0.11
0.58
0.09
0.07
0.11
0.15
0.04
0.05
0.07
0.07
NC
L NC
Mean
0.46
0.47
0.82
0.70
0.42
0.28
0.97
0.74
0.59
0.41
0.32
1.45
0.22
0.27
0.73
0.32
0.33
2.35
0.15
0.27
0.25
0.24
0.23
0.45
0.28
Standard
Deviation
0.92
0.48
2.03
0.85
0.49
0.27
1.05
0.91
0.68
0.40
0.31
2.05
0.13
0.20
0.60
0.54
0.30
3.25
0.08
0.23
0.23
0.20
0.22
0.50
0.26
95% Confidence
Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.08
0.28
0.00
0.35
0.21
0.17
0.54
0.36
0.31
0.25
0.20
0.60
0.17
0.18
0.48
0.10
0.20
1.01
0.12
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.24
0.17
Upper
(ppm)
0.85
0.67
1.66
1.05
0.62
0.39
1.40
1.12
0.88
0.58
0.45
2.29
0.28
0.35
0.98
0.54
0.45
3.70
0.18
0.37
0.35
0.33
0.32
0.65
0.38
-------
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 -Pentene
Acetone
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Cyclopentane
Freon 1 1 3
t-2-Butene
Methylene Chloride
Chloroethane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
2-Methylheptane
1-Heptene
1,1-Dichloroethylene
2,4-Dimethylpentane
3-Methyl-l-Butene
t-3-Heptene
1-Decene
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
t-2-Heptene
t-2-Hexene
2-Methyl-2-Pentene
1-Butanol
Methylisobutylketone
Heptanal
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.19
0.25
0.25
0.18
0.18
0.25
0.87
0.25
0.31
0.22
0.32
0.25
0.25
3.15
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
44
44
44
40
36
36
36
36
36
36
32
32
32
28
28
28
24
20
20
20
20
20
16
16
16
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
' Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
2.63
2.48
66.1
1.87
0.92
1.40
0.30
0.47
1.67
0.75
0.05
0.45
1.31
0.14
0.25
0.23
0.47
1.83
95.4
1.43
0.23
0.15
0.52
0.17
1.61
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Mean
0.70
0.24
10.5
0.49
0.21
0.36
0.31
0.20
0.42
0.24
0.11
0.16
0.20
1.09
0.12
0.12
0.15
0.25
9.36
0.26
0.14
0.12
0.16
0.12
0.27
Standard
Deviation
0.88
0.47
19.2
0.58
0.20
0.43
0.26
0.11
0.45
0.22
0.09
0.13
0.24
0.93
0.07
0.07
0.12
0.36
25.8
0.33
0.07
0.07
0.10
0.06
0.36
95% Confidence
Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
0.34
0.05
2.60
0.25
0.13
0.18
0.21
0.15
0.24
0.14
0.07
0.11
0.10
0.71
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.00
0.12
0.11
0.09
0.12
0.09
0,12
Upper
(ppm)
1.06
0.44
18.5
0.73
0.30
0.54
0.42
0.24
0.61
0.33
0.15
0.22
0.30
1.47
0.15
0.15
0.20
0.40
20.0
0.39
0.17
0.14
0.20
0.14
0.42
-------
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
Cyclopentene
2,3-DimethyIbutane
3-Methylpentane
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
c-2-Butene
c-2-Pentene
1,2-Dichloroethane
c-3-Heptene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
p-Isopropyltoluene
c-3-Hexene
Methylcyclopentene
Methanol (+)
Bromodichloromethane
3,5,5-Trimethylhexene
1,4-Dioxane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
Bromomethane
Bromoform
Bromochloromethane
Benzaldehyde
Acrylonitrile
/Vcetaldehyde
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.77
0.25
0.25
0.37
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.37
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
16
16
12
12
12
12
8
8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
• ••••.. . - :-.. - . ••.• • •..•• -• •--.-.- .
•:• ... "'• • • • • -' • .:.:.• .;..'• • •"..; • .-. . --• •••: -.. -;- ' '•
Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
0.25
17.8
0.11
0.07
0.20
0.31
0.05
0.12
0.08
1.47
1.18
0.40
4.74
0.04
0.06
0.13
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Mean
0.14
0.86
0.12
0.31
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.13
0.13
0.16
0.17
0.13
0.31
0.14
0.16
0.14
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
0.09
3.53
0.08
0.21
0.07
0.07
0.11
0.06
0.07
0.28
0.22
0.10
0.93
0.07
0.07
0.08
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95 % Confidence
•• intervals
Loiver
(ppm)
0.10
0.00
0.09
0.22
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.08
0.09
0.00
0.11
0.13
0.10
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
0.17
2.32
0.16
0.40
0.17
0.16
0.20
0.15
0.15
0.28
0.26
0.17
0.69
0.16
0.19
0.17
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
4-Nonene
4-MethyI- 1 -Pentcnc
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
t-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
p-Chlorotoluene
o-Chlorotoluene
m-Chlorotoluene
c-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
c-2-Octene
c-2-Hexene
Vinyl Bromide
Vinyl Acetate
Trichloroethylene
Neopentane
Methyl t-Butylether
Indene
Indan
Frcon 23
Ethylene
Diethyl Ether &2-Propanol
Di bromoch loromethane
Cyclohexene
Chloroprene
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.13
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
' 0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC .
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Mean
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence
Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
-------
Table 4-28
(Continued)
Compound
Chloroform
Chlorodifluoromethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Butyraldehyde
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
2-Butanone
2,4,4-Trimethyl-l-Pentene
1-Propanol
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
1-Nonene
1,3-Butadiene
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.19
0.25
0.36
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.28
0.25
0.25
Percent
Detected
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Samples
25
25
25
25
25
L 25
25
25
25
25
25
Concentration (ppm)
Minimum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Maximum
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Median
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Mean
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Standard
Deviation
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
95% Confidence
Intervals
Lower
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Upper
(ppm)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
Table 4-29
Concentration and Emission Results for Select VOCs
from Sampling of Gas Extraction Wells
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1,1-DichIoroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
c-1 ,2-Dichlorocthylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroelhane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzenc
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
BK-10
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.12
ND
0.16
3.30
0.13
1.00
1.00
0.30
ND
0.41
0.50
0.37
0.33
1.39
ND
148
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
2.23
NC
2.36
57.9
2.84
20.2
20.2
5.98
NC
8.31
12.3
12.8
8.60
33.6
NC
2,420
BK-17
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.26
ND
0.46
4.75
0.32
1.66
1.65
0.48
ND
0.71
0.93
0.55
0.60
2.37
ND
222
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
4.53
NC
6.33
77.3
6.30
31.3
31.0
8.79
NC
13.4
21.1
17.6
14.5
53.4
NC
3,380
BK-19
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.05
ND
0.68
5.34
0.33
1.64
2.38
0.58
ND
0.96
1.28
0.55
0.87
3.20
ND
265
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
1.03
NC
12.3
114
8.71
40.3
58.5
13.9
NC
23.6
37.9
23.0
27.6
94
NC
5,280
BK-24
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.04
ND
0.86
8.10
0.54
2.95
3.26
1.00
0.01
1.50
2.67
1.84
0.83
6.01
0.03
592
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
2.57
NC
47.2
523
42.3
220
243
72.9
1.71
112
240
233
79.8
535
2.89
35,700
BK-29
(ppm)
0.15
ND
ND
0.06
0.42
ND
0.83
7.27
0.49
2.56
2.64
0.79
ND
0.41
1.57
0.78
0.42
3.85
0.06
314
(ug/sec)
7.39
NC
NC
4.46
31.8
NC
51.2
528
43.4
214
221
64.6
NC
34.4
159
111
44.9
386
6.71
21,300
BK-31
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.14
ND
1.14
7.84
0.60
4.17
3.69
0.85
ND
1.36
2.14
0.98
0.71
5.44
0.02
355
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
28.6
NC
184
1490
140
915
810
184
NC
299
569
368
201
1430
5.98
63,100
-------
§
n
I
o
Table 4-29
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichlorocthane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
BK-37
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
0.05
0.16
ND
0.62
9.87
0.72
3.91
3.68
1.07
ND
1.72
2.66
0.82
0.67
4.50
0.06
353.00
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
2.89
9.59
NC
30.4
569
50.7
260
244
69.9
NC
114
214
93.0
57.0
358
5.31
19,000
BK-39
(ppm)
0.20
ND
ND
ND
0.09
ND
1.13
9.27
0.58
4.39
3.64
0.90
ND
1.34
1.94
1.10
1.34
4.38
0.03
386
(US/sec)
22.3
NC
NC
NC
14.9
NC
156
1510
116
825
684
165
NC
251
439
352
323
985
6.11
58,700
C-13
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.29
2.29
0.19
1.10
1.17
0.23
ND
0.42
0.60
0.26
0.38
1.24
ND
127
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
7.27
67.5
6.88
37.3
40.0
7.51
NC
14.4
24.7
15.2
16.5
50.5
NC
3,490
C-6
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.44
4.34
0.31
1.78
1.74
0.41
ND
0.66
0.91
0.66
0.78
2.75
ND
206
(ug/sec)
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC1
NC'
NC1
NC1
•• D-l
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.61
4.56
0.22
1.91
1.96
0.49
ND
0.70
1.05
0.53
0.70
2.23
ND
213
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
20.8
183
10.7
88.5
90.5
22.2
NC
32.2
58.7
41.7
41.7
124
NC
7,980
D-7
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.03
ND
0.63
5.89
0.34
2.54
2.75
0.51
ND
1.03
1.44
0.69
1.01
3.06
ND
270
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
2.15
NC
33.6
373
26.2
185
201
36.2
NC
75.2
127
85.4
94.5
267
NC
15,900
-------
Table 4-29
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
1 ,1 ,2,2-TetrachIoroethane
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
F-2
(ppm)
0.15
ND
ND
ND
0.08
ND
1.22
12.18
0.72
4.39
6.30
1.32
0.02
2.37
3.80
0.99
0.75
5.93
0.02
468
(ug/sec)
16.9
NC
NC
NC
14.1
NC
173
2040
147
848
1210
249
7.20
457
885
326
186
1370
5.66
73,100
F-4
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.05
ND
0.99
8.57
0.53
3.01
3.72
0.82
ND
1.44
2.27
0.63
1.08
3.40
ND
304
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
1.96
NC
31.5
322
24.2
131
161
34.9
NC
62.2
119
46.4
60.2
177
NC
10,600
F-5
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
1.35
8.55
0.50
4.02
3.68
0.90
0.03
1.40
2.23
0.99
1.59
5.08
ND
408
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
3.12
NC
58.2
434
31.3
235
215
51.7
2.38
81.7
158
98.9
120
356
NC
19,300
H-7
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.34
ND
4.06
29.44
2.75
10.11
13.2
2.89
0.05
4.97
8.84
1.56
4.91
10.1
0.05
969
(ug/sec)
NC
NC
NC
NC
18.5
NC
179
1530
175
606
790
170
5.03
298
640
160
380
727
4.02
47,000
J-l
(ppm)
0.05
0.08
0.93
2.10
1.83
0.56
0.67
33.83
2.50
6.63
9.55
6.15
0.01
3.53
6.72
0.34
1.84
3.64
0.94
585
(UE/SCC)
1.20
3.00
29.4
77.7
66.5
28.1
19.6
1170
105
263
379
240
0.79
140
323
23.0
93.9
173
46.1
18,800
J44
(ppm)
0.46
0.14
0.36
2.63
1.32
0.22
1.25
41.12
2.73
7.30
10.5
5.59
0.01
3.29
7.52
0.35
2.60
4.67
0.88
692
(ug/seCj
7.24
3.33
7.70
65.6
32.3
7.47
24.5
953
77.4
195
281
146
0.59
87.9
243
16.0
89.5
149
29.3
15,000
-------
n
o
Table 4-29
(Continued)
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
J-17
(ppm)
0.32
0.06
1.22
1.48
0.73
0.53
0.42
29.14
1.89
5.66
9.22
3.90
ND
1.02
5.29
0.12
1.36
2.97
0.51
371
(US/sec)
8.34
2.59
43.9
61.6
29.8
29.7
13.9
1130
90.0
253
413
171
NC
45.7
286
9.37
78.5
159
28.1
13,400
J-28
(ppm)
0.23
0.05
0.75
1.11
0.60
0.41
0.33
19.32
1.77
3.41
5.08
3.34
ND
4.52
3.58
0.09
1.25
2.81
0.46
459
(ug/sec)
14.8
5.27
67.2
116
61.2
58.0
26.9
1880
210
382
569
367
NC
506
485
17.5
181
377
63.7
41,600
J-3
(ppm)
0.67
0.04
1.67
2.08
0.61
0.33
0.47
24.75
1.92
3.60
5.96
3.69
0.01
3.44
4.28
0.18
0.36
2.42
0.48
363
(ug/sec)
19.1
1.76
64.7
93.8
26.8
20.3
16.8
1040
98.5
174
289
175
0.67
166
250
14.8
22.1
140
28.5
14,200
J-4
(ppm)
0.81
ND
0.22
1.41
1.71
0.28
0.44
19.71
1.74
3.41
6.12
3.72
ND
2.02
4.02
0.12
0.32
2.03
0.68
358
(ug/sec)
49.4
NC
18.6
136
161
36.1
33.3
1770
190
353
632
376
NC
209
502
20.6
43.1
252
86.5
29,900
J-6
(ppm)
0.17
ND
0.88
1.18
0.63
0.25
0.38
20.96
1.48
3.99
6.55
3.04
ND
1.97
4.07
0.22
1.22
2.73
0.49
421
(ug/sec)
11.3
NC
78.1
122
64.3
34.5
30.9
2020
175
444
728
332
NC
219
548
41.7
175
363
67.1
37,900
J-7
(ppm)
0.94
0.06
0.77
1.36
2.48
0.23
0.47
26.19
1.92
4.40
7.22
3.18
ND
2.22
4.83
0.15
1.15
2.30
0.75
384
(ug/sec)
77.2
7.06
86.5
177
317
41.2
48.1
3180
286
617
1010
437
NC
312
818
36.1
208
385
131
43,500
-------
o
K)
70
I'
Site ID
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Bulylbenzene
Trichloroethene
TNMHC
J-8
(ppm)
0.79
0.08
1.24
2.54
1.41
0.92
0.92
37.6
4.26
5.24
8.78
6.50
0.01
5.29
6.63
0.32
2.07
4.24
0.93
637
(ug/scc)
48.2
7.94
103
246
133
121
70.3
3400
469
545
914
662
2.40
551
834
56.1
277
528
119
53,700
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
NC1 = Flow rate not available due to problems with flow orifice.
Table 4-29
(Continued)
o
-------
g
o
S
£
o
Table 4-30
Concentration and Emissions of Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2 from Gas Extraction Wells
Gas
Extraction
Well*
BK-10
BK-17
BK-19
BK-24
BK-29
BK-31
BK-37
BK-39
C-13
C-6
D-l
D-7
F-2
F-4
F-5
H-7
J-l
J-14
J-17
J-28
J-3
J-4
J-6
J-7
J-8
Flow Rate
(m'/min)
0.28
0.26
0.34
1.03
1.16
3.04
0.92
2.60
0.47
0.0
0.64
1.01
2.67
0.60
0.81
0.83
0.55
0.37
0.62
1.55
0.67
1.43
1.54
1.94
1.44
c
-------
g
Table 4-31
Concentrations and Emissions of Select VOCs from
Temporal Sampling of Gas Extraction Wells
Date
Flow Rate
(mVmin)
Vinyl Chloride
(ppm)
fag/sec)
1,1-DichIoroethylene
(ppm)
(/ug/sec)
Methylene Chloride
(ppm)
Cug/sec)
1,1-Dichloroethane
(ppm)
(^g/sec)
c-l,2-DlcUoroethylene
(ppm)
0/g/sec)
BK-39
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
07/12/95
2.60
1.14
2.17
0.20
0.30
0.28
22.3
14.4
26.0
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.09
0.09
0.18
14.9
6.58
25.9
F-2
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
07/12/95
2.67
2.78
2.29
0.15
0.07
ND
16.9
8.83
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
0.08
0.06
0.08
14.1
11.8
12.7
J-28
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
07/12/95
1.55
1.31
1.48
0.23
0.30
0.36
14.8
16.4
22.8
0.05
0.08
0.08
5.27
6.67
7.79
0.75
1.07
1.16
67.2
80.9
99.2
1.11
1.26
1.45
116
111
145
0.60
0.69
0.87
61.2
59.3
84.8
o
•c
i
-------
n
I
3
c.
o
Table 4-31
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(mVmin)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
(ppm)
(^ig/sec)
Benzene
(ppm)
0
-------
Table 4-31
(Continued)
Date
BK-39
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
07/12/95
F-2
7/10/95
7/1 1/95
7/13/95
J-28
7/10/95
7/11/95
7/12/95
Flow Rate
(acfm)
2.60
1.14
2.17
2.67
2.78
2.29
1.55
1.31
1.48
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
(ppm)
3.64
3.66
4.72
6.30
5.61
7.12
5.08
6.53
7.88
(Mg/sec)
684
301
740
1,210
1,120
1,180
569
618
843
Styrene
(ppm)
0.90
0.85
1.17
1.32
1.09
1.39
3.34
4.38
5.87
0/g/sec)
165
68.5
180
248
215
225
367
406
615
1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane
(ppm)
ND
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
ND
ND
ND
fag/sec)
NC
1.80
4.21
7.20
6.70
7.85
NC
NC
NC
o-Xylene
(ppm)
1.34
0.94
1.22
2.37
1.97
2.54
4.52
5.92
8.41
(/zg/sec)
251
77
192
457
395
420
506
561
899
n-Nonane
(ppm)
1.94
1.89
2.47
3.80
3.38
4.21
3.58
4.43
5.85
Cug/sec)
439
188
467
885
819
842
485
507
755
-------
§
I
o
Table 4-31
(Continued)
Date
Flow Rate
(acfm)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
(ppm)
(jig/sec)
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dlchlorobenzene
(ppm)
(/ug/sec)
Trlchloroethene
(ppm)
Gig/sec)
1,2,4-Trlroethylbenzene
& t-Butylbehzene
(ppm)
(Mg/sec)
TNMHC
(ppm)
fag/Stc)
BK-39
07/10/95
07/11/95
07/12/95
2.60
1.14
2.17
1.10
1.20
1.37
352
169
366
1.34
1.13
0.73
323
120
147
0.03
0.03
0.04
6.11
2.86
7.95
4.38
4.34
5.84
985
428
1,100
386
367
503
58,700
24,500
63,900
F-2
7/10/95
7/1 1/95
7/13/95
2.67
2.78
2.29
0.99
0.83
1.25
326
283
353
0.75
1.65
2.34
186
428
500
0.02
ND
0.02
5.66
NC
4.97
5.93
4.02
5.86
1,370
967
1,160
468
392
490
73,100
63,700
65,600
J-28
7/10/95
7/1 1/95
7/12/95
1.55
1.31
1.48
0.09
0.22
0.20
17.5
36.0
37.0
1.25
0.78
2.20
181
94.7
303
0.46
0.55
0.67
63.7
64.3
89.1
2.81
3.63
3.50
377
411
448
459
614
626
41,600
47,000
54,200
ND = Not Detected
NC = Not Calculated
-------
Table 4-32
Concentrations and Emissions of Hg, H2S, CI14, CO2, and O2 from
Temporal Sampling or Gas Extraction Wells
Date
Flow Rate
(mVmin)
cor
(%)
(g/sec)
CH4
(%)
(g/sec)
°*
(%)
(g/sec)
. . Hi8 "".
(T>pn»)
Oug/sec)
Hg
(ppm)
(jug/sec)
BK-39
07/10/95
07/11/95
07/12/95
2.60
1.14 •
2.17
28.5
29.9
42.3
22.2
10.2
27.5
42.2
48.8
53.5
11.9
6.06
12.6
5.6
3.8
0.7
3.17
0.94
0.33
41.0
48.0
85.9
2470
1270
4320
NM
0.38
NM
NM
59.1
NM
F-2
07/10/95
07/11/95
07/12/95
2.67
2.78
2.29
32.2
36.4
36.0
25.7
30.3
24.7
46.8
49.1
51.4
13.6
14.9
12.8
4.4
3.2
2.7
2.56
1.94
1.35
43.0
39.2
NM
2660
2530
NM
0.43
1.51
NM
157
573
NM
J-28
07/10/95
07/1 1/95
07/12/95
1.55
1.31
1.48
26.6
37.3
37.2
12.3
14.6
16.5
43.7
58.8
59.5
7.37
8.38
9.58
6.6
1.4
1.1
2.23
0.40
0.35
26.0
40.0
37.9
934
1210
1300
NM
0.31
0.66
NM
55.4
133
NM = Not Measured
-------
Table 4-33
Concentration of VOCs Detected in Condensate from Landfill Gas Collection System
Compound
Acetonitrile
Acetone
Melhylene Chloride
2-Butanone
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Methylisobutylketone
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Elhylbenzene
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
Dibromomethane
2-Hexanone
. • ;v:: '• • Concentration 0;':': L:- '-'V/.v
South'
7/03/95
ND
8055.00
35.55
12450.00
6.27
ND
5.65
267.00
107.50
1.94
34.00
54.20
8.77
25.30
29.04
47.30
7/06/95
ND
17250.00
76.35
22650.00
ND
ND
ND
318.50
73.70
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
61.15
ND
7/07/95
ND
14600.00
50.00
20900.00
ND
ND
ND
267.00
86.00
ND
ND
85.70
ND
ND
58.70
ND
7/10/95
788.00
14000.00
166.00
17000.00
ND
ND
ND
282.00
64.90
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
60.60
ND
7/11/95
ND
17150.00
46.70
21850.00
ND
ND
ND
333.00
69.70
ND
ND
25.90
ND
ND
70.05
ND
••': North* :•• . -X; .'. -:';•'
7/06/95
272.00
6040.00
82.80
5235.00
ND
14.10
ND
171.50
47.00
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
45.10
ND
7/07/95 •
391.00
6900.00
82.25
5585.00
ND
15.60
ND
172.00
47.10
ND
ND
20.30
ND
ND
41.75
ND
7/l6»5
464.00
6075.00
106.90
5025.00
ND
ND
ND
162.50
52.10
ND
13.20
29.20
ND
ND
40.30
ND
7/11/95
495.00
7590.00
23.50
5970.00
ND
ND
ND
173.50
40.50
ND
ND
19.00
ND
ND
27.45
ND
i Alf/Wat«f Separator5
7/03/95
ND
11750.00
41.20
13200.00
4.43
ND
3.68
287.50
57.80
ND
18.20
26.90
5.12
14.40
28.93
37.60
7/08/95
ND
9760.00
174.00
9620.00
ND
ND
ND
205.00
81.60
ND
ND
46.90
ND
ND
51.50
ND
7/12/95
356.00
12450.00
32.40
14750.00
ND
ND
ND
239.50
61.60
ND
ND
12.15
ND
ND
38.55
ND
7/13V95
362.50
9750.00
31.45
11050.00
ND
ND
ND
227.50
56.30
ND
ND
11.25
ND
ND
42.95
ND
ND = Not Detected
'Sample collected from south field header.
2Sample collected from north field header.
'Sample collected from air/water separator located immediately downstream of north and south field header sampling locations.
-------
Table 4-34
Mass Flow Rate of VOCs Detected in Condensate from
Landfill Gas Collection System
Compound Name
Acetonitrile
Acetone
Methylene Chloride
2-Butanone
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Benzene
Methylisobutylketone
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
Dibromomethane
2-Hexanone
Condensate
Production Rate
(L/day)
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
49,000
Average
Concentration
(PS/LY
180
10,900
69.8
12,200
0.55
0.46
240
64.3
2.28
20.9
0.64
1.80
40.5
4.70
Mass flow Rate
(gteec)
1.02e-04
6.22e-03
3.97e-05
6.92e-03
3.15e-07
2.62e-07
1.37e-04
3.66e-05
1.30e-06
1.19e-05
3.64e-07
1.03e-06
2.31e-05
2.68e-06
aBased on samples collected from air/water separator on July 3, 8, 12, and 13.
4-110
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 4-35
Concentrations of Select VOCs from Landfill Gas Monitoring Wells
Compound Name
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Melhylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-DichloroethyIene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene+m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
n-Nonane
N-Undecane
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
TNMHC
-1- '••• '•-:• Concentration (ppm) '.-: ;'::;;?-;^::^'-';":";:' .' - ".'.'.-.' ;•;':::'.
10 Deep
ND
ND
ND
0.08
0.27
ND
1.98
33.6
2.78
8.06
11.7
3.77
4.22
6.93
13.6
4.10
23.0
0.07
6.22
895
10 Medium
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.09
3.18
0.26
1.33
2.42
0.80
0.73
1.04
16.0
0.92
8.29
ND
• 2.21
226
10 Shallow
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.22
3.70
0.40
2.76
4.98
0.75
1.15
1.46
10.2
0.86
8.06
ND
4.49
302
22 Deep
0.57
0.02
ND
0.43
1.17
ND
0.66
27.4
2.31
8.21
10.7
4.41
4.54
9.32
75.7
7.03
76.2
0.14
9.32
1,210
22 Medium
0.04
ND
ND
ND
1.60
ND
1.89
46.1
3.56
10.4
12.6
6.05
4.55
10.2
7.25
4.34
25.9
0.25
7.05
1,070
22 Shallow
1.82
0.06
ND
1.17
2.00
ND
0.69
47.8
4.14
12.6
15.8
5.88
5.95
13.2
4.58
3.34
19.5
0.19
6.40
663
23 Deep
0.72
ND
0.31
0.06
1.45
ND
1.71
41.2
3.34
12.2
19.2
6.99
7.79
10.3
10.1
5.77
34.6
0.07
9.95
1,050
23 Medium
0.10
0.18
0.26
0.04
0.76
ND
0.91
44.9
4.71
12.0
17.3
7.74
18.8
13.2
4.03
3.95
20.9
0.55
6.74
989
23 Shallow
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.22
ND
0.18
0.25
ND
0.09
0.05
0.44
ND
0.42
ND
0.14
23.0
ND = Not Detected
-------
Table 4-36
Hg, H2S, CH4, CO2, and O2 Concentrations from
Landfill Gas Monitoring Wells
Monitoring Well # ;
10 deep
10 medium
10 shallow
22 deep
22 medium
22 shallow
23 deep
23 medium
23 shallow
C02
.:•;: (%)•-•:-:
14.2
0.1
10.0
0.6
7.2
17.4
23.1
8.7
0.1
CH4
-:"ic%r^
20.1
0.2
18.0
1.2
10.8
26.1
33.3
15.2
0.2
,; .op'--v:;
•** m • ' '• -
13.9
20.7
15.3
20.2
17.3
11.3
9.2
16.5
20.6
B£V^';
(ppm)
82.1
24.1
214.3
11.3
55.4
44.1
116.1
270.9
2.8
Hg
(ppm)
MM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.93
1.24
0.11
NM = Not Measured
4-112
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 4-37
Summary of Activity Factor Information
Feature
Passive Vents
Entire Section
Entire Section
"Top" of Section
"Side" of Section
"Toe" of Section
Active Face
Landfill Gas Collection System
Cracks'
Seeps (wet)
Seeps (wet + dried)*1
Perimeter Vent Trenchd
Perimeter pipes
Parameter
Total count
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass Volume0
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Mass of Waste
Surface Area
Mass of Waste
Surface area
Surface area
Surface area
Surface area
Total
Units
#
hectare
m3
hectare
m3
hectare
m3
hectare
m3
hectare
m3
hectare
m3
m2
m2
m2
m2
#
Landfill Section
1/9
36
175.57
3.70 x 10'°
68.95
2.12 xlO10
56.24
8.16xl09
30.02
1.70xl09
1.07
NA
19.29
7.82 x 109
1,756
55.74
55.74
2,546
0
6/7
0
75.44
1.15x10'°
39.52
7.54 x 109
20.31
2.70 x 109
13.33
1.27xl09
2.28
NA
0.0
0.0
754.4
37.16
37.16
790
0
3/4
119
57.17
1.21 x 10'°
13.02
4.98 x 109
22.10
4.92 x 109
22.05
2.16 x 109
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
571.7
9.29
9.29
2,231
0
2/8
102
58.05
1.05 x 10'°
11.77
4.31 x 109
21.70
4.23 x 109
24.58
1.97 x 10'
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
580.5
4.64
4.64
1,004
0
1 Cracks were estimated to cover approximately 0.1% of entire surface area.
b Only wet seep areas were identified. Therefore, wet + dried seep area is set equal to wet seep area.
c Top of Section mass includes mass of active face which is located on the top of Section 1/9 and 6/7. Were unable to accurately measure mass of active face.
* Assumed width of vent trenches was 1.5 m (5 ft). Note: Vent trenches were not found during field investigation, but were found on autocad maps of each section.
= Not Available
-------
Table 4-38
Summary of Activity Factors by Feature and Cover Material
•Feature
Section 3/4
Toe
Side
Top
Section 2/8
Toe
Side
Top
Section 6/7
Toe
Side
Top
Active Face
Section 1/9
Toe
Side
Top
LFG Collection System
Active Face
Surface Area (hectares)* :• :
Clay Cap
8.55
0.57
0.0
6.05
2.26
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.12
10.50
0.0
0.0
0.0
PVC Liner
0.80
7.36
0.10
0.76
3.80
2.70
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Soil Cover
12.69
14.17
12.93
. 17.77
15.64
9.07
13.33
20.31
39.52
2.28
20.90
45.74
68.95
19.29
1.07
: Total*
Passive
Vents
33
69
17
16
56
30
0
0
0
0
0
28
8
0
0
# Flowing
Passive
Vents
11
51
17
4
46
30
0
0
0
0
0
8
7
0
0
' 1 hectare = 10,000 mz = 2.47 acres.
4-114
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
In this section, the results presented
in the previous section are further reduced
and discussed. The measured emission
rates, emission fluxes, and mass flow rates
are summarized by section and by feature.
The variability in the measurement data are
evaluated. An overall emission rate for
selected compounds is given for each
section and for the entire landfill. The
average composition of the landfill gas also
is given. The results are compared with
other published studies and information is
provided for predicting future emissions.
5.1 Measurement Results for the
Passive Vents
The VOC analyses of samples
collected from the passive vents generally
resulted in about 60 compounds being
identified in each sample (results are given
in Appendix D). These compounds included
primarily alkanes (e.g., butane), aromatic
compounds (e.g., toluene, xylenes), and
chlorinated hydrocarbons (e.g.,
chlorobenzene). There was relatively little
variation in the number and types of
compounds detected from sample to sample.
The emission rate measurements for
individual vents were averaged to develop
an emission factor in units of g/sec per vent
or u g/sec per vent. Emission factors were
developed based on vent location on the
landfill mound (top, side, and toe) and by
type of cover surrounding the vent (soil,
clay, and PVC). These emission factors
were multiplied by the total number of vents
with measurable flow (i.e., the activity
factor) to yield the emission rate for that
species. Total emission rates for selected
species are given in Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3
for Sections 1/9, 2/8, and 3/4, respectively.
(All tables appear at the end of the section
following the text and figures). Complete
data for all compounds are given in
Appendix M.
The emission rate data follow certain
trends. In general, the emission rate per vent
is highest from the top of a section and
lowest from the toe of a section. This is
consistent with the fact that a larger volume
and mass of waste is present under the top
areas than is present than under the toe
areas. It implies that the landfill gas more
readily migrates upward than laterally.
Some of the passive vents at the toe areas
actually were found to have negative flow;
i.e., ambient air was being drawn into the
vents due to the vacuum produced by gas
flow elsewhere in the landfill. The emission
rate per vent from the sides of the landfill is
intermediate between the rates from the top
and toe areas.
The type of cover material
surrounding the vent has some effect on
emissions from the vent. At locations
covered by a synthetic cover, the emission
rate from the passive vents was relatively
large. This implies that the cover serves to
limit gas transport through the surface and
the gas preferentially exits the landfill via
the passive vents. The clay cover was
present primarily on the toes and sides of the
landfill sections. There was little difference
in emissions for vents in areas with soil
versus those in areas with clay cover. This
is somewhat unexpected and implies that the
clay cap fails to retard gas transport. This is
probably due to erosion of the clay cap,
which produces pathways for gas transport.
The emission rates for selected
species were summed to develop total
Radian Corporation
5-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
emission rate values by section and for the
entire landfill. The total emission rates for
passive vents are given in Table 5-4.
Complete data for all compounds are given
in Appendix M. TNMHC emissions from
all passive vents are about 3.9 g/sec;
emissions of individual VOCs are 0.2 g/sec
or less. The total emission rates of methane
and carbon dioxide are 900-1,800 g/sec and
hydrogen sulfide emissions were about 0.15
g/sec. Hydrogen sulfide has a very low odor
threshold and the emissions of this
compound from the passive vents certainly
contributes to the characteristic odor of the
landfill. Mercury emissions were 0.00545
g/sec from the passive vents.
The measurement program included
tests to determine the section, spatial,
temporal, sampling, and analytical
variability of the data set. The variability for
each of these factors (the variance
component) was calculated using the SAS
procedure PROC NESTED. The variability
in the passive vent data is shown in Table 5-
5 in terms of percent coefficient of variation
(%CV). The sampling and analytical
variabilities generally are small and are
better than expected. The temporal
variability is the variability introduced by
the time of sampling; i.e., what is the effect
of taking a sample at one time during the 3-
week sampling effort as opposed to another
time within that same 3-week period. The
combination of sampling plus analytical plus
temporal variability is the measurement
variability. In most cases, this is less than
+/- 50%. Again, this small amount of
variability is better than expected.
Spatial variability is the variability
from one vent to another within a given
section. In most cases, the spatial variability
is larger than the measurement variability.
Section variability is the variability from one
section of the landfill to another section.
This variability tends to be smaller than the
spatial variability, indicating that there is
less difference from one section to another
than there is for the vents within a given
section. The total variability generally is
less than 100% CV, indicating that for any
measurement the overall variability is less
than a factor of two. The variability for a
representative compound — toluene — is
depicted in Figure 5-1 (all figures appear at
the end of the section following the text).
5.2 Measurement Results for the
Surface Flux
During the course of this project, a
total of 74 surface emission flux
measurements were made. Flux chamber
measurements were performed at different
areas within each landfill section (i.e., top,
side, toe, cracks, and seeps) and over various
types of surface covers (i.e., soil, clay, and
PVC cover). Measurements also were made
over freshly deposited MSW (active face of
Sections 1/9 and 6/7) and over areas that
were affected by the vacuum of the gas
collection system (Section 1/9).
The complete results for the VOC
analysis of samples collected from the flux
chambers are given in Appendix D. There
were 50 compounds that were present in
50% of the flux chamber samples (See Table
4-14). These compounds included alkanes
(e.g., isobutane), aromatics (e.g., toluene,
benzene, xylenes), and chlorinated
hydrocarbons (e.g., vinyl chloride, 1,1-
dichloroethane). There was little variation
in the types of compounds detected from
sample to sample, but a large variation in the
concentrations of compounds from sample
to sample. The large variation in measured
5-2
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
concentrations is a result of the large spatial
variability in emissions at the landfill.
To extrapolate the flux chamber
measurements to the entire landfill surface
area (9.62 m2 sampled compared to a landfill
surface area of 3.66 x 106 m2), the flux
chamber measurements were grouped
according to the feature/cover/presence of
landfill gas collection (LFG) system
combinations presented in Table 5-6. The
combinations presented in Table 5-6 are the
prominent combinations present within each
landfill section. However, due to the limited
number of samples collected on Section 1/9,
3/4, and 2/8, some combinations were not
sampled:
Side/clay combination for Sections
2/8 and 3/4;
Toe/clay/No LFG Collection System
combination for Section 1/9;
Toe/soil/No LFG Collection System
combination for Section 1/9;
Top/PVC combination for Sections
2/8 and 3/4;
Active face for Section 1/9; and
Cracks and Seeps for Section 2/8.
For the first five combinations listed
above, the average flux for the existing data
that most closely matched the combination
was used. For example, the average flux
measurements from the toe/clay combination
at Section 2/8 was used for the side/clay
combination at Section 2/8. Because no flux
chamber measurements were made of the
active face on Section 1/9, the average flux
from the top/no gas extraction well
combination was used; this is a valid
estimate since the active face was actually
atop the older waste. Unlike Sections 3/4,
6/7, and 1/9, there were no prominent cracks
and seeps on Section 2/8. Therefore, no
emission flux measurements were performed
over seeps and cracks on Section 2/8.
After the flux chamber
measurements were grouped according to
the combinations presented in Table 5-6, the
average compound emission fluxes for each
combination was calculated. The average
compound emission flux (ug/m2-min) for
each combination was then multiplied by the
corresponding activity factor for the
combination (surface area). The activity
factors were presented in Tables 4-37 and 4-
38.
The emission rates for selected
VOCs are given in Tables 5-7 through 5-10
for Sections 1/9,2/8, 3/4, and 6/7,
respectively. Emission rates for all of the
compounds measured are given in Appendix
N. The distribution of the data was
determined using the Shapiro-Wilks W-test.
Bounds were calculated for the normally
distributed data using the 95% confidence
limits and for the non-normally distributed
data using maximum and minimum values.
The landfill surface emission rates
for select VOCs were summed to develop
total emission rate values by section and for
the entire landfill. The total surface
emission rates are given in Table 5-11. The
emission rate of TNMHC was 29.5 g/sec,
hydrogen sulfide emissions were 0.301
g/sec, and all other compounds were emitted
at rates of about 1.0 g/sec or less.
5.2.1 Surface Emissions over Soil, Clay
and PVC Cover
Landfill sections 2/8 and 3/4 are the
only sections that have PVC cover.
Emissions for all compounds were
significantly lower from areas with PVC
Radian Corporation
5-3
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
cover as compared with emissions from
areas with soil cover. The methane emission
fluxes for PVC-covered areas are based on
the lower detection limit for methane,
because no methane was detected in the flux
chamber samples. A better indication of
emissions through the PVC cover are the
TNMHC emissions, which averaged 3.09
and 5.74 ug/m2-min, for Section 2/8 and 3/4,
respectively, while TNMHC emissions for
soil covered areas averaged 419 ug/m2-min.
However, the TNMHC emissions also are
likely to be an overestimate of landfill
emissions through the PVC cover, because it
is probable that VOCs off-gassing from the
PVC cover contributed to the measured
emissions. In addition, the TNMHC
concentrations from flux chamber samples
taken over the PVC cover were near the
detection limit of the analytical system, so
more variability would be expected. Soil
samples collected over the PVC cover
showed no significant concentrations of
VOCs, so it appears that VOCs off-gassing
from the soil are not contributing to the
measured TNMHC emissions at locations
with the PVC cover.
Landfill Section 2/8, 3/4, and 1/9 all
have a clay cover on a portion of each
section. Emissions for all compounds were
lower from areas with an intact clay cover as
compared to emissions over soil covered
areas. For example, TNMHC emissions
over intact clay covered area on Section 2/8
averaged 3.53 as compared to TNMHC
emissions over soil covered areas of 419
ug/m2-min. The TNMHC emission over the
clay cover on Section 3/4 was 3,340 ug/m2-
min, however, this emission flux
measurement was obtained in an erosion
channel through the clay cover. These data
indicate that the clay cover is indeed
suppressing emissions, and that it must be
maintained to be effective.
5.2.2 Surface Emissions from Toe, Side,
and Top
The majority of flux chamber
measurements were made on Section 6/7, so
the data from this section provides the best
estimate of spatial variability in emissions.
The emissions flux data from Section 6/7
indicate that flux rates are highest at the top
of a section and lowest at the toe of the
section, which is consistent with the fact that
there is more waste under the top than the
toe. In addition, this implies that the landfill
gas tends to migrate upwards rather than
laterally. The flux data from Section 6/7
also indicates that methane fluxes over the
active face are not significantly different
from those from the rest of the landfill. This
is a result of the fact that the active face is
actually on top of older MSW, therefore,
emissions from the active face are the
combined emissions of the new and old
MSW.
5.2.3 Cracks and Seeps
Cracks were identified on all landfill
sections, however, cracks on Sections 6/7
and Section 3/4 were more common and
larger compared to cracks on the other
landfill sections. The cracks on Section 6/7
were in an area covered by standing water,
while the cracks on Section 3/4 were
actually a five foot wide by three foot deep
erosion channel through the clay cover. The
measured TNMHC emissions from cracks
averaged 566,000 and 3,340 ug/m2-min for
Section 6/7 and 3/4, respectively, as
compared to TNMHC emissions through
undisturbed soil of 419 ug/m2-min. the
elevated landfill gas flow rate from the
cracks on Section 6/7 is likely a result of
5-4
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
increased landfill gas generation due to the
increased moisture content of the waste
directly below the cracks and lateral
movement of gas to the cracks. Although
cracks were estimated to cover only 0.1% of
the total landfill surface area, the TNMHC
emissions through the cracks accounts for
24.2% of the total landfill surface emissions
of TNMHC.
There are areas where liquid from
within the landfill seeps out onto the landfill
surface. The total surface area of soil wetted
by seeped leachate is estimated to be 107 m2,
based on field observations. Seeps were
identified on all landfill sections, but were
prominent only at Sections 3/4, 6/7 and 1/9.
All of the seeps occurred on either the toe or
the bottom portion of the sides of the
landfill. An attempt was made to identify
areas where seeps had occurred and the
landfill surface was now dry, but no such
areas were identified. The analysis of liquid
samples from the seeps showed only a
handful of compounds and those few were at
the low ppb level with the exception of one
sample which had low ppm levels of 2-
butanone (methyl ethyl ketone [MEK]).
TNMHC emissions from seeps
averaged 18.0 yug/m2-min, for Section 3/4,
13.5 Mg/m2-min, for Section 1/9, and 16,400
ug/m2-min for Section 6/7, compared with
average TNMHC emissions through soil of
419 ug/m2-min. However, TNMHC
emissions from seeps are less than 0.04% of
the total TNMHC emissions from the
landfill.
5.2.4 Spatial and Temporal Variations
in Surface Emissions
Sources of variability for the surface
emission fluxes include analytical, sampling,
temporal, and spatial variability. Analytical
variability was determined from replicate
analysis of samples, while sampling
variability was determined from collection
of duplicate samples. Short-term temporal
variability was determined from multiple
emission flux measurements over time at
four sampling locations on Section 6/7. The
magnitude of each source of variability is
expressed as %CV and are presented in
Table 5-12. Both the spatial and temporal
%CV are large with respect to the sampling
and analytical %CV's. Surface emission
fluxes vary with time primarily due to
changes in environmental conditions within
the landfill (i.e., temperature and moisture
content) and in the surrounding environment
(i.e., temperature, rainfall, and atmospheric
pressure). For example, as the atmospheric
pressure increases, the surface fluxes
decrease. Also, rain will suppress surface
fluxes as the water acts as a barrier to gas
transport. Over longer periods of time,
surface emission fluxes will decrease due to
the decrease in degradable material available
to the anaerobic bacteria. The temporal
variability in TNMHC emissions measured
at the four points on Section 6/7 are
presented in Figure 5-2.
The spatial variability in surface
fluxes are generally much larger than
temporal variability, suggesting that surface
fluxes are more a function of position than
time. The spatial distribution of TNMHC
emission flux from Section 6/7 are shown in
Figure 5-3. The contour plot presented in
Figure 5-3 was developed using Radian's
Contour Plotting System (CPS). Due to the
limited number of samples used to develop
this contour plot, the plot should only be
used to evaluate spatial variations in
emissions and not the magnitude of
emissions.
Radian Corporation
5-5
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
5.3 Measurement Results for the Gas
Collection System
The gas collection system is
comprised of over 200 vertical extraction
wells, several lateral extraction wells, and
two gas collection headers. The wells attach
to the gas collection headers which route the
landfill gas to the gas processing plant. A
subset of the flowing gas extraction wells
were sampled to assess spatial variability in
mass flow rates while the gas collection
header was sampled over several days to
determine the average landfill gas
composition and temporal variability in
mass flow rates. The landfill gas collection
system culminates in two major headers.
These two headers represent the two major
well fields in section 1/9, with each header
collecting gas from over 100 extraction
wells. The headers were sampled nine times
during the program with the exception of
VOC samples, which were collected six
times.
The results of the individual flow
rate and concentration measurements and the
mass flow rates calculated from these values
were given in Section 4. The total mass
flow rate of gases to the plant are shown in
Table 5-13. There were over 70 individual
VOC compounds detected and quantified in
the landfill gas header samples. The
concentrations of the VOCs was quite
constant over the duration of the program
with %CVs generally in the single digits.
The consistency in measured
concentrations is illustrated in Figure 5-4.
The measured flow rate versus time is
shown in Figure 5-5. The South Field
Header typically had slightly higher
concentrations than the North Header. This
may have been due to the newest wells (the
"J" series) being in the south field where
recently accepted MSW is producing gas at a
relatively rapid rate. Mass flow rates for the
individual compounds were typically 10"' to
10'3 g/sec per header with TNMHC
emissions averaging 8 g/sec for the
combined headers. This equates to a mass
flow rate of about 700 kg/day of total VOCs.
These VOCs are not being emitted to the
environment, but they are an indication of
the landfill's potential to produce VOCs.
The landfill gas and condensate
entering the gas collection plant are
processed and methane is recovered. The
gas-phase VOCs and condensate are sent to
an on-site incinerator for destruction, which
acts to control air emissions of these
compounds. Emissions from the plant were
outside the scope of this study, but
incineration typically achieves destruction
efficiencies of 98% or higher (Eklund, et al.,
1992).
The gas collection system functions
by inducing a vacuum within the landfill
mound and drawing vapors to the individual
gas extraction wells. Contaminants within
the landfill exist in equilibrium among gas-,
liquid-, and solid-phases. Most VOCs are
present in the gas-phase along with some
fraction that is dissolved in either free liquid
or the liquid film coating soil particles.
Elemental mercury is predominantly a liquid
at ambient temperatures, but it has some
vapor pressure and is considered to be a
semi-volatile material. Ogano-mercury
compounds may be more volatile (and more
toxic) than elemental mercury. The induced
vacuum in the landfill will shift the
equilibrium among the phases towards the
gas phase. This effect should be small for
the VOCs, which already are present
primarily as vapors, but the vacuum should
5-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
significantly increase the fraction of mercury
that is present in the gas-phase. The
magnitude of this effect will depend on the
species of mercury that are present. The
result is that the mass flow of mercury to the
gas collection system is higher per unit mass
of MSW than the emission rate of mercury
from an equal mass of MSW that is not
under vacuum.
The flow rate and concentrations of
the major constituents of the landfill gas
(i.e., methane and carbon dioxide) were
quite consistent during the program. The
flow rate data has a percent coefficient of
variation (%CV) of about 8% for both
headers, indicating relatively little variation
in flow rate during the program. The %CVs
for the CH4 concentration ranged from 44%
to 60% and averaged 56%. The %CVs for
the CO, concentration ranged from 29% to
40% and averaged 37%. The differences
between the two headers were very slight.
H2S concentrations were approximately 20%
higher in the South Field Header than the
North Field Header. The mercury
concentrations ranged from 0.2 ppm to 1.2
ppm. The CVs for mercury were near 50%
for both headers. Oxygen concentrations
averaged 1 %, which is very near the
instrument detection limit. The variability in
concentration was quite high for oxygen,
which is expected given the many non
detects in the data set and the many
measurements that were near the detection
limit.
The mass flow rates measured at the
headers also showed good precision.
Carbon dioxide mass flow rates averaged
1,180 g/sec in the North Header and 2,110
g/sec in the South Header. The methane
mass flow rates averaged 650 g/sec in the
North Header and 1,290 g/sec in the South
Header. The differences in mass flow
between the two headers is primarily a
function of the gas plant flow rate which
changes depending on plant conditions and
capacity. The measurements made using the
pitot tubes installed in the two headers
showed values approximately twice as high
as the values reported by the Air Products
gas plant. The values measured at the
headers and the values reported by the gas
plant are shown in Table 5-14. The flow
rate measurements were made using
standard pitot tubes installed by Air
Products several years ago. At the start of
the program the pilots were plugged so they
were cleared with high pressure helium prior
to use. This appeared to result in reasonable
and reproducible values. We did not,
however, remove and inspect the pitot tubes
for physical damage. Several assumptions
were used to calculate mass flow through the
headers that were not empirically measured.
The cross-sectional area of the ducting was
assumed to be 18 inches. The amount of
cross-sectional area occupied by the flow of
condensate was assumed to be negligible.
The moisture content of the gas was
assumed to be equal to the adiabatic
saturation content of the gas at the
temperature measured. It is possible that the
flow rates measured during the monitoring
program are biased due to incorrect
assumptions or by a damaged pitot tube. If
this is the case, then the mass flow rates of
the VOCs also will be biased. The Air
Products facility has highly accurate
measurements of the process gas entering
the gas pipeline, but less accurate
measurements of the gas entering the
facility. It is quite possible that our flow rate
measurements are biased high and/or the Air
Products values for the same gas stream are
biased low.
Radian Corporation
5-7
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
The individual extraction wells were
sampled to determine the degree of spatial
variability in compound concentration and
gas composition in the landfill. A total of 25
extraction wells were sampled to make this
determination. The average CO2 and CH4
concentrations were somewhat lower for the
extraction wells than for the landfill gas
collection system. This is primarily an
artifact of the wells that extract gas from
older garbage having very little flow and
more air infiltration. Average H2S
concentrations also were lower for the
extraction wells, however, average mercury
concentrations were similar to those
measured in the north field header.
The average VOC concentrations in
the extraction wells closely mirrored the
values measured in the north and south field
headers, however, there was significantly
more variability in the concentrations. The
%CV for the individual VOCs usually were
in the 70% range, which is a much larger
variability than that seen in the north and
south field headers. Since the mean
concentrations of the extraction wells versus
the inlet to the gas plant were quite similar, a
representative cross-section of wells were
chosen for sampling. The average total non-
methane hydrocarbon (TNMHC) mass flow
rate was 27,300 /^g/sec (0.027 g/sec). This
equates to 2.3 kg/day of TNMHC per well or
575 kg/day for the collection system. The
data from the north and south field headers
indicated that 700 kg/day of TNMHC was
collected. This also indicates that the wells
selected for sampling were relatively
representative of the overall well field.
The average mass flow rates for CH4
and CO2 were 5.2 and 10.1 g/sec,
respectively. This translates to 450 kg/day
for methane and 875 kg/day of CO2 on a per
well basis. Assuming approximately 250
wells (200 vertical wells plus many meters
of lateral wells), this equates to 125,000
kg/day for methane and 219,000 kg/day for
CO2. The data from the landfill gas
collection system indicate that there is
167,000 kg/day of methane and 284,000
kg/day of CO2 entering the gas plant. This
relatively minor difference between the two
estimates is likely due to the assumption that
the lateral wells are equivalent to 50 vertical
wells.
Liquid condensate samples were
collected from the north and south field
headers and from the air/water separator,
which was located immediately downstream
from the header sampling locations. The
air/water separator location was sampled
during times when the header sampling
locations were not accessible. The
condensate samples were collected to more
fully characterize the composition of gas
within the landfill gas collection system. A
total of 16 VOCs were detected in one or
more of the samples. The compounds
detected represent the major compounds
detected in the gas samples plus several
polar compounds that were not detected in
appreciable concentrations in the gas
samples.
Acetone, methylene chloride, 2-
butanone (MEK), and methylisobutylketone
(MIBK) were the four major constituents
found in the condensate samples. These
compounds are very water soluble, so it is
not surprising that they are the major
compounds detected in the samples. In
general, the north header had the lowest
concentrations with the south header having
the highest and the air/water separator
having values intermediate to the other two.
The air/water separator samples represented
5-8
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
the combination of the two headers, so the
intermediate values indicate that this was a
valid sampling location. During the
monitoring period, Air Products was
collecting between 45,000 and 53,000 liters
(12,000 and 14,000 gallons) of condensate
daily. The condensate was incinerated at the
plant.
5.4 Measurement Results for Other
Potential Emission Sources
There are two potential emission
sources at Fresh Kills identified prior to the
field work that were not sampled: perimeter
vent trenches and perimeter pipes. No
perimeter pipes were found during the field
effort and, according to NY DOS staff, no
perimeter pipes exist. Therefore, they can
be dismissed as a source of air emissions.
The vent trenches were not found
during the field study. Much of the landfill
is surrounded by surface water. For some of
the areas where the landfill is bordered by
land, vent trenches are located just beyond
the toe of the landfill mounds. If lateral
migration of landfill gases were to occur, the
vent trenches would allow the gas traveling
just below the ground surface to be released
to the atmosphere, thereby avoiding the
safety hazard of landfill gas entering
basements and other subsurface structures.
Conversations with NY DOS staff indicate
that total hydrocarbon (THC) screening
measurements above the vent trenches have
shown no measurable gas concentrations
(THC detection limits typically are 1 ppmv).
Furthermore, the vent trenches are covered
by heavy vegetation which is evidence
against the vent trenches being emission
sources, since above certain concentration
levels, landfill gases will kill vegetation. It
is common practice to identify emission
points of migrating landfill gas by looking
for areas with dead vegetation. The
available information indicates that the vent
trenches are not a significant source of air
emissions.
5.5 Composition of Landfill Gas
The individual measurement data
were compiled and evaluated to determine
the typical composition of landfill gas at
Fresh Kills. The measured concentrations
from the passive vents were summed and
averaged, as were the measured
concentrations to the gas collection plant.
These data are given in Table 5-15. The
data were not weighted to account for
differences in flow rate among the vents.
No concentration data of undiluted landfill
gas was collected from the surface of the
landfill, so no absolute composition data can
be developed for that source (i.e., the flux
chamber sampling approach involves
dilution of the emitted landfill gas with
sweep air and the amount of dilution varies
with the sweep air flow rate). However, the
relative composition of the landfill gas can
be determined for flux chamber samples by
converting the flux values from a mass basis
to a molar basis. Table 5-16 contains the
relative composition of VOCs present in the
landfill gas exiting the landfill from the
passive vents, from the landfill surface, and
to the gas collection plant. The relative
fraction of each VOC is given as a function
of the total VOC. The landfill gas
composition is remarkably consistent among
all three measurement locations even though
the emission rates for these three sources are
quite different, indicating that the
composition does not vary significantly as a
function of landfill gas flow rate.
Radian Corporation
5-9
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
The best estimate of the composition
of the landfill gas is the set of concentration
data shown in Table 5-15 for the gas
collection system. These represent
integrated samples drawn from over 200
extraction wells that withdraw gas over a
wide area and from a significant depth
interval. In addition, the data represent
averages of multiple days of measurements.
5.6 Overall Emissions From Fresh
Kills Landfill
The total emission rates of landfill
gas to the atmosphere were determined by
summing the emissions from the passive
vents and the emissions from the entire
landfill surface. Of the two data sets, the
emission rates for the passive vents are
considered to be more accurate because
VOC measurements were made at roughly
25% of the vents. The emissions from the
landfill surface, in contrast, are based on
extrapolations from a limited number of
measurements that cover less than 0.0003%
of the entire landfill surface. In addition,
surface emissions of methane were not
detected in many cases and, to be
conservative, the lower detection limit for
methane of 0.282% was used in those cases,
which resulted in a flux of 0.158 ug/m2-min.
The total landfill gas production rates
were determined by summing the total
landfill gas emission rates and the mass flow
rates to the gas collection system (see Table
5-13). The landfill gas emission rate is less
than the landfill gas production rate, because
the landfill gases captured by the collection
system are processed into pipeline quality
natural gas, with the VOCs and condensate
being removed from the gas stream and
incinerated. However, emissions from the
incinerator (carbon monoxide, any
uncombusted VOCs, paniculate matter,
nitrogen oxides, and mercury), other sources
at the landfill gas processing plant (i.e.,
fugitive emissions and engine emissions),
the composting operations, and the small
volume of waste deposited over the southern
half of Section 6/7 are not included in the
estimated landfill gas emission rates. With
the exception of mercury emissions from the
incinerator, these sources are believed to be
insignificant with respect to the total landfill
gas emissions. Mercury emissions are
discussed later in this section. No
measurements were made at the southern
half of Section 6/7, but relatively small
volumes of MSW were deposited in this
area and dense vegetation is present,
indicating no significant emissions of
landfill gas.
The landfill gas emission and
production rates from the landfill for all
compounds measured are given in Table 5-
17. TNMHC emissions from the landfill are
33.4 g/sec (1,053 Mg/yr). Several
compounds are being emitted to the
atmosphere at a rate greater than 0.288 g/sec
(10 tons/year). Hydrogen sulfide emissions
are estimated to be 0.453 g/sec (14.3 Mg/yr).
As previously noted, H2S has a very low
odor threshold and this level of emissions
certainly contributes to the odors at the
landfill. Methane is being emitted at a rate
of 21,800 g/sec (0.687 Tg/yr). However,
methane was not detected in 53 of the 74
flux chamber samples. For these samples,
the methane detection limit of 0.282% was
used to calculate methane emissions, which
roughly corresponds to an emission flux of
0.158,ug/m2-min. These non-detect
measurements account for 42.6% of the
methane emissions (0.293 Tg/yr).
5-10
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
The mass flow rate of mercury to the
gas collection system was found to be 2.45
kg/day (5.4 Ib/day). The mercury
concentration in the landfill gas collection
system averaged 0.688 ppm, while the
mercury concentration in the passive vents
averaged 0.373 ppm. It appears that the gas
extraction system is increasing mercury
volatilization relative to areas not under the
influence of the gas extraction system. It is
likely that the increase in mercury emissions
is due to the transport distance. The gas
entering the extraction wells travels a
relatively short distance through MSW
compared with gas that is emitted from the
landfill surface. This reduces the amount of
mercury that is adsorbed onto the MSW and
thus removed from the gas phase.
The mercury data are based on field
measurements using a portable analyzer
rather than the EPA reference method. Also,
a limited number of mercury measurements
• were made. Therefore, the data set for
mercury should not be considered to be
definitive.
The impending New Source
Performance Standards for MSW Landfills
are expected to require landfills emitting
more that 50 Mg/yr of TNMHC to install gas
collection systems to control NMOC
emissions. Based on the measurements
made at Fresh Kills, the fate of mercury in
such gas collection systems is a topic that
merits investigation. Of course, mercury
emissions from landfills in the future should
decrease as the mass of mercury being
landfilled is reduced due to recycling efforts
(i.e., fluorescent lamps and battery
recycling) and source reduction.
In addition to elemental mercury
emissions it is likely that the anaerobic
environment within the landfill is converting
some of the elemental mercury into organo-
mercury compounds such as methyl mercury
and dimethyl mercury. Many of these forms
of mercury are more toxic than elemental
mercury. The emissions of speciated
mercury from the landfill also should be
investigated.
No attempt was made to determine
the fate of mercury entering the gas
processing plant. The possible fate
mechanisms of the mercury entering the gas
plant include: 1) the mercury is removed
with the VOCs and condensate, sent to the
incinerator, and ultimately emitted in the
exhaust gas from the incinerator; 2) the
mercury is removed by the iron impregnated
wood chips used in the H2S scrubber, is
trucked off with the used wood chips, and
ultimately disposed of in a landfill; and 3)
the mercury is not removed from the
processed gas and enters the natural gas
pipeline.
The efficiency of the gas collection
system was evaluated from the measured
mass flow rates. The mass flow rate of
methane to the gas collection plant is 2,090
g/sec. The measured emission flux from the
surface of Section 1/9 in areas where active
gas collection is taking place averaged 0.143
g/m2-min over a surface area of 192,900 m2.
This flux equals an emission rate from the
landfill surface of 460 g/sec of methane.
Therefore, 82% of the landfill gas is being
captured by the gas collection system.
5.7 Comparison of Data With Other
Landfill Studies
The generation of methane and
carbon dioxide from MSW has been
extensively studied and a very large body of
Radian Corporation
5-11
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
literature exists regarding the factors that
influence gas production and the amount of
gas that is produced per category of waste
material and per mass of waste. Surprisingly
few studies, however, have been identified
which examined air emissions from MSW
landfills. The difficulty in measuring air
emissions from large, heterogeneous area
sources has limited the work done to date.
No studies were found that are as detailed
and comprehensive as the work described in
this report.
The U.S. EPA has published one
compilation of composition data for landfill
gas (EPA, 1990) and funded another (Kuo,
1990). The two compilations may have
significant overlap and only the EPA
publication has undergone extensive peer
review, so that data set was selected for
comparison with the Fresh Kills data. This
comparison is given in Table 5-18. The
comparison shows that the Fresh Kills
concentrations are within the range of
published values and at the low end of the
range. The average TNMHC value
measured at the gas collection plant was 438
ppm versus a proposed default regulatory
value for landfills of 4,000 ppm.
Two studies were identified where
emission fluxes were measured from the
surface of MSW landfills. A field study was
conducted in 1993 at a 300 acre landfill in
the southwestern U.S. that accepts 1,100
metric tons/day (1,200 tons/day) of
residential refuse (Schmidt, et al., 1994).
Measurements were made using an emission
isolation flux chamber. TNMHC fluxes
were 640 to 5,400 |jg/m2-min, methane
fluxes were 33 to 120 ug/m2-min, and fluxes
of about 20 individual VOCs ranged from
ND to 350 ng/m2-min. The reported values
are much lower than those measured at
Fresh Kills. A second field study was
performed at two MSW landfills in Florida
(Reinhart, et al., 1993). Methane fluxes up
to 230 ug/m2-min were measured. Again,
this is far less than the values measured at
Fresh Kills.
While the concentrations of
pollutants in the landfill gas from Fresh
Kills are lower than the average for MSW
landfills, the emission fluxes are much
higher, which implies that the gas generation
rate for Fresh Kills is much higher than
average. The shallow groundwater table and
high rainfall at Fresh Kills are thought to
provide adequate moisture to maintain
optimal conditions for biodegradation,
which in turn leads to high levels of gas
production.
No field measurements are known of
the efficiency of gas collection systems.
Estimates of the collection efficiency range
from 50 to 90% (Thomeloe and Peer, 1991),
though the bases of these estimates is not
known. The 82% value measured at Fresh
Kills falls within the estimated range.
The total methane emissions from all
MSW landfills in the U.S. has been
estimated at about 13 Tg/year (15 million
tons/year) based on the volume of waste
disposed and published emission factors
(Doom, et al., 1994). The global methane
emissions from all MSW landfills have been
estimated at 39 Tg/year (Doom and Barlaz,
1995). No data on VOC emissions was
found. The methane emissions from Fresh
Kills of 21,800 g/sec are equivalent to 0.687
Tg/year, or 5.7% of the estimated U.S. total
and 1.8% of the estimated global total.
5-12
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
5.8 Estimation of Future Emissions
The measurements were performed
over a 3-week period in July of 1995 at a
time when large portions of the landfill were
undergoing installation of a PVC cover
passive vents, and gas collection system.
Any extrapolation of the measurement data
to future emissions must take into account
these changes in landfill cover and emission
points, or a bias might be introduced. The
following paragraphs discuss estimation of
annual emissions and estimation of future
emissions based on the data set presented in
this report.
5.8.1 Annual Emissions
The emission rate data in Table 5-17
are given in units of grams per second.
These emission rates can be scaled up to
provide emission estimates on an annual
basis. A value of 1 g/sec corresponds to
3.15xl07 g/year or 31.5 Mg/year (190
Ibs/day and 69,500 Ib/year). The total
TNMHC emission rate of 33.4 g/sec
corresponds to 1,053 Mg/year. The total
TNMHC production rate of 41.4 g/sec
corresponds to 1,306 Mg/year.
No measurements of long-term
temporal variability were performed in this
study, so no seasonal or annual correction
factors were developed. The key
environmental variables that might influence
emissions over the course of a year are the
temperature and moisture content within the
landfill. However, these parameters are not
thought to cause seasonal fluctuations in
emissions at Fresh Kills, as explained below.
Biodegradation processes are
exothermic and the heat that is generated
serves to maintain biological activity during
the colder months of the year. In addition,
the mass of MSW and soil cover act to
insulate the mound. Therefore, the landfill
gas generation rate and air emissions are not
expected to vary significantly between the
summer and winter months due to ambient
temperature effects.
The gas production rate in MSW
landfills often is limited by the amount of
moisture present within the landfill.
Increases in soil moisture lead to increases
in gas production. At the Fresh Kills
landfill, however, it is believed that there is
enough rainfall and/or uptake of ground
water to maintain optimal conditions for
microbial degradation of the MSW. This
situation may change when installation of
the PVC cover is complete. The cover will
reduce the amount of moisture percolating
down through the MSW and thereby lead to
diminished gas production rates.
5.8.2 Future Emissions
There are many possible methods for
estimating air emissions, including
theoretical and empirical models. For the
sake of simplicity, this discussion is limited
to the use of emission factors based on the
field measurement data. The EPA/Radian
study was a relatively expensive undertaking
and it is doubtful if similar measurement
programs will be performed in the future at
Fresh Kills. Therefore, it is useful if the
existing data set can be used to estimate
future emissions. Such estimates probably
will require that a limited amount of
additional measurement data be collected to
update and augment the existing data set.
Emission factors worth considering include:
1. Vent emissions on a per vent basis;
Radian Corporation
5-13
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
2. Surface flux emissions on a surface
area basis;
3. Surface flux emissions on a MSW
mass basis;
4. Gas collection system data on a
surface area basis; and
5. Gas collection system data on a
MSW mass basis.
The total emission rates shown in
Table 5-17 can be evaluated to determine the
relative contribution of vents and landfill
surface to the total air emissions. For
TNMHC, the vent emissions were 11.6% of
the total and the landfill surface emissions
were 88.4% of the total. The gas collection
system, for comparison, accounted for an
estimated 19.4% of the total landfill gas
production of TNMHC for the entire
landfill. These data suggest that emissions
from the vents are relatively insignificant
compared with emissions from the landfill
surface. The relative contribution of vent
emissions and surface emissions to the total
should change as the PVC cover is put in
place and more passive vents are installed.
Even so, it will not be cost-effective nor
accurate to use the existing vent data or to
make additional vent measurements to
estimate future emissions.
In this study, the surface flux
measurements for a given section were
extrapolated based on surface area to
develop emission estimates for the surface
of the entire landfill. This was done because
surface area data were readily available and
the surface area to volume ratio for the tops
of the sections, where 90% of the surface
emissions occur, was believed to be
relatively constant across a given section.
Therefore, the surface area data were used as
a surrogate for MSW volume. For
estimating future emissions, however, the
use of surface areas and the existing
emission factors could lead to an
underestimation of emissions. For example,
if the mounds were raised and the mass of
MSW in the landfill were doubled without
changing the surface area, any emission
estimates based on surface area likely would
be biased low. If the tops of the mounds
were graded to significantly increase the
surface area, any emission estimates based
on surface area likely would be biased high.
Alternatively, emission factors based
on the flux measurements can be multiplied
by the total mass of MSW in the landfill to
yield total landfill emissions. These
emission factors were developed by
assuming that all of the landfill gas produced
by the column of waste under the flux
chamber was captured by the flux chamber
(i.e., there was no lateral migration of
landfill gas). A subset of the flux chamber
measurement data was used to generate
these emission factors by using data only
from areas where all air emissions are from
the soil-covered landfill surface.
Measurements made over areas with PVC
cover or in areas with passive vents were not
used. These emission factors, in terms of
g/sec per kg of MSW, are given in Table 5-
19. Such emission factors could be used
with landfill records of the mass or volume
of MSW accepted to develop emission
estimates.
The landfill gas collection system
provides another estimation approach. The
mass of pollutants drawn to the gas plant can
be scaled up to estimate the total production
of gas for the entire landfill. For the reasons
given above, such estimates are more valid
if based on the mass or volume of MSW
than if based on the surface area of the
landfill.
5-14
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
The use of data from landfill gas
collection system is, by far, the best
approach for estimating future emissions.
As demonstrated in Tables 5-15 and 5-16,
the composition of the landfill gas is
remarkably consistent, whether the gas is
collected exiting a passive vent, exiting the
landfill surface, or entering the gas plant.
The headers to the gas plant offer an
integrated sample that is representative of a
large volume of the landfill. Given the little
short-term temporal variability observed in
the composition of the gas going to the
plant, it might be possible to track the mass
flow using only flow rate measurements
without the need for regular (and costly)
analysis of gas samples. Any such estimates
would have to be corrected over time for the
changes in the fraction of the total landfill
under the influence of the gas collection
system.
Emission estimates were developed
using two different approaches: emission
factors based on flux chamber measurements
and emission rates based on gas plant data.
These emission estimates are given in Table
5-20 along with the emission total based on
the field measurements. The comparison of
the results shows that emission factors based
on gas plant data yield results that are
similar to the field measurements. The
emission factors based on flux chamber
measurements yield total emission estimates
that are two to three orders of magnitude
greater than the field measurements. This
high bias may be due to the small number of
measurements used to develop these
emission factors and the representativeness
of these measurements. The data from the
gas plant provides the best estimation tool
for predicting future emissions.
Radian Corporation
5-15
-------
Components of Variability for Vents
Toluene
53.8%
Total Variability
5.8%
Measurement Variability
31
Eri
I
on
H
CL
o
i
i
1
11 Section • Spatial H Measurement
I Temporal • Sampling 13 Analysis
Figure 5-1. Variability in Emissions from Passive Vents
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
1E6
FC-6/7-3TP
FC-6/7-9S FC-6/7-16T
Flux Chamber Sample ID
FC-6/7-28S
Day 1 H Day 2 [3 Day 3 PI Day 4
_^^___«^—_^——^^^^—^-^~l
Figure 5-2. Temporal Variability in TNMHC Emission Flux from Section 6/7
Radian Corporation
5-17
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Siud\
N
100 200
Meters
FC-6/7-1
FC-6/7
'-42F
SECTION 6/7
Flux Emissions
JVQ0291 08/15/SS
^••d 11T3^'
UC58
Figure 5-3. Spatial Variability of Surface TNMHC Flux Emissions
for Landfill Section 6/7
Radian Corporation
5-4H
-------
Toluene
Temporal Variation at North Field Header
7/10
Ethylbenzene
Temporal Variation at North Field Header
7/3
7/10
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Temporal Variation at North Field Header
I
7/10
n-Nonane
Temporal Variation at North Field Header
7/10
Figure 5-4. Variability in VOC Concentration Extracted Gas
-------
Gas Collection System Flow Rates Verses Time
s.
i
g
July3 JulyS July 6 July? July 8 July 10 July 11 July 12 July 13
Date
North Field Header
South Field Header
^'
Total Flow
Figure 5-5. Temporal Variability in Gas Collection System Flow Rates
-------
Table 5-1
Emission Rates from Passive Vents at Section 1/9
Compound
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen sulfide
Mercury
Benzene
Benzyl chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
Total
Emission
Rate"
(Hg/sec)
32.5 g/sec
62.8 g/sec
8.44 g/sec
3360
315
230
926
513
6,540
Factor'
No. Vents
with Flow
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. fag/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
7
2.70
18.9
5.24
36.7
0.676
4.73
282
1,970
a
147
_1
107
a
432
__•
239
a
3,050
Side
8
1.69
13.5
3.26
26.1
0.463
3.70
173
1,380
21.0
168
15.3
122
61.8
494
34.2
274
436
3,490
Toe
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
14
2.16
30.2
4.18
58.6
0.603
8.44
225
3,150
7.40
104
15.0
209
64.1
897
32.4
453
441
6,180
Clay
1
2.28
2.28
4.19
4.19
0
0
207
207
48.4
48.4
17.1
17.1
50.1
50.1
43.4
43.4
408
408
Liner
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Table 5-1
(Continued)
Compound
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
n-Nonane
Styrene
Toluene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Total
Emission
Rate*
(ug/sec)
1.55
0
4.23
1680
0
1,640
327
581
0
Factor'
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (jig/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (pg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (pg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R, (jig/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. ((Jg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
a
0.723
a
0
__a
1.97
__a
783
B
0
__a
767
__»
153
a
271
a
0
Side
0.103
0.827
0
0
0.282
2.25
112
895
0
0
110
877
21.8
174
38.7
310
0
0
Toe
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
0.124
1.74
0
0
0.338
4.73
112
1,570
0
0
116
1,620
21.5
300
42.0
588
0
0
Clay
0
0
0
0
0
0
110
110
0
0
78.8
78.8
23.4
23.4
22.2
22.23
0
0
Liner
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Table 5-1
(Continued)
Compound
Trichloroethene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzcne
n-Undecane
Vinyl chloride
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
Total
Emission
Rate"
(ug/sec)
0
2160
1470
29.1
814
2000
85100
Factor'
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E,F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
a
0
__a
1,010
a
685
a
13.6
--•
380
a
934
__a
39,700
Side
0
0
144
1,150
97.8
783
1.94
15.5
54.3
434
133
1,070
5,670
45,400
Toe
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
0
0
137
1,920
101
1,420
1.49
20.9
55.3
774
136
1,910
5,570
77,900
Clay
0
0
180
180
80.1
80.1
4.20
4.20
49.3
49.3
119
119
6,220
6,220
Liner
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' - No samples were collected from vents on top of Section 1/9, so the emission factor from the side vents was used.
h - Total emission rate = emissions from top + side + toe = emissions from soil + clay + liner areas
c - No. vents with flow is the activity factor and equals the total number of vents that had measureable flow when tested.
Avg E.F. = average emission factor in units of g/sec per vent or Mg/sec per vent
B.R. is emission rate = activity factor x emission factor
-------
Table 5-2
Emission Rates from Passive Vents at Section 2/8
Compound
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen sulfide
Mercury
Benzene
Benzyl chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Total Emission
Rate*
(fig/sec)
482 g/sec
952 g/sec
22.0 g/sec
69700
2840
2080
8770
12600
Factor'
No. Vents
with Flow
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (|ag/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. ((Jg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
29
8.65
251
17.0
493
0.0683
1.98
1,260
36,600
31.2
904
37.3
1,080
139
4,030
230
6,670
Side
46
4.78
220
9.45
435
0.412
19.0
688
31,700
38.7
1,780
19.3
888
96.4
4,430
120
5,520
Toe
4
2.79
11.1
6.19
24.8
0.254
1.02
367
1,470
__»
155
27.7
111
77.5
310
107
427
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
43
5.27
226
10.4
447
0.487
21.0
778
33,400
36.6
1,570
26.4
1,130
102
4,390
158
6,810
Clay
9
4.33
39.0
9.13
82.2
0.104
0.940
374
3,370
64.3
579
14.6
131
57.6
518
114
1,030
Liner
27
8.02
217
15.7
423
0.00295
0.0795
1,220
32,900
nn
748
30.1
813
151
4,080
181
4,900
-------
Table 5-2
(Continued)
Compound
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichlorocthylcnc
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroelhylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
n-Nonane
Styrene
Toluene
Total Emission
Rateb
(ug/sec)
76800
6280
138
7780
35500
9810
36500
16200
123000
Factor*
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (jig/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
1,290
37,300
143
4,160
2.83
82.2
132
3,820
541
15,700
256
7,420
646
18,700
298
8,650
2,250
65,200
Side
850
39,100
45.8
2,110
1.20
55.2
86.0
3,960
391
18,000
52.0
2,390
363
16,700
156
7,190
1,260
57,800
Toe
103
410
2.95
11.8
0
0
0
0
462
1,850
0
0
273
1,090
83.1
332
57.1
228
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
910
39,100
99.7
4,290
1.78
76.6
90.1
3,870
383
16,500
172
7,400
430
18,500
198
8,530
1,480
63,700
Clay
512
4,610
4.71
42.4
1.38
12 .4
153
1,380
422
3,800
5.76
51.8
342
3,080
125
1,120
1,270
11,500
Liner
1,330
35,900
65.0
1,760
1.90
51.4
106
2,860
606
16,400
66.3
1,790
588
15,900
255
6,870
1,940
52,300
-------
Table 5-2
(Continued)
Compound
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
1 ,2,4-Trimelhylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
n-Undecane
Vinyl chloride
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
Total Emission
Rate*
(ug/sec)
1380
4500
25800
16300
7280
20600
55600
1970000
Factor'
Avg. B.F.
E.R. (ug/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ug/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
27.3
793
99.1
2,870
399
11,600
245
7,100
129
3,740
307
8,910
857
24,900
34,800
1,010,000
Side
12.7
585
35.4
1,630
277
12,800
189
8,700
77.0
3,540
239
11,000
624
28,700
19,900
918,000
Toe
0
0
0
0
362
1,450
128
513
0
0
165
662
488
1,950
11,500
46,100
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
19.3
828
66.5
2,860
296
12,700
192
8,270
93.8
4,040
224
9,650
590
25,400
25,200
1,080,000
Clay
2.84
25.5
30.5
274
150
1,350
69.7
627
102
915
207
1,860
744
6,700
12,500
113,000
Liner
19.6
528
49.1
1,330
451
12,200
289
7,810
92.0
2,480
366
9,870
956
25,800
29,700
802,000
' - No Hg samples were collected from vents on toe of Section 2/8, so the emission factor from the side vents was used.
b - Total emission rate = emissions from top + side + toe = emissions from soil + clay + liner areas
c - No. vents with flow is the activity factor and equals the total number of vents that had measureable flow when tested.
Avg E.F. = average emission factor in units of g/sec per vent or ug/sec per vent
-------
Table 5-3
Emission Rates from Passive Vents at Section 3/4
Compound
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen sulfide
Mercury
Benzene
Benzyl chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Total Emission
Rate1
(ug/sec)
427 g/sec
803 g/sec
22.4 g/sec
79700
2290
1960
13900
12300
Factor"
No. Vents
with Flow
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (jig/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (n g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. ((Jg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (jig/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
17
8.41
143
15.5
263.5
0.278
4.73
1,470
25,000
23.0
391
36.9
627
313
5,330
252
4,280
Side
50
5.05
253
9.64
482
0.311
15.6
957
47,900
37.9
1,895
24.4
1,220
155
7,770
148
7,390
Toe
11
2.87
31.6
5.25
57.7
0.189
2.08
620
6,820
0
0
10.6
117
74.6
820
55.6
612
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
44
5.04
222
9.60
423
0.419
18.4
898
39,500
26.6
1,170
27.5
1.210
223
9,820
183
8,030
Clay
10
5.24
52.4
9.90
99.0
0.0191
0.191
949
9,490
46.1
461
31.8
318
141
1,410
212
2,120
Liner
24
6.38
153
11.7
282
0.156
3.75
1,280
30,700
34.0
816
27.0
648
193
4,640
157
3,770
-------
Table 5-3
(Continued)
Compound
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
c- 1,2-Dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
n-Nonane
Styrene
Toluene
Total Emission
Rate"
(ug/sec)
105000
1010
50.6
1860
41900
157
43700
11800
77200
Factor*
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (|jg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ng/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (|ag/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F,
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
2,160
36,800
32.4
551
1.52
25.8
43.4
738
829
14,100
5.25
89.3
884
15,000
255
4,330
1,730
29,400
Side
1,340
67,200
9.06
453
0.496
24.8
22.2
1,110
554
27,700
1.36
67.8
567
28,300
136
6,780
954
47,700
Toe
60.2
662
0.623
6.86
0
0
1.52
16.7
11.1
122
0
0
34.7
382
64.2
706
7.89
86.8
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
1,560
68,700
20.8
914
0.591
26.0
26.6
1,170
627
27,600
3.58
158
656
28,900
175
7,710
1,260
55,400
Clay
1,260
12,600
4.44
44.4
0.383
3.83
48.0
480
635
6,350
0.377
3.77
807
8,070
210
2,100
1,530
15,300
Liner
1,550
37,300
12.9
309
1.52
36.6
25.0
601
550
13,200
1.49
35.6
534
12,800
158
3,780
802
19,300
-------
Table 5-3
(Continued)
Compound
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Bulylbenzene
n-Undecane
Vinyl chloride
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
Total Emission
Rate'
(ug/sec)
446
806
35100
21800
5570
21200
57500
1830000
Factor6
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (ug/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg.'E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (Mg/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Top
16.2
275
25.1
426
704
12,000
481
8,180
92.2
1,570
434
7,370
1,120
19,000
40,100
681,000
Side
3.33
166
7.36
368
443
22,100
267
13,300
79.9
4,000
274
13,700
766
38,300
21,900
1,090,000
Toe
0.373
4.11
1.13
12.4
90.9
1,000
23
255
0.917
10.1
10.7
118
10.6
116
4,910
54,000
Emissions by Cover Material
Soil
9.17
403
14.0
617
512
22,500
333
14,700
70.7
3,110
317
14,000
849
37,300
27,900
1,230,000
Clay
0.373
3.73
5.72
57.2
448
4,480
170
1,700
257
2,570
410
4,100
1,160
11,600
26,100
261,000
Liner
7.50
180
14.6
351
518
12,400
356
8,540
31.4
754
258
6,180
673
16,200
25,800
618,000
' - Total emission rate = emissions from top + side + toe = emissions from soil + clay + liner areas
b - No. vents with flow is the activity factor and equals the total number of vents that had measureable flow when tested.
Avg E.F. = average emission factor in units of g/sec per vent or Mg/sec per vent
E.R. is emission rate = activity factor x emission factor
-------
Table 5-4
Summary of Measured Emission Rates for Passive Vents
Compound
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen sulfide
Mercury
Benzene
Benzyl chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
n-Nonane
Styrene
Toluene
1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenrene
& t-Butylbenzene
n-Undecane
Vinyl chloride
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
Units
g/sec
g/sec
g/sec
^g/sec
jig/sec
Hg/sec
^g/sec
Hg/sec
Hg/sec
jig/sec
^ig/sec
Hg/sec
jag/sec
jig/sec
jig/sec
jag/sec
Hg/sec
|i g/sec
Hg/sec
(a g/sec
Mg/sec
Hg/sec
H g/sec
p g/sec
|i g/sec
Section 1/9
Emission
Rate
32.5
62.8
8.44
3,360
315
230
926
513
6,540
1.55
0
4.23
1,680
0
1,640
327
581
0
0
2,160
1,470
29.1
814
2,000
85,100
Section 2/8
Emission
Rate
482
952
22.0
69,700
2,840
2,080
8,770
12,600
76,800
6,280
138
7,780
35,500
9,810
36,500
16,200
123,000
1,380
4,500
25,800
16,300
7,280
20,600
55,600
1,970,000
Section 3/4
Emission
Rate
427
803
22.4
79,700
2,290
1,960
13,900
12,300
105,000
1,010
50.6
1,860
41,900
157
43,700
11,800
77,200
446
806
35,100
21,800
5,570
21,200
57,500
1,830,000
Section 677
Emission:
Rate
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Entire
Landfill
Emission
Rate
942
1,820
52.8
153,000
5,450
4,270
23,600
25,400
188,000
7,290
188
9,640
79,100
9,970
81,900
28,300
201,000
1,820
5,310
63,100
39,500
12,900
42,600
••^^^^•MMOM^HV
115,000
3,890,000
5-30
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-5
Variability in Measurement Data for Passive Vents
Analyte
Flow Rale
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Slyrene
Toluene
Trichloroethane
Sources of Variability Based on Concentration Measurements (%CV)
Total
55.8
26.2
25.0
214.5
81.8
130.2
143.7
173.6
105.2
59.2
47.1
70.2
41.9
58.0
301.2
55.6
71.4
153.2
Section
9.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.6
45.9
65.3
89.4
42.9
27.1
11.6
38.5
0.0
10.5
116.6
12.1
30.2
99.0
Spatial
35.1
25.9
24.7
214.2
68.4
44.5
126.5
148.0
73.6
48.5
43.6
32.6
39.6
52.4
277.0
51.0
60.8
114.3
Temporal
42.3
3.6
3.7
11.4
38.2
99.9
14.9
15.6
55.6
18.2
10.7
39.7
13.0
22.3
18.1
16.7
21.9
22.3
Sampling
—
—
—
—
6.5
53.8
10.8
2.7
17.7
7.6
0.0
0.0
3.6
0.0
0.0
5.8
2.4
6.7
Analytical
—
—
—
—
—
...
6.8
3.0
20.8
5.8
8.3
28.5
2.5
3.7
8.2
5.2
1.5
8.3
Measurement1
42.3
3.6
3.7
11.4
38.7
113.5
19.6
16.1
62.0
20.5
13.5
48.8
13.7
22.6
19.9
18.4
22.0
24.7
-------
Table 5-5
(Continued)
Analyte
Vinyl Chloride
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
o-Xylene
p- & m-Xylene
TNMHC
Sources of Variability Based on Concentration Measurements (%CV)
Total
94.5
168.8
60.2
52.7
73.5
64.0
66.5
42.7
Section
0.0
95.1
23.2
13.1
27.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Spatial
89.3
134.6
48.1
48.5
57.8
60.0
62.3
41.9
Temporal
26.6
28.4
6.7
15.5
0.0
18.7
22.6
6.8
Sampling
2.2
22.2
26.8
3.5
20.1
10.7
4.7
3.6
Analytical
15.8
4.4
2.9
1.5
30.2
5.6
1.6
2.9
Measurement1
31.0
36.3
27.8
16.0
36.3
22.3
23.1
8.3
1 Measurement variability combines temporal, sampling, and analytical variabilities.
Notes: 1. A %CV of 0.0 implies negligible variabiility relative to other sources of variability.
2. A value of "—" is given for those on-site analyses where only averages of multiple measurements have been reported.
3. The variabilities were developed from the combined data set for Sections 2/8 and 3/4.
4. The data for methane, carbon dioxide, and oxygen are based on the on-site measurements.
-------
Table 5-6
Possible Feature/Liner/Gas Extraction Well Combinations for Each Section
Section 3/4
Toe/Clay
Toe/Soil
Toe/PVC
Side/Clay
Side/Soil
Side/PVC
Top/Soil
Top/PVC
Cracks
Seeps
Section 2/8
Toe/Clay
Toe/Soil
Toe/PVC
Side/Clay
Side/Soil
Side/PVC
Top/Soil
Top/PVC
Section 1/9
Toe/Soil/No
Toe/Clay/No
Side/Soil/No
Side/Clay/No
Top/Soil/No
Top/Soil/Yes
Cracks
Seeps
Active Face
Section 6/7
Toe
Side
Top
Active Face
Cracks
Seeps
Radian Corporation
5-33
-------
Table 5-7
Surface Emissions of Select Compounds from Section 1/9
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
1,1,1-Trichlorocthane
1,1-Dichlorocthane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzcne
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
6340
11400
0.0304
0.0041
0.172
0.0021
0.0745
0.0095
0.0739
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination and Presence of Landfill Gas Extraction System
Toe/Clay/No
9.120
<1.48e-01
2.25e+02
6.36e-01
9.67e+02
3.66e+00
5.57e-03
1.97e-02
2.99e-05
0
0
0
0
1.80e+01
2.74e-02
1.70e+00
2.58e-03
1.71e+01
2.59e-02
Toe/Soil/No
20.900
3.04e-01
1.06e+03
3.37e-01
1.18c+03
1.40e+00
4.89e-03
1.86e-01
6.46e-04
1.52e+01
5.28e-02
1.60e-01
5.56e-04
4.88e-01
,1.70e-03
2.89e-01
l.OOe-03
1.27e+00
4.43e-03
Side/Clay/No
10.500
<1.48e-01
2.59e+02
6.36e-01
l.lle+03
3.66e+00
6.41e-03
1.97e-02
3.44e-05
0
0
0
0
1.80e+01
3.16e-02
1.70e+00
2.97e-03
1.71e+01
2.98e-02
Side/Soil/No
45.740
3.04e-01
2.32e+03
3.37e-01
2.57e+03
1.40e+00
1.07e-02
1.86e-01
1.41e-03
1.52e+01
1.166-01
1.60e-01
1. 22c-03
4.88e-01
3.72e-03
2.89e-01
2.20e-03
1.27e+00
9.70e-03
Top/Soil/No
68.950
<1.72e-01
1.98e+03
2.12e-01
2.43e+03
1.30e-01
1.49e-03
1. 50e-02
1.72e-04
0
0
2.60e-02
2.99e-04
6.29e-01
7.23e-03
3.006-02
3.45e-04
1.62e-01
1.86e-03
Top/Soil/Yes
19.290
<1.43e-01
4.606+02
9.306-01
2.99e+03
3.37e-01
1. 08e-03
1.17e-01
3.75e-04
8.68e-01
2.79e-03
1.30e-02
4.18e-05
7.88e-01
2.53c-03
1.03e-01
3.32e-04
6.16e-01
1.98e-03
Cracks
0.176
4.666-01
1.36e+01
6.29e-01
1.84e+01
1.95e+00
5.71e-05
2.87e-01
8.40e-06
3.03e+01
8.87e-04
2.98e-01
8.72e-06
9.76e-01
2.86e-05
5.28e-01
1.55e-05
2.48e+00
7.25e-05
Seeps
0.006
<1. 48e-01
1.37e-01
3.62e-02
3.36e-02
4.26e+00
3.96e-06
6.75e-02
6.27e-08
8.00e-03
7.43e-09
1.05e-02
9.75e-09
7.60e-02
7.06e-08
6.45e-02
5.99e-08
8.40e-02
7.80e-08
Active face
1.070
<1. 43e-01
2.55e+01
7.30e-0i
1.30e+02
9.52e-01
1.70e-04
7.90e+00
1.4Ie-03
4.49e-01
S.Ole-05
0
0
1.39e+00
2.48e-04
8.00e-03
1.43e-06
2.82e-01
5.02e-05
E
i'
n
I
B.
S
-------
Table 5-7
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
Isobutane
Isopentane
Melhylene Chloride
Slyrene
Telrachloroethylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroelhylene
n-Butane
0.311
0.379
0.189
0.0381
0.0643
0.128
0.0169
0.0178
0.0615
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/ST)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination and Presence of Landfill Gas Extraction System
Toe/Clay/No
9.120
1.02e+OI
1.54c-02
5.74e-01
8.72e-04
4.77e-02
7.25e-05
5.19e+00
7.88e-03
3.17e-02
4.81e-05
9.30e-01
1.41e-03
0
0
0
0
7.35e+00
1.12e-02
Toe/Soil/No
20.900
2.16e+01
7.52e-02
2.97e+01
1.03e-01
1.686+01
5.86e-02
1.55e+00
5.41e-03
5.60e+00
1.95e-02
l.Ole+01
3.53e-02
1.48e+00
5.15e-03
1.49e+00
5.18e-03
9.81e-01
3.42e-03
Side/Clay/No
10.500
1.02e+01
1.78e-02
5.74e-01
l.OOe-03
4.77e-02
8.34e-05
5.19e+00
9.08e-03
3.17e-02
5.54e-05
9.30e-OI
1.63e-03
0
0
0
0
7.35e+00
1.29e-02
Slde/Soll/No
45.740
2.16e+01
1.65e-01
2.97e+01
2.26e-01
1.68e+01
1.28e-01
1.55e+00
1.18e-02
5.60e+00
4.27e-02
l.Ole+01
7.72e-02
1.48e+00
1.13e-02
1.49e+00
1.13e-02
9.81e-01
7.48e-03
Top/Soil/No
68.950
1.10e-01
1.26e-03
3.02e-01
3.47e-03
1.60e-02
1.84e-04
7.90e-02
9.08e-04
4.40e-02
5.06e-04
1.74e-01
2.00e-03
0
0
0
0
1.10e-01
1.26e-03
Top/Soil/Yes
19.290
1.03e+01
3.32e-02
8.92e+00
2.87e-02
7.00e-02
2.25e-04
8.65e-OJ
2.78e-03
3.44e-01
l.lle-03
2.93e+00
9.42e-03
1.33e-01
4.27e-04
3.59e-01
1.15e-03
6.53e+00
2.10e-02
Cracks
0.176
4.32e+01
1.26e-03
5.94e+01
1.74e-03
3.366+01
9.84e-04
3.016+00
8.79e-05
l.lle+01
3.25e-04
1.96e+01
5.73e-04
2.96e+00
8.65e-05
2.95e+00
8.62e-05
1.96e+00
5.74e-05
Seeps
0.006
0
0
2.45e-02
2.28e-08
1.30e-02
1.21e-08
4.95e-02
4.60e-08
6.60e-02
6.13e-08
3.98e-01
3.70e-07
0
0
1.50e-02
1.39e-08
2.25e-02
2.09e-08
Active face
1.070
1. 15e+01
2.04e-03
7.14e+01
1.27e-02
5.05e+00
9.00e-04
4.57e-01
8.16e-05
2.74e-01
4.89e-05
1.24e+00
2.21e-04
1.90e-02
3.39e-06
0
0
2.41e+01
4.29e-03
-------
L/l
i
IjJ
Ox
Table 5-7
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate
(E/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
0.125
0.0816
0.0341
0.0789
5.94
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
. -•' - ' (
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination and Presence of Landfill Gas Extraction System
Toe/Clay/No
9.120
1.64e+01
2.50e-02
1.68e+01
2.55e-02
4.67e+00
7.106-03
1.43e+01
2.18e-02
9.28e+02
1.41e+00
Toe/Soil/No
20.900
3.31e+00
1.15e-02
2.09e+00
7.27e-03
1.24e+00
4.32e-03
2.45e+00
8.52e-03
2.00e+02
6.98e-01
Side/Clay/No
10.500
1.64e+01
2.88e-02
1.68e+01
2.94e-02
4.67e+00
8.17e-03
1.43e+01
2.51e-02
9.28e+02
1.62e+00
Side/Soil/No
45.740
3.31e+00
2.52e-02
2.09e+00
1.59e-02
1.24e+00
9.45e-03
2.45e+00
1.87e-02
2.00e+00
1.53e+00
Top/Soil/No
68.950
2.15e+00
2.47e-02
4.80e-02
5.52e-04
2.84e-01
3.26e-03
2.04e-01
2.34e-03
2.40e+01
2.76e-01
Top/Soli/Yes
19.290
2.84e+00
9.12e-03
8.78e-01
2.82e-03
5.196-01
1.67e-03
7.43e-01
2.39e-03
1. 08e+02
3.47e-01
Cracks
0.176
6.48e+00
1.90e-04
4.186+00
1.22e-04
2.41e+00
7.06e-05
4.76e+00
1.39e-04
3.92e+02
1.15e-02
Seeps
0.006
1.87e-01
1.74e-07
0
0
9.70e-02
9.01e-08
1.22e-01
1.13e-07
1.35e+01
1.25e-05
Active face
1.070
9.16e-01
1.63e-04
2.60e-02
4.64e-06
2.93e-01
5.23e-05
3.58e-01
6.38e-05
2.83e+02
5.05e-02
I
D.
Notes: 1. Total emission rate = emissions from each feature/cover/Iandfill gas extraction system combination
2. Avg E.F. = average emission factor in units of ug/m2-min, except for methane and carbon dioxide which are in units of g/m2-min
3. E.R. is emission rate = (activity factor) x (emission factor)
4. Activity factor in units of hectare (1 hectare = 10,000 m2)
-------
Table 5-8
Surface Emissions of Select Compounds from Section 2/8
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate (g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Hydrogen sullide
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
Benzene
Eihylhenzene
3240
4420
0.00778
0.00002
0.00187
0.00
0.0047
0.0090
0.163
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/scc)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination
Toe/Clay
6.05
<0.136
1.37e+02
0
0
2.0e-OI
2.02e-04
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.80e-02
3.83e-05
0
0
1.28e-01
1.29e-04
Toe/Soil
17.77
< 0.773
2.29e+03
1.44
4.26e+03
l.5e+00
4.44e-03
0
0
6.32eOI
1.87e-03
0
0
1.75e-01
5.11e-04
2.95e+00
8.74e-03
5.49e+01
1.62e-01
Tot/PVC
0.76
< 0.136
l.72e+01
0.0767
9.71e+00
7.0e-01
8.87e-05
1.2e-02
1.52e-06
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.7e-02
5.95e-06
0
0
Side/Clay
2.26
-------
U)
00
Table 5-8
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate (g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene chloride
Styrene
Telrachloroelhylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c-1 ,2-Dichloroe(hylene
n-Butane
0.126
0.0328
0.000911
0.0242
0.00377
0.0106
0.00
0.00013
0.0738
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination .
Toe/Clay
6.05
0
0
2.22e-02
2.22e-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.6e-02
5.65e-05
0
0
0
0
8.80e-02
8.87e-05
Toe/Soil
17.77
4.22e+01
1.25e-OI
1.09e+01
3.23e-02
1.9le-OI
5.64e-04
7.84e+00
2.32e-02
1.10e-02
3.26e-05
3.22e+00
9.53e-03
0
0
3.40e-02
l.Ole-04
2.46e+01
7.27e-02
Toe/PVC
0.76
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.0e-02
3.80e-06
5.6e-02
7.09e-06
0
0
0
0
0
0
Side/Clay
2.26
0
0
2.2e-02
8.29e-06
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.6e-02
2.1le-05
0
0
0
0
8.80e-02
3.31e-05
Side/Soil
15.64
2.01e-01
5.23e-04
1.57e-01
4.09e-04
l.33e-OI
3.47e-04
2.87e-01
7.47e-04
1.42e+00
3.70e-03
2.83e-01
7.38e-04
0
0
9.67e-03
2.52e-05
1.13e-01
2.95e-04
Slde/l»VC
3.80
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.0e-02
l.90e-05
5.6e-02
3.55e-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
Top/Soil
9.07
l.33e-01
2.01e-04
2.27e-02
3.43e-05
0
0
1.41e-01
2.13e-04
3.77e-02
5.69e-05
l.54e-01
2.33e-04
0
0
4.0e-03
6.05e-06
4.10e-01
6.20e-04
Top/PVC
2.70
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.0e-02
l.35e-05
5.6e-02
2.52e-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Table 5-8
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate (g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor
n-Decane & p-
Dichlorohonzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
0.133
0.0769
0.0234
0.127
4.09
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination
Toe/Clay
6.05
8.70e-02
8.77e-05
0
0
0
0
9.70e-02
9.78e-05
3.53e+00
3.56e-03
Toe/Soil
17.77
4.39e+01
1.30e-01
2.58e+01
7.65e-02
7.74e+00
2.29e-02
4.26e+0l
l.26e-01
1.27e+03
3.76e+00
Toe/PVC
0.76
4.5e-02
5.70e-06
0
0
0
0
3.3e-02
4.18C-06
3.09e+00
3.91e-04
Side/Clay
2.26
8.70e-02
3.28e-05
0
0
0
0
9.70e-02
3.65e-05
3.53e+00
1.33e-03
Side/Soil
15.64
9.42e-01
2.45e-03
9.97e-02
2.60e-04
1.39e-01
3.62e-04
I.19e-0l
3.11e-04
7.18e+01
l.87e-01
Sldc/PVC
3.80
4.5e-02
2.85e-05
0
0
0
0
3.3e-02
2.09e-05
3.09e+00
1.96e-03
Top/Soil
9.07
4.16e-OI
6.29e-04
6.60e-02
9.98e-05
9.90e-02
l.50e-04
I.44e-OI
2.l7e-04
8.55e+01
l.29e-01
Top/PVC
2.70
4.5e-02
2.03e-05
0
0
0
0
3.3e-02
l.49e-05
3.09e+00
1.39e-03
Notes: 1. Total emission rate = emissions from each feature/cover/landfill gas extraction system combination
2. Avg E.F. = average emission factor in units of ug/m:-min, except for methane and carbon dioxide which are in units of g/m'-min
3. E.R. is emission rale = (activity factor) x (emission factor)
4. Activity factor in units of hectare (1 hectare = 10,000 m!)
-------
Table 5-9
Surface Emissions of Select Compounds from Section 3/4
Compound
Total
Emission Rate
(g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
& t-Butylbenzene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
6820
12000
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.147
0.009
0.082
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination
Toe/Clay
8.25
3.03e+00
4.17e+03
3.54e+00
4.86e+03
5.95e-01
8.18e-04
7.11e-01
9.78e-04
9.05e-01
1.24e-03
7.40e-02
1.02e-04
5.58e+01
7.67e-02
3.17e+00
4.36e-03
1.37e+01
1.88e-02
Toe/Soil
12.69
<1.42e-01
3.00e+02
3.88e-01
8.21e+02
9.59e-01
2.03e-03
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.00e-02
1.69e-04
0
0
6.60e-02
1.40e-04
Toe/PVC
0.8
<1.16e-01
1.55e+01
3.72e-02
4.96e+00
3.31e-01
4.41e-05
4.37e-02
5.82e-06
0
0
0
0
3.50e-02
4.67e-06
2.40e-02
3.20e-06
4.43e-02
5.91e-06
Side/Clay
0.57
3.03e+00
2.88e+02
3.54e+00
3.36e+02
5.95C-01
5.65e-05
7.11e-01
6.75e-05
9.05e-01
8.60e-05
7.40e-02
7.03e-06
5.58e+01
5.30e-03
3.17e+00
3.02e-04
1.37e+OI
1.30e-03
Side/Soil
14.17
6.61e-01
1.56e+03
1.51e+00
3.57e+03
6.63c-02
1.57e-04
2.846-01
6.72e-04
1.25e-01
2.95e-04
8.03e-02
1.90e-04
2.72e+01
6.44e-02
1.97e+00
4.64e-03
2.60e+01
6.13e-02
Side/PVC
7.36
<1.16e-01
1.42e+02
3.72e-02
4.56e+01
3.316-01
4.06e-04
4.37e-02
5.366-05
0
0
0
0
3.50e-02
4.29e-05
2.40e-02
2.94e-05
4.43e-02
5.44e-05
Top/Soil
12.93
<1.46e-01
3.15e+02
1.09e+00
2.35e+03
1.10e-01
2.37e-04
4.00e-03
8.62e-06
0
0
0
0
1.70e-02
3.66e-05
0
0
0
0
Top/PVC
0.1
<1. 16e-01
1.93e+00
3.72e-02
6.20e-01
3.31e-01
5.52e-06
4.37e-02
7.28C-07
0
0
0
0
3.50e-02
5.83e-07
2.40e-02
4.00e-07
4.43e-02
7.39e-07
Cracks
0.05805
3.03e+00
2.93e+01
3.54e+00
3.42e+01
5.95e-01
5.76e-06
7.11e-01
6.88e-06
9.05e-01
8.76e-06
7.40e-02
7.16e-07
5.58e+01
5.40e-04
3.17e+00
3.07e-05
I.37e+01
1.32e-04
Seeps
0.0005
< 1.58e-01
1.22e-02
3.28e-02
2.54e-03
5.24e+00
4.05e-07
9.00e-03
6.96e-10
0
0
0
0
4.40e-02
3.40e-09
5.40e-02
4.18e-09
7.40e-02
5.72e-09
g.
n
I
a.
§
-------
s.
n
o
S
cf.
o
Table 5-9
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission Rate
(g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
Isobutane
Isopcntane
Methylcne Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroelhylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c-l ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Butane
0.090
0.037
0.002
0.062
0.002
0.114
0.001
0.001
0.075
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination
Toe/Clay
8.25
3.17e+01
4.36e-02
1.71e+01
2.35e-02
9.13e-01
1.26e-03
3.37e+01
4.63e-02
6.14e-01
8.44e-04
8.19e+00
1.13e-02
2.14e-01
2.94e-04
9.40e-02
1.29e-04
3.24e+01
4.46e-02
Toe/Soil
12.69
5.50e-02
1.16e-04
9.00e-02
1 .90e-04
2.12e-01
4.48e-04
0
0
3.10e-02
6.56e-05
8.70e-02
1.84e-04
0
0
0
0
1.82e-01
3.85e-04
Toe/PVC
0.8
3.59e-01
4.79e-05
1.53e+00
2.03e-04
2.87e-02
3.82e-06
0
0
6.00e-02
8.00e-06
3.I7e-OI
4.22e-05
0
0
0
0
4.73e-02
6.31e-06
Side/Clay
0.57
3.17e+01
3.02e-03
1.71e+01
1.62e-03
9.13e-01
8.67e-05
3.37e+01
3.20e-03
6.14e-01
5.83e-05
8.19e+00
7.78e-04
2.14e-01
2.03e-05
9.40e-02
8.93e-06
3.24e+01
3.08e-03
Side/Soil
14.17
1.77e+01
4.17e-02
4.13e+00
9.74e-03
6.63e-02
1.57e-04
4.98e+00
1.18e-02
1.96e-01
4.64e-04
4.29e+01
l.Ole-01
3.63e-01
8.57e-04
2.18e-01
5.15e-04
I.08e+01
2.55e-02
Side/PVC
7.36
3.59e-01
4.41e-04
1.53e+00
1.87e-03
2.87e-02
3.52e-05
0
0
6.00e-02
7.36e-05
3.17e-01
3.88e-04
0
0
0
0
4.73e-02
5.81e-05
Top/Soil
12.93
2.46e-OI
5.30e-04
4.65e-02
1 .OOe-04
0
0
0
0
1.35e-02
2.91e-05
1.05e-01
2.26e-04
0
0
0
0
3.22e-01
6.93e-04
Top/PVC
0.1
3.59e-01
5.99e-06
1.53e+00
2.54e-05
2.87e-02
4.78e-07
0
0
6.00e-02
l.OOe-06
3.17e-01
5.28e-06
0
0
0
0
4.73e-02
7.89e-07
Cracks
0.05805
3.17e+OI
3.07e-04
1.71e+01
1.65e-04
9.13e-01
8.83e-06
3.37e+01
3.26e-04
6.14e-01
5.94e-06
8.19e+00
7.92e-05
2.14e-01
2.07e-06
9.40e-02
9.09e-07
3.24e+OI
3.14e-04
Seeps
0.0005
0
0
0
0
1.20e-02
9.28e-10
0
0
0
0
9.70e-02
7.50e-09
0
0
0
0
9.54e-OI
7.38e-08
-------
Table 5-9
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission Rate
(g/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
0.219
0.041
0.052
0.080
7.530
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (R/sec)
Emissions by Feature/Cover Material Combination
Toe/Clay
8.25
4,80e+01
6.59e-02
7.57e+00
1.04e-02
l.40e+01
1.92e-02
9.97e+00
1.37C-02
3.34e+03
4.60e+00
Toe/Soil
12.69
3.18e-01
6.73e-04
4.00e-02
8.46e-05
2.90e-02
6.13e-05
6.60e-02
1.40e-04
6.78e+00
1.43e-02
Toe/PVC
0.8
3.26e-01
4.35e-05
0
0
2.60e-02
3.47e-06
6.60e-02
8.80e-06
5.74e+00
7.66e-04
Side/Clay
0.57
4.80e+01
4.56e-03
7.57e+00
7.19e-04
1.40e+01
1.33e-03
9.97e+00
9.47e-04
3.34e+03
3.17e-01
Side/Soil
14.17
6.22e+OI
1.47e-01
I.25e+OI
2.94e-02
1.33e+OI
3.14e-02
2.76e+01
6.52e-02
1.08e+03
2.55e+00
Side/PVC
7.36
3.26e-01
4.00e-04
0
0
2.60e-02
3.19e-05
6.60e-02
8.10e-05
5.74e+00
7.04e-03
Top/Soli
12.93
1.36e-01
2.93e-04
0
0
0
0
1.95e-02
4.20e-05
5.68e+00
1.22e-02
Top/PVC
0.1
3.26e-01
5.43e-06
0
0
2.60e-02
4.33e-07
6.60e-02
1.10e-06
5.74e+00
9.57e-05
Cracks
0.05805
4.80e+01
4.64e-04
7.57e+00
7.33e-05
1.40e+0l
1.35e-04
9.97e+00
9.64e-05
3.34e+03
3.23e-02
Seeps
0.0005
1.54e-0!
1.19e-08
0
0
3.90e-02
3.02e-09
7.40e-02
5.72e-09
1.80e+01
1.39e-06
I
s
NOTES: 1. Total emission rate = emissions from each feature/cover combination
2. Avg E.F. = average emission factor in ug/m2-min, except for methane and carbon dioxide, which are in g/m2-min.
3. E.R. is emission rate = (activity factor)*(emission factor)
4. Activity factor in units of hectare (1 hectare = 10,000m2)
§
-------
s
n
I
3,
B>
Table 5-10
Surface Emissions of Select Compounds from Section 6/7
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate (e/sec)
Factor
Activity Factors (hectares)
Melhane
Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene Chloride
4500
9920
0.259
0.036
0.033
0.002
0.206
0.012
0.196
0.463
1.04
0.098
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/scc)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (E/sec)
AVR. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Active Face
2.28
<1.43e-01
5.43e+01
7.30e-01
2.77e+02
9.52e-01
3.62e-04
7.90e+00
3.00e-03
4.49e-01
1.71e-04
0
0
1.39e+00
5.28e-04
8.00e-03
3.04e-06
2.82e-01
1.07e-04
USe+Ol
4.36e-03
7.14e+01
2.71e-02
5.05e+00
1.92e-03
Side
20.31
<1.25e-01
4.23e+02
7.25e-01
2.45e+03
3.42e+00
1.16e-02
3.62e+00
1.23e-02
3.43e+00
1.16e-02
9.19e-02
3.11e-04
7.26e-01
2.46e-03
3.58e-01
1.21e-03
1.47e+00
4.96e-03
8.85e+01
2.99e-01
2.38e+02
8.05e-01
9.09e+00
3.08e-02
Toe
13.33
1.69e-01
3.75e+02
2.66e-01
5.92e+02
8.56e+01
1.90e-01
4.05e-02
9.00e-05
0
0
0
0
2.54e+00
5.63e-03
2.45e-01
5.44e-04
3.09e+00
6.87e-03
7.686-01
1.71e-03
3.71e+00
8.236-03
7.506-03
1.67e-05
Top
39.52
2.396-01
1.57e+03
4.226-01
2.78e+03
3.30e+00
2.17e-02
2.85e+00
1.88e-02
2.85e+00
1.88e-02
1.78e-01
1.17e-03
1.09e+00
7.17e-03
3.37e-01
2.22e-03
2.07e+00
1.36e-02
8.39e+00
5.53e-02
2.866+01
1.88e-01
9.72e+00
6.40e-02
Cracks
0.0754
1.65e+02
2.07e+03
3.04e+02
3.82e+03
2.60e+03
3.27e-02
1.32e+02
1.66e-03
1.68e+02
2.11e-03
4.11e+01
5.16e-04
1.51e+04
1.90e-01
6.11e+02
7.68e-03
1.35e+04
1.70e-01
8.08e+03
1.02e-01
4.91e+02
6.17e-03
8.75e+01
1.10e-03
Seeps
0.00372
4.99e+00
3.09e+00
8.196+00
5.07e+00
3.27e+03
2.03e-03
5.80e+00
3.59e-06
3.26e+OI
2.02e-05
0
0
1.96e+02
1.21e-04
1.43e+01
8.84e-06
2.40e+02
1.49e-04
2.89e+02
1.79e-04
9.04e+01
5.606-05
1.30e-02
8.05e-09
-------
Table 5-10
(Continued)
Compound
Total
Emission
Rate (B/sec)
Factor
Activity Factor (hectares)
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Butane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
0.060
0.027
0.348
0.019
0.012
0.318
0.773
0.200
0.095
0.220
11.9
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Avg. E.F.
E.R. (g/sec)
Emissions by Feature
Active Face
2.28
4.57E-01
1.74E-04
2.74e-01
1.04e-04
1.24e+00
4.70e-04
1.90e-02
7.22e-06
0
0
2.41e+01
9.14e-03
9.16e-01
3.48e-04
2.60e-02
9.88e-06
2.93e-01
l.lle-04
3.58e-01
1.36e-04
2.83e+02
1.08e-01
Side
20.31
1.25E+00
4.22E-03
1.37e+00
4.63e-03
1.42e+01
4.80e-02
1.86e+00
6.30e-03
5.36e-01
1.81e-03
7.04e+01
2.38e-01
2.38e+00
8.04e-03
7.76e-01
2.63e-03
9.37e-01
3.17e-03
1.70e+00
5.74e-03
7.39e+02
2.50e+00
Toe
13.33
4.28E-01
9.50E-04
8.15e-02
1.81e-04
1.36e+01
3.02e-02
2.56e-01
5.69e-04
0
0
1.21e+00
2.69e-03
6.44e+00
1.43e-02
l.64e+00
3.64e-03
7.78e-01
1.73e-03
2.05e+00
4.55e-03
1.23e+02
2.73e-01
Top
39.52
1.85E+00
1.22E-02
2.15e+00
1.42e-02
1.32e+01
8.69e-02
2.45e-01
1.62e-03
8.00e-01
5.27e-03
4.80e+00
3.16e-02
3.76e+00
2.48e-02
2.886+00
1.90e-02
1.35e+00
8.92e-03
3.00e+00
1.98e-02
2.90e+02
1.91e+00
Cracks
0.0754
3.34E+03
4.19E-02
6.27e+02
7.88e-03
1.45e+04
1.82e-01
8.39e+02
1.05e-02
3.54e+02
4.45e-03
2.90C+03
3.65e-02
5.77e+04
7.25e-01
1.39e+04
1.75e-01
6.48e+03
8.14e-02
1.51e+04
1.89e-01
5.66e+05
7.11e+00
Seeps
0.00372
1.68E+02
1.04E-04
1.02e+01
6.30e-06
9.08e+02
5.62e-04
4.35e+01
2.70e-05
1.75e+01
1.08e-05
1.26e+02
7.78e-05
8.20e+02
5.08e-04
3.06e+02
1.89e-04
1. 14e+02
7.076-05
3.18e+02
1.97e-04
1.64e+04
1.02e-02
NOTES: 1. Total emission rate = emissions from each feature
2. Avg E.F. = average emission factor in ug/m2-min, except for methane and carbon dioxide, which are in g/m2-min.
3. E.R. is emission rate = (activity factor)*(emission factor)
4. Activity factor in units of hectare (1 hectare = 10,000 m2)
-------
Table 5-11
Summary of Measured Emission Rates from Landfill Surface
Compound
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -DichJoroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Butane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
TNMHC
Emission Rate (e/sec)
Section 1/9
6.34e+03
1.14e+04
3.04e-02
4.09e-03
1.72e-01
2.12e-03
7.45e-02
9.45e-03
7.39e-02
3.11e-01
3.79e-01
1.89e-01
3.81e-02
6.43e-02
1.28e-01
1.69e-02
1.78e-02
6.15e-02
1.25e-01
8.16e-02
3.41e-02
7.89e-02
5.94e+00
Section 2/8
3.24e+03
4.42e+03
7.78e-03
2.23e-05
1.87e-03
0
4.88e-03
9.00e-03
1.63e-01
1.26e-01
3.28e-02
9.11e-04
2.42e-02
3.77e-03
1.06e-02
0
1.32e-04
7.38e-02
1.33e-01
7.69e-02
2.34e-02
1.27e-01
4.09e+00
Section 3/4
6.82e+03
1.20e+04
4.00e-03
2.00e-03
1.63e-03
0
1.47e-01
9.37e-03
8.17e-02
8.98e-02
3.74e-02
2.00e-03
6.16e-02
1.55e-03
1.14e-01
1.17e-03
6.54e-04
7.46e-02
2.19e-01
4.07e-02
5.22e-02
8.02e-02
7.53e+00
Section 6/7
4.50e+03
9.92e+03
2.59e-01
3.58e-02
3.27e-02
2.00e-03
2.06e-01
1.17e-02
1.96e-01
4.63e-01
1.04e+00
9.78e-02
5.96e-02
2.70e-02
3.48e-01
1.91e-02
1.15e-02
3.18e-01
7.73e-01
2.00e-01
9.54e-02
2.20e-01
1.19e+01
landfill
Total
2.13e+04
3.77e+04
3.01e-01
4.19e-02
2.08e-01
4.12e-03
4.33e-01
3.96e-02
5.14e-01
9.90e-01
1.49e+00
2.90e-01
1.83e-01
9.66e-02
6.01e-01
3.72e-02
3.01e-02
5.28e-01
1.25e+00
3.99e-01
2.05e-01
5.06e-01
2.95e+01
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-12
Variability in Flux Chamber Concentration Measurements from Section 6/7
Anaryte
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
Hydrogen Sulfide
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene Chloride
Nitrogen
Styrene
TNMHC
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
n-Butane
i-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
o-Xylene
p/m-Xylene
Sourcesof Variability based on Concentration Measurements (%CV)
Total
92.3
169.2
153
245.6
186.1
174.0
248.8
231.7
163.9
199.0
195.4
501.3
199.6
151.8
168.7
179.0
273.5
189.2
139.8
198.9
225.8
235.3
168.4
201.4
182.3
Spatial
82.4
155.9
150.9
217.7
172.0
137.6
237.2
224.3
121.2
182.9
179.3
500.6
192.9
149.9
126.2
154.9
154.0
152.2
133.5
179.9
200.7
222.2
145.3
189.5
163.1
Measurement*
41.5
65.7
25.2
113.6
71.0
106.6
74.9
58.0
110.4
78.3
77.8
26.4
51.4
24.5
112.0
89.7
226.0
112.4
41.5
84.8
103.6
77.3
85.0
68.3
81.2
Temporal
40.8
64.4
20.2
113.6
70.5
104.7
0.0
57.4
110.2
77.8
77.7
26.2
46.5
18.4
111.2
89.2
225.8
112.1
30.8
84.4
103.4
76.4
84.3
67.2
80.7
Sampling
0.0
11.5
13.7
0.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
2.7
2.7
5.4
1.3
2.0
0.0
12.0
10.4
6.3
7.2
6.0
23.6
0.0 '
4.2
8.9
8.0
11.1
0.0
Anarvs
7.8
5.8
6.0
0.0
3.8
20.0
74.9
8.2
5.1
6.0
3.8
2.3
21.7
10.8
7.8
6.3
6.0
6.2
14.8
8.6
3.9
8.1
7.5
5.8
9.2
"Measurement variability includes termporal, sampling, and analytical variabilities.
Notes: 1. A %CV of 0.0 implies negligible variability relative to other sources of variability.
2. The variabilities were developed from flux chamber concentration data from Section 6/7.
3. Variability estimates are based on only those measurements that were above the analytical detection limit.
5-46
Radian Corporation
-------
ta
D.
i'
o
o
o
3
Table 5-13
Landfill Gas Emissions to the Gas Collection System
Compound Name
TNMHC
Toluene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
n-Nonane
Ethylbenzene
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
o-Xylene
Styrene
Chlorobenzene
Benzene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
1,1-Dichloroethane
Trichloroethene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
124 Trichlorobenzene
Emissions (g/sec)
North Header
2.66e+00
8.29e-02
4.99e-02
4.09e-02
2.95e-02
3.44e-02
1.96e-02
1.54e-02
1.23e-02
8.01e-03
4.74e-03
3.55e-03
4.16e-03
1.18e-03
1.85e-03
2.27e-03
8.99e-04
2.40e-04
2.86e-04
1.75e-02
South Header
5.35e+00
2.11e-01
8.37e-02
9.75e-02
7.05e-02
7.20e-02
3.42e-02
3.45e-02
3.47e-02
2.07e-02
1.12e-02
8.47e-03
4.98e-03
7.92e-03
5.27e-03
2.75e-03
2.98e-03
7.76e-05
2.80e-04
1.82e-02
Total Gas Phase
Emissions
(g/sec)
8.01e+00
2.94e-01
1.34e-01
1.38e-01
l.OOe-01
1.06e-01
5.38e-02
4.99e-02
4.70e-02
2.87e-02
1.59e-02
1.20e-02
9.14e-03
9.10e-03
7.12e-03
5.02e-03
3.88e-03
3.18e-04
5.66e-04
3.57e-02
Total Liquid Phase
Emissions
(g/sec)
0
3.66e-05
0
1.19e-05
0
1.30e-06
0
1.03e-06
3.64e-07
0
2.62e-07
3.15e-07
3.97e-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
Emissions
(g/sec)
8.01e+00
2.94e-01
1.34e-01
1.38e-01
l.OOe-01
1.06e-01
5.38e-02
4.99e-02
4.70e-02
2.87e-02
1.59e-02
1.20e-02
9.14e-03
9.10e-03
7.12e-03
5.02e-03
3.88e-03
3.18e-04
5.66e-04
3.57e-02
-------
Table 5-14
Comparison of Field Measurements of Flow Rate with Gas Plant Data
Date
7/03/95
7/05/95
7/07/95
7/08/95
7/10/95
7/11/95
7/12/95
7/13/95
Gas Flow Rates Provided by Gas Plant
MCFD1
8.494
8.418
8.304
8.169
8.263
8.157
8.058
7.958
SCFM2
5,900
5,840
5,770
5,670
5,740
5,660
5,600
5,530
SCMM3
167
165
165
160
162
160
158
156
On-Site
Measurements
SCMM3-4
NA5'
295
301
326
306
282
263
279
1 Million standard cubic feet per day
2 Standard cubic feet per minute
3 Standard cubic meters per minute
4 Flows assume a duct diameter of 18 inches and moisture content equal to saturation at
measured duct temperature.
5 Invalid value for one of the headers.
5-48
Radian Corporation
-------
EL
E"
3
o
o
o
Table 5-15
Average Landfill Gas Composition (ppm)
••&*• • ' -. • ' X; Compound V.'y-: •:.'' -'::'V:'
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen
TNMHC
Ethane
Propane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Isobutane
Acetaldehyde
Vinyl Chloride
Isobutene+ 1-Butene
1,3-Butadiene
n-Butane
Methanol (+)
Bromomethane
t-2-Butene
Neopentane
c-2-Butene
Chloroethane
Vinyl Bromide
3-Methyl-l-Butene
Isopentane
Acetone (+)
Trichlofofluoromethane
1-Pentene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
Acrylonitrile
n-Pentane
Isoprene
•.-.ivry;.. .',: Passive
-^1 Passive Vents
53.39%
37.68%
4.12%
434
217
15.9
1.52
9.08
ND
1.97
1.15
ND
4.02
0.14
0.30
0.24'
0.13
0.13
0.30
ND
0.15
2.06
2.25
0.30
0.16
0.40
ND
0.87
0.17
: „ *<%* ; ' >
Collection System "
55.63%
37.14%
0.99%
438
223
13.0
1.27
8.24
ND
0.27
0.92
0.44
3.80
ND
ND
0.12
0.12
0.13
0.13
ND
0.13
3.76
6.09
0.69
0.16
0.22
ND
0.97
0.17
Section 1/9
"; Passive i Vents
42.11%
29.74%
5.35%
272
195
8.34
0.64
3.21
ND
0.21
1.56
ND
2.05
ND
0.17
0.10
ND
ND
0.15
ND
0.16
0.15
0.19
0.06
ND
0.25
ND
0.23
ND
v Section 2/8
Passive :Verits ,-.'
54.43%
39.51%
1.84%
448
231
16.4
2.15
10.5
ND
2.57
0.94
ND
4.34
ND
ND
0.17
0.12
0.14
0.44
ND
0.13
3.98
4.14
0.50
0.15
0.48
ND
1.44
0.17
Section 3/4
Passive Vents ,-
54.51%
37.36%
2.14%
445
207
16.8
1.05
8.78
ND
1.72
1.28
ND
4.06
0.14
0.43
0.33
0.13
0.15
0.19
ND
0.16
0.51
0.74
0.16
0.14
0.33
ND
0.42
0.18
-------
en
O
Table 5-15
(Continued)
%M '- "> ; :':: Compound ••• •• ;..•:" • ""'•'• '•"••"'•
t-2-Pentene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
c-2-Pentene
Methylene Chloride
2-MethyI-2-Butene
Neohexane
Cyclopentene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
4-Methyl-l-Pentene
1,1-DichIoroethane
Cyclopentane
1-Propanol
2,3-Dimethylbutane
Methyl t-Butylether
c-4-Melhyl-2-Pentene
Isohexane
Butyraldehyde
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
2-Butanone
3-MethyIpentane
1-Hexene
2-MethyI-l-Pentene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
n-Hexane
Chloroform
c-3-Hexene
t-2-Hexene
2-Meihyl-2-Pentene
c-2-Hexene
.,-.-.. ., Passive, , f';;:--'
!;.>A11 Passive VentlvV
0.39
1.06
0.18
0.90
0.37
0.16
0.13
0.11
0.12
0.59
0.35
ND
0.13
0.99
0.14
0.31
0.13
ND
0.20
0.56
0.32
0.16
1.10
0.14
1.70
ND
0.15
0.12
0.31
0.16
V'^'^VH G38'- vx;>£;".,.;. '•
'•' ''Collection System '!?:
2.37
1.27
0.14
0.55
0.29
0.17
ND
ND
ND
0.34
0.24
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.25
ND
ND
ND
2.03
0.17
ND
0.57
ND
0.92
ND
ND
0.24
0.12
ND
r; Section 1/9
?^ Passive Vents
0.11
ND
ND
ND
0.21
0.11
0.24
ND
ND
0.02
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.11
0.15
ND
ND
ND
0.14
ND
ND
0.12
ND
0.28
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
.Section 2/8
; Passive Vents -
0.47
0.88
0.24
1.81
0.53
0.19
0.16
0.11
0.13
1.06
0.55
ND
ND
1.89
ND
0.39
ND
ND
ND
0.99
0.51
ND
1.90
0.11
3.04
ND
0.17
0.13
0.31
0.25
Section 3/4
:.''> Passive Vents?>
0.34
1.14
0.14
0.14
0.23
0.16
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.23
0.18
ND
0.12
0.25
0.13
0.25
0.12
ND
0.30
0.21
0.19
0.20
0.48
0.13
0.62
ND
0.13
0.14
0.37
ND
JO
P
a.
p
3
0
o
I
3
5'
-------
JO
cu
0.
5'
n
o
o
Table 5-15
(Continued)
Compound -
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
Methylcyclopentane
1,2-Dichloroethane
2,4-Dimethylpentane
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Methylcyclopentene
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
1-Butanol
Cyclohexane
Isoheptane + 2,3-Dimethylpentane
Cyclohexene
3-Methylhexane
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
1,4-Dioxane
Trichloroethylene
1-Heplene
2,2,4-Trimelhylpentane
n-Heptane
l-3-Heptene
c-3-Heptene
t-2-Heptene
2,4,4-Trimethyl- 1 -Pentene
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Methylcyclohexane
Melhylisobutylketone
2,4-4-Trime(hyl-2-Pentene
2,5-Dimelhylhexane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
;-;,:,•: ...Passive ;.• •,-. -..-
AH Passive Vents
0.11
0.43
0.19
0.18
0.13
ND
0.53
0.18
0.30
0.76
0.84
0.14
0.56
0.10
0.16
ND
0.13
0.58
0.91
0.18
0.27
0.14
0.12
0.33
0.70
0.14
ND
0.15
0.16
0.07
.•-.;..?(• ^!-.GaSf:y^\; • ••^:.
Collection System ;-;
ND
0.23
ND
0.12
0.19
ND
0.93
ND
ND
0.45
0.46
ND
0.37
ND
ND
ND
0.14
0.30
0.67
0.19
ND
0.15
ND
ND
0.52
0.13
ND
0.18
0.16
ND
Section 1/9
: Passive Vents
ND
0.13
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.90
0.09
ND
0.21
0.26
ND
0.17
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13
0.43
0.18
ND
0.08
ND
ND
0.27
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Section 2/8
Passive Vents
ND
0.56
0.14
0.16
0.19
ND
0.50
ND
0.20
1.13
1.15
0.16
0.82
ND
0.15
ND
0.13
0.82
1.18
0.13
0.31
0.20
0.12
0.36
0.93
0.16
ND
0.19
0.21
0.06
Section 3/4
Passive Vents
0.12
0.34
ND
0.19
0.08
ND
0.50
ND
0.41
0.49
0.63
ND
0.38
0.11
0.15
ND
0.13
0.42
0.72
0.24
0.22
0.13
0.14
0.33
0.56
0.12
ND
0.13
0.14
0.07
-------
Table 5-15
(Continued)
•'.'v*. Compound :
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
2,3.4-Trimethylperitane
Toluene
1 -Methylcyclohexene
3,5,5-Trimethylhexene
Dibromochloromethane
3-Methylheptane
Hexanal
1 ,2-Dibromoelhane
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
1-Octene
n-Octane
Tetrachloroethylene
c-2-Octene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Bromoform
Styrene
Heptanal
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
o-Xylene
1-Nonene
n-Nonane
4-Nonene
Cumene
a-Pinene
Benzaldehyde
o-Chlorotoluene
m-ChlorotoIuene
Passive .
> -s All Passive Vents V
ND
0.34
19.9
0.17
0.15
ND
0.43
0.75
0.14
0.22
0.37
1.63
0.73
0.16
2.08
7.09
10.4
ND
2.46
0.22
0.09
3.79 ,
ND
5.84
0.17
0.71
8.50
0.17
0.18
0.18
>•;.-. -;?-ii;;Gas...,x-..;i:....;.
«': Collection System
ND
0.12
14.6
0.19
ND
ND
0.23
0.37
ND
0.29
0.24
0.99
0.57
ND
1.15
4.71
5.97
ND
2.02
ND
0.03
2.17
ND
3.57
ND
0.63
7.85
ND
ND
ND
Section 1/9
Passive Vents
ND
0.10
1.56
ND
0.14
ND
0.18
0.24
ND
0.11
0.17
0.49
0.17
0.09
1.30
4.22
4.87
ND
0.85
0.17
0.09
2.00
^_ ND
3.23
0.72
0.71
2.03
0.60
0.96
0.42
Section 2/8
Passive Vents
ND
0.55
27.0
0.18
0.14
ND
0.52
0.89
ND
0.23
0.43
2.07
1.27
0.16
2.12
7.07
11.4
ND
2.94
0.21
0.08
4.03
ND
5.63
ND
0.62
10.1
ND
ND
ND
Section 3/4
Passive Vents
ND
0.18
16.1
0.13
0.17
ND
0.39
0.71
0.16
0.23
0.35
1.40
0.32
0.21
2.18
7.66
10.5
ND
2.28
0.22
0.10
3.89
ND
6.53
ND
0.81
8.17
ND
ND
0.19
n
o
•3
o
3
5'
-------
CD
CL
n
o
•a
o
•-I
p
o'
D
Table 5-15
(Continued)
•''/•..<•'• Compound .• -;
n-Propylbenzene
p-Chlorotoluene
m-Elhyltoluene
p-Elhyltoluene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
o-Ethyltoluene
b-Pinene
1-Decene
Isobutylbenzene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
p-Isopropylloluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
Limonene
Indan
Indene
m-Diethylbenzene
n-Bulylbenzene
p-Diethylbenzene
1-Undecene
n-Undecane
Dichlorotoluene
Naphthalene
Total Unidentified VOCs
Chloroprene
Ethylene
Chlorodifiuoromethane
Freon 1 1 3
Vinyl Acetate
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-Butadiene
Bromochloromethane
IvV^Sv.Passive; . •-. .
• . Ail Passive Vents
2.74
ND
3.59
2.32
2.51
4.32
1.74
0.26
0.80
1.29
0.54
1.59
15.1
1.17
ND
1.26
1.17
2.49
0.72
2.45
0.30
0.18
122
0.15
ND
ND
0.40
0.14
0.16
0.12
•;•.•:•;.'• >:;.:;,,Gas.-,;;f:V;.v:.-;.
Collection System :
2.09
ND
2.49
2.01
1.76
3.43
0.70
0.19
0.86
1.90
1.22
2.17
35.4
ND
ND
1.46
1.38
2.67
1.37
5.50
0.89
0.80
135
ND
ND
ND
0.25
ND
0.48
ND
.Section 1/9
• Passive Vents
2.29
ND
1.37
1.58
2.71
4.51
3.36
ND
0.90
0.98
0.41
1.63
3.90
ND
ND
1.51
1.78
3.87
1.03
2.40
0.33
0.26
83.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.09
ND
Section 2/8
Passive Vents •
2.47
ND
3.36
2.23
2.05
3.57
1.40
0.23
0.74
1.16
0.89
1.32
19.5
1.12
ND
1.00
0.77
1.67
0.51
2.09
0.23
0.13
117
ND
ND
ND
0.33
0.14
0.20
ND
Section 3/4
Passive Vents :
3.10
ND
4.23
2.55
2.93
5.03
1.78
0.33
0.83
1.48
0.25
1.85
12.9
1.40
ND
1.48
1.45
3.04
0.87
2.81
0.36
0.21
134
0.11
ND
ND
0.43
ND
0.13
0.15
u>
u>
-------
Table 5-15
(Continued)
'.&•>? Compound *
Freon 23
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Bromodichloromethane
Benzyl Chloride &m-Dichlorobenzcne
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
Elhanol & Acetonitrile
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylben
Dielhyl Ether &2-Propanol
2-Methylheptane
Trichloroelhene
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 1 14
TNMHC
Ethane
Passive •. , : •
:A11 Passive Vents
ND
0.23
0.12
1.67
12.2
18.9
4.73
0.16
0.15
0.40
0.25
417
213
.i^-y-:.... Gas:..- .•;.:::-.
h' Collection System Si:
ND
0.88
ND
1.88
14.0
ND
5.06
ND
0.14
0.24
0.23
438
223
Section 1/9
Passive. Vents
ND
0.23
ND
1.78
11.7
ND
4.71
ND
0.13
ND
0.14
273
195
Section 2/8
Passive Vents
ND
0.20
0.13
1.31
10.3
27.2
4.05
ND
0.20
0.66
0.23
439
218
Section 3/4
Passive Vents -
ND
0.25
0.13
2.00
14.1
14.1
5.42
0.17
0.14
0.20
0.30
423
212
s.
s
3
n
o
•i
ND = Not Detected
§
-------
Table 5-16
Ratio of Individual VOC to Total VOC Concentration Values (%)
Compound
Ethane
Total Unidentified VOCs
Lunonene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
Toluene
a-Pinene
Propane
n-Undecane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Isobutane
n-Nonane
o-Ethyltoluene
Ethylbenzene
p-Diethylbenzene
n-Butane
m-Ethyltoluene
Isopentane
n-Propylbenzene
Acetone
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1-Undecene
m-Diethylbenzene
n-Butylbenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
o-Xylene
Styrene
p-Ethyltoluene
3-Methylpentane
t-2-Pentene
p-Isopropyltoluene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3.5-Trimethylbenzene
Isobutylbenzene
Naphthalene
n -Octane
Dichlorodifluororaethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
b-Pinene
Chlorobenzene
Dichlorotoluene
n-Pentane
Isopropylbenzene
Benzene
n-Hexane
1 ,2.4-Trichlorobenzene
VOC to TNMHC Ratio (%)
Gas Collection System
37.0
22.4
9.8
3.1
2.4
2.2
2.2
1.7
1.4
1.3
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
02
0.2
0.2
f 0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
Passive Vents
37.3
21.0
4.3
2.8
3.4
2.4
2.7
0.8
1.4
2.4
1.0
1.5
1.1
\2
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.3
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.0
Flux Chamber Samples
29.7
30.5
2.2
6.1
1.8
2.1
1.8
1.8
2.3
2.2
1.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
0.6
0.9
0.2
0.9
0.1
0.5
0.0
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.7
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
Radian Corporation
5-55
-------
Table 5-16
(Continued)
Compound
n-Heptane
Trichlorofluoiomethane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Methylcyclohexane
TetracMoroethylene
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
Isoheptane + 2,3-Dimethylpentane
Cyclohexane
3-Methylhexane
2,2,5-TrimethyIhexane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
Hexanal
1,3-Butadiene
1,1-Dichloroethane
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-Butadiene
3-MethyIheptane
1-Octene
Vinyl Chloride
Isohexane
Methylcyclopentane
2-Methyl-2-Butene
Trichloroethene
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 114
t-2-Hexene
t-3-Heptene
2,5-Dimethvlhexane
1-Heptene
1 -Methylcyclohexene
Cyclopentane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2-Methyl-l-Butene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1-Hexene
Neohexane
2-MethyIheptane
Freonll3
2-Methyl-2-Pemene
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
1-Decene
koprene
Methylisobutylketone
t-2-Heptene
c-2-Pentene
2,4-Dimethylpentane
VOC to TNMHC Ratio (%)
Gas Collection System
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Passive Vents
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Flux Chamber Samples
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5-56
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-16
(Continued)
Compound
c-2-Butene
1-Pentene
Chloroethane
t-2-Butene
Neopentane
3-Methyl-l-Butene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Dichlorofluoromethane
Diethyl Ether &2-Propanol
Cyclopentene
Dibromochloromethane
Dimethylsulfide
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
Dimethyl Acetal
Dimethyl Ether
Cyclohexene
1,2-Dichloroethane
Chloroform
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorodifluoromethane
Cumene
Cyclohexanone
Chloromethane
Chloroprene
Ethyl Mercaptan
MTBE, Isohexane. & c-4-Methyl-2-Pentane
Methanol
Isopentyl Mercaptan
IsovaJeraldehyde
Methyl Mercaptan
Methyl t-Burvlether
Methyl Acrylate
Methyl Formate
Isobutyraldehvde
Freon 114
Freon23
Ethvlene
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
Indene
lodomethane
Heptanal
Indan
Butyraldehyde
2-Bulanone
2-Butyne
VOC to TNMHC Ratio (%)
Gas Collection System
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Passive Vents
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
Flux Chamber Samples
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Radian Corporation
5-57
-------
Table 5-16
(Continued)
. Compound
1,4-Dioxane
2,5-Dimethylthiophene
2-Methyl- 1 ,3-Dioxolane
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
1-Nonene
1-Butanol
1-Butyne
1-Butanol & Cyclohexane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
2.4,4-Trimethyl- 1 -Pentene
1-Propanol
1,4-Dioxane & 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
2-Methylthiophene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Acrylonitrile
Benzaldehyde
Butyl Acrylale
Butyl Mercaptan
Bromofonn
Bromomethane
Acetylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
3-Methylthiophene
2-Pentanone
3,5,5-Trimethylhexene
4-Nonene
Acetaldehyde
3-Octanone
4-Methyl-l -Pentene
bis-Chloroethyl Ether
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
Vinyl Bromide
c-2-Hexene
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
bis-Chloromethyl Ether
Total Unidentified Halogenated VOCs
Thiophene
Tetrahydrothiophene
Vinyl Acetate
Valeraldehyde
Trichloroethylene + BCM
VOC to TNMHC Ratio (%)
Gas Collection System
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Passive Vents
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Flux Chamber Samples
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5-58
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-16
(Continued)
Compound
t-l ,2-Dichloroethylene
p-Chlorotoluene
o-Chlorotoluene
M-Methyl-2-Pemene
1 . 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
t-l 3-Dichloropropene
c-3-Hexene
c-3-Heptene
c-2-Octene
m-Chlorotoluene
c-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
Propyne
Propylene
Propionaldehyde
Methylcyclopentene
VOC to TNMHC Ratio (%)
Gas Collection System
0.0
0.0
^_ o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Passive Vents
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Flux Chamber Samples
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Radian Corporation
5-59
-------
Table 5-17
Landfill Gas Production and Emission Rates for Fresh Kills Landfill
Compound
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
TNMHC
Total Unidentified VOCs
Ethane
Isopentane
n-Decane &
p-Dichlorobenzene
Isobutane
Limonene
Toluene
Acetone
n-Propylbenzene
p/m-Xylene
Ethylbenzene
Propane
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
n-Butane
p-Ethyltoluene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene &
t-Butylbenzene
n-Nonane
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Hydrogen Sulfide
n-Butylbenzene
Section 1/9
Surface
1.14e+04
6.34e+03
5.94e+00
2.66e+00
1.75e-02
3.78e-01
1.25e-01
3.11e-01
1.74e-01
1.28e-01
4.70e-01
1.32e-01
7.89e-02
7.39e-02
5.51e-02
6.13e-02
6.15e-02
8.71e-02
7.45e-02
8.16e-02
l.Ole-01
3.04e-02
4.96e-02
Passive Vents
6.28e+01
3.25e+01
8.51e-02
2.68e-02
2.03e-02
1.81e-05
6.54e-03
6.83e-04
1.92e-03
5.81e-04
1.48e-05
l.Ole-03
2.00C-03
1.68e-03
1.30e-03
4.35e-04
3.99e-04
7.20e-04
2.16e-03
1.64e-03
1.19e-03
3.36e-03
8.42e-04
Gas
Collection
System"
3.83e+03
2.09e+03
8.02e+00
2.45e+00
1.42e+00
5.01e-02
4.27e-01
1.03e-01
1.03e+00
2.94e-01
8.74e-02
5.40e-02
1.39e-01
1.06e-01
1.25e-01
4.75e-02
4.70e-02
5.05e-02
1.34e-01
l.OOe-01
4.56e-02
6.51e-01
4.23e-02
Section 2/8
Surface
4.42e+03
3.24e+03
4.09e+00
2.06e+00
5.64e-02
3.28e-02
1.33e-01
1.26e-01
6.41e-02
1.06e-02
6.13e-02
9.98e-02
1.27e-01
1.63e-01
1.41e-01
7.03e-02
7.38e-02
7.46e-02
4.68e-03
7.69e-02
5.68e-02
7.76e-03
6.58e-02
Passive Vents
9.52e+02
4.82e+02
1.97e+00
5.28e-01
3.65e-01
1.65e-02
7.68e-02
3.64e-02
1.45e-01
1.23e-01
1.45e-02
1.50e-02
5.55e-02
3.55e-02
4.08e-02
6.77e-03
1.48e-02
1.25e-02
2.58e-02
3.65e-02
1.30e-02
6.97e-02
4.87e-03
Section 3/4
Surface
1.20e+04
6.82e+03
7.53e+00
4.36e+00
4.57e-02
3.74e-02
2.19e-01
8.98e-02
1.26e-01
1.14e-01
4.85e-02
2.93e-01
8.02e-02
8.17e-02
7.96e-02
3.82e-01
7.46e-02
2.16e-01
1.47e-01
4.07e-02
1.82e-01
3.76e-03
1.73e-01
Passive Vents
8.03e+02
4.27e+02
1.83e+00
6.00e-01
3.02e-01
1.68e-03
1.05e-01
2.49e-02
8.44e-02
7.72e-02
2.22e-03
1.91e-02
5.75e-02
4.19e-02
3.49e-02
9.57e-03
1.10e-02
1.57e-02
3.51e-02
4.37e-02
1.76e-02
7.97e-02
9.94e-03
Section 6/7
Surface
9.92e+03
4.50e+03
1.19e+01
4.41e+00
l.Ole+00
1.04e+00
7.73e-01
4.63e-01
2.87e-01
3.48e-01
1.14e-01
1.20e-01
2.20e-01
1.96e-01
2.33e-01
4.92e-02
3.18e-01
1.04e-01
2.06e-01
2.00e-0 1
1.03e-01
2.58e-01
7.23e-02
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
4.34e+04
2.39e+04
4.14e+01
1.71e+01
3.24e+00
1.55e+00
1.87e+00
1.15e+00
1.91e+00
1.10e+00
7.98e-01
7.34e-01
7.59e-01
7.00e-01
7.11e-01
6.27e-01
6.01e-01
5.61e-01
6.29e-01
5.81e-01
5.21e-01
1.10e+00
4.19e-01
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
3.96e+04
2.18e+04
3.34e+01
1.46e+01
1.81e+00
1.50e+00
1.44e+00
1.05e+00
8.82e-01
8.02e-01
7.10e-01
6.806-01
6.21e-01
5.94e-01
5.85e-01
5.79e-01
5.54e-01
S.lle-Ol
4.96e-01
4.81e-01
4.75e-01
4.53e-01
3.77e-01
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
n-Pcntane
Mclhylene Chloride
Dichlorodifluoromethane
m-Ethyltoluene
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
Ethanol & Acelonitrile
o-Ethyltoluene
Indcne
o-Xylene
Acetylene
1,1-Dichloroethane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
n-Undecane
Styrene
Diethyl Ether & 2-Propanol
Hexanal
n-Octane
Propylene
Chlorobenzene
p-Diethylbenzene
n-Hexane
t-2-Butene
Benzyl Chloride &
m-Dichlorobenzene
Tetrachloroethylene
Section 1/9
Surface
7.46e-02
1.89e-01
1.02e-01
4.09e-02
O.OOe+00
9.10e-04
1.81e-02
7.55e-02
3.41e-02
1.06e-04
1.72e-01
5.49e-02
5.64e-04
3.81e-02
3.86e-02
2.37e-02
1.51e-02
2.11e-02
7.96e-03
1.84e-03
5.89e-02
1.05e-01
O.OOe+00
6.43e-02
Passive Vents
5.35e-05
O.OOe+00
9.99e-05
6.10e-04
1.20e-03
O.OOe+00
1.98e-03
O.OOe+00
8.14e-04
O.OOe+00
1.55e-06
2.72e-04
1.47e-03
3.27e-04
O.OOe+00
8.40e-05
2.00e-04
O.OOe+00
5.13e-04
1.83e-03
7.75e-05
8.23e-06
9.26e-04
2.98e-05
Gas
Collection
System*
1.31e-02
9.14e-03
3.48e-02
6.32e-02
2.33e-01
O.OOe+00
8.77e-02
O.OOe+00
4.99e-02
O.OOe+00
9.33e-03
1.14e-02
1.74e-01
4.70e-02
O.OOe+00
8.60e-03
2.57e-02
O.OOe+00
2.88e-02
7.50e-02
1.64e-02
1.73e-03
5.38e-02
2.20e-02
Section 2/8
Surface
1.16e-02
9.11e-04
3.12e-02
5.38e-02
O.OOe+00
2.88e-02
1.16e-02
7.61e-02
2.34e-02
9.51e-02
1.87e-03
2.08e-02
1.22e-03
2.42e-02
4.36e-03
2.66e-02
3.25e-02
4.80e-02
3.65e-02
2.02e-03
1.77e-02
1.59e-03
O.OOe+00
3.82e-03
Passive Vents
5.79e-03
9.81e-03
1.44e-02
1.99e-02
6.91e-02
6.32e-02
2.15e-02
O.OOe+00
2.06e-02
O.OOe+00
6.28e-03
2.56e-03
1.63e-02
1.62e-02
O.OOe+00
4.78e-03
1.25e-02
O.OOe+00
1.26e-02
1.15e-02
1.77e-02
3.68e-04
8.77e-03
1.02e-02
Section 3/4
Surface
3.57e-02
2.00e-03
2.05e-02
6.83e-02
O.OOe+00
6.09e-04
2.78e-02
8.50e-02
5.22e-02
1.24e-01
1.63e-03
1.12e-01
O.OOe+00
6.16e-02
3.56e-03
4.87V02
2.66e-02
5.61e-02
5.69e-02
O.OOe+00
2.29e-02
3.10e-03
3.81e-05
1.55e-03
Passive Vents
1.42e-03
1.57e-04
5.76e-03
2.57e-02
5.53e-02
2.43e-02
3.13e-02
O.OOe+00
2.12e-02
O.OOe+00
l.Ole-03
3.36e-03
2.18e-02
1.18e-02
1.72e-04
3.39e-03
7.87e-03
O.OOe+00
1.23e-02
2.08e-02
2.43e-03
7.11e-04
1.39e-02
2.02e-03
Section 6/7
Surface
1.78e-01
9.78e-02
1.24e-01
8.78e-02
1.70e-01
1.55e-01
1.55e-01
1.22e-02
9.54e-02
3.44e-04
3.27e-02
2.00e-02
1.72e-01
5.96e-02
1.39e-01
5.77c-02
6.97e-02
3.66e-02
3.26e-02
1.17e-01
2.38e-02
2.54e-02
9.02e-02
2.70e-02
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
3.20e-01
3.09e-01
3.33e-01
3.60e-01
2.95e-01
2.73e-01
3.55e-01
2.49e-01
2.98e-01
2.19e-01
2.25e-01
2.25e-01
3.87e-01
2.59e-01
1.86e-01
1.73e-01
1.90e-01
1.62e-01
1.88e-01
2.30e-01
1.60e-01
1.37e-01
1.68e-01
1.31e-01
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
3.07e-01
3-OOe-Ol
2.98e-01
2.97e-01
2.95e-01
2.73e-01
2.67e-01
2.49e-01
2.48e-01
2.19e-01
2.16c-01
2.13e-01
2.13e-01
2.12e-01
1.86e-01
1.65e-01
1.64e-01
1.62e-01
1.59e-01
1.55e-01
1.44e-01
1.36e-01
1.14e-01
1.09e-01
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
n-Heptane
o-Dichlorobcnzene
Methylcyclohexane
3-Melhylhexane
b-Pinene
Trichlorofluoromethane
3-Methylpentane
m-Diethyl benzene
3-Methylheptane
Isoheptane +
2,3-Dimethylpentane
Chloroethane
t-2-Pentene
2,2,5-Trimethylhexane
Vinyl Chloride
Methylcyclopentane
Benzene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Isobutylbenzene
Chloromcthane/Halocarbon
114
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Cumene
Ethylene
Trichloroethylene
Section 1/9
Surface
3.90e-02
O.OOe+00
3.62e-02
3.74e-02
O.OOe+00
1.57e-02
4.25e-02
4.03e-05
4.41c-03
8.89e-03
3.66e-02
2.23e-02
5.16e-03
1.69e-02
2.35e-02
9.45e-03
4.09e-03
O.OOe+00
1.05e-02
1.78e-02
4.23e-04
1.93e-03
1.84e-02
Passive Vents
1.49e-04
8.85e-04
9.02e-05
5.71e-05
1.53e-03
4.83e-06
3.13e-05
7.21e-04
6.82c-05
7.99e-05
2.40e-06
6.75e-06
1.86e-05
2.92e-05
3.56e-05
2.30e-04
O.OOe-i-00
4.32e-04
O.OOe+00
4.23e-06
3.08e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Gas
Collection
System*
1.46e-02
6.68e-02
1.10e-02
8.35e-03
1.79e-02
1.83e-02
2.21e-01
3.86e-02
6.00e-03
l.Ole-02
1.72e-03
3.42e-02
7.59e-03
3.88e-03
4.77e-03
1.60e-02
5.02e-03
2.44e-02
O.OOe+00
1.20e-02
1.61e-02
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 2/8
Surface
2.32e-02
O.OOe+00
1.77e-02
5.76e-03
3.71e-03
6.75e-04
5.66e-03
5.67e-04
1.86e-02
1.26e-02
4.19e-03
6.16e-04
8.58e-03
O.OOe+00
5.03e-03
8.96e-03
2.23e-05
O.OOe+00
3.45e-03
1.32e-04
5.49e-05
6.70e-03
4.09e-05
Passive Vents
6.60e-03
9.83e-03
5.09e-03
4.76e-03
1.07e-02
4.15e-03
5.39e-03
6.88e-03
3.25e-03
6.55e-03
1.68e-03
1.57e-03
1.44e-03
7.28e-03
2.71e-03
2.08e-03
1.38e-03
5.18e-03
O.OOe+00
7.77e-03
3.46e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 3/4
Surface
1.28e-02
O.OOc+00
1.73e-02
1.22e-02
9.09e-05
9.49e-04
1.49e-02
O.OOe+00
1.51e-02
1.39e-02
1.30e-03
1.96e-02
1.34e-02
1.17e-03
6.35e-03
9.37e-03
1.79e-03
O.OOe+00
1.22e-02
6.54e-04
7.06e-03
1.73e-02
3.67e-04
Passive Vents
3.54e-03
1.44e-02
2.55e-03
1.79e-03
1.26e-02
8.92e-04
6.76e-04
l.Ole-02
2.14e-03
2.87e-03
3.96e-04
1.02e-03
1.20e-03
5.57e-03
1.26e-03
1.96e-03
4.46e-04
5.68e-03
O.OOe+00
1.86e-03
5.12e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 6/7
Surface
2.36e-02
7.69e-02
2.08e-02
2.66e-02
5.98e-02
6.03e-02
1.26e-02
5.39e-02
2.36e-02
2.13e-02
1.89e-02
6.32e-03
2.07e-02
1.91e-02
7.70e-03
1.17e-02
3.58e-02
3.14e-02
1.42e-02
1.15e-02
2.26e-02
1.28e-02
1.73e-02
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
1.24e-01
1.69e-01
l.lle-01
9.69e-02
1.06e-01
l.Ole-01
3.02e-01
l.lle-01
7.32e-02
7.64e-02
6.48e-02
8.56e-02
5.81e-02
5.39e-02
5.14e-02
5.97e-02
4.85e-02
6.72e-02
4.03e-02
5.18e-02
5.52e-02
3.88e-02
3.61e-02
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
1.09e-01
1.02e-01
9.97e-02
8.86e-02
8.85e-02
8.27e-02
8.18e-02
7.22e-02
6.72e-02
6.62e-02
6.30e-02
5.15e-02
5.05e-02
5.00e-02
4.66e-02
4.37e-02
4.35e-02
4.27e-02
4.03e-02
3.97e-02
3.91e-02
3.88e-02
3.61e-02
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
2,3,4-Trimethylpcntane
2-Methyl-l-Butene
Ncohcxanc
2-Methyl-2-Butcne
2,2,3-Trimcthylpcntane
c-2-Pen(ene
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-Butadiene
Methanol
2,5-Dimethylhexane
Naphthalene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 -Octene
Cyclopentane
MTBH, Isohexane, &
c-4-Mcthyl-2-Pentene
Indan
Freon 113
1 ,4-Dioxane &
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
3-Mcthyl-l-Butene
1-Hexene
1-Undecene
c-2-Bulene
Mclhylisobutylketone
1-Butanol & Cyclohexane
Section 1/9
Surface
l.OOe-02
9.98e-03
1.30e-02
2.01e-03
7.16e-03
2.14e-02
O.OOe+00
5.69e-03
4.82e-03
2.28e-03
O.OOe+00
3.27e-04
8.10e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
7.62e-03
O.OOe+00
2.22e-03
4.65e-03
O.OOe+00
6.55e-03
4.24e-04
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
1.97e-05
5.92e-05
1.02e-05
5.00e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
6.59e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.16e-04
1.51e-04
5.19e-05
O.OOe+00
3.62e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.32e-05
2.80e-05
O.OOe+00
5.01e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
5.65e-05
Gas
Collection
System*
2.69e-03
3.83e-03
3.13e-03
4.21e-03
3.66e-03
1.77e-03
2.57e-02
O.OOe+00
5.09e-03
2.00e-02
3.28e-02
5.92e-03
3.79e-03
4.56e-03
O.OOe+00
1.44e-03
7.76e-03
1.92e-03
3.73e-03
6.36e-02
6.74e-04
7.90e-04
8.59e-03
Section 2/8
Surface
4.95e-03
3.70e-03
3.18e-03
1.26e-03
4.08e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.71e-03
3.78e-03
2.57e-03
O.OOe+00
1.54e-03
9.92e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
6.55e-06
O.OOe+00
1.79e-03
7.70e-05
O.OOe+00
6.10e-04
1.83e-03
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
3.57e-03
1.92e-03
8.19e-04
2.15e-03
1.33e-03
4.74e-04
1.41e-03
O.OOe+00
8.65e-04
8.19e-04
1.65e-03
2.72e-03
2.26e-03
1.27e-02
6.93e-03
1.90e-04
5.54e-03
3.50e-04
2.11e-03
3.70e-03
2.03e-04
4.08e-04
5.82e-03
Section 3/4
Surface
6.66e-03
8.08e-03
4.96e-03
7.25e-03
8.43e-03
1.04e-03
O.OOe+00
4.27e-03
6.00e-03
5.14e-04
O.OOe+00
2.86e-03
2.23e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
5.20e-04
O.OOe+00
5.80e-03
2.02e-03
O.OOe+00
1.85e-03
6.25e-03
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
9.24e-04
1.10e-03
4.44e-04
7.61e-04
3.36e-04
3.63e-05
7.02e-04
8.65e-05
3.39e-04
1.28e-03
2.09e-03
1.84e-03
4.65e-04
1.49e-03
8.67e-03
3.35e-06
2.42e-03
3.58e-04
4.94e-04
5.97e-03
1.97e-04
7.06e-05
2.72e-03
Section 6/7
Surface
9.14e-03
9.89e-03
5.85e-03
1.32e-02
4.59e-03
1.62e-04
2.03e-02
1.06e-02
3.92e-03
1.20e-02
1.35e-02
7.26e-03
9.79e-03
2.29e-03
O.OOe+00
6.97e-03
7.29e-03
2.55e-03
3.04e-03
2.66e-04
9.15e-04
8.11e-04
O.OOe+00
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
3.80e-02
3.86e-02
3.14e-02
3.08e-02
2.96e-02
2.48e-02
4.82e-02
2.23e-02
2.48e-02
3.96e-02
5.02e-02
2.25e-02
2.03e-02
1.65e-02
1.56e-02
1.68e-02
1.53e-02
1.50e-02
1.61e-02
7.41e-02
1.10e-02
1.06e-02
8.59e-03
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
3.53e-02
3.47e-02
2.82e-02
2.66e-02
2.59e-02
2.31e-02
2.25e-02
2.23e-02
1.97e-02
1.96e-02
1.74e-02
1.66e-02
1.65e-02
I.65e-02
1.56e-02
1.53e-02
1.53e-02
1.31e-02
1.24e-02
1.04e-02
1.03e-02
9.79e-03
8.59e-03
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
2-Methy!-2-Pentene
2,4-Dimethylpentane
2,3-Dimethylbutane
Trichloroethene
1-Pentene
Isoprene
Mercury
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Dichlorotoluene
1,3-Butadiene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
c-3-Hexene
1-Decene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
p-lsopropyltoluene
c-3-Heptene
Chlorodifluoromethane
t-2-Hexene
Chloroform
Heptanal
Bromomethane
2-Methylheptane
c-2-Octene
Section 1/9
Surface
3.49e-03
7.63e-04
7.47e-04
O.OOe+00
7.31e-04
1.44e-03
NM
2.12e-03
1.56e-03
3.87e-03
O.OOe+00
1.15e-03
5.46e-04
3.56e-04
O.OOe+00
6.11e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.25e-04
2.44e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
l.OOe-06
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.15e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.72e-04
O.OOe+00
8.68e-06
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.03e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
5.90e-06
6.33e-06
1.37e-05
2.03e-05
Gas
Collection
System*
3.08e-03
2.85e-03
O.OOe+00
7.12e-03
2.22e-03
2.50e-03
2.84e-02
1.64e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.93e-02
2.72e-02
7.53e-04
O.OOe+00
3.97e-03
O.OOe+00
2.22e-01
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.76e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.01e-03
O.OOe+00
Section 2/8
Surface
O.OOe+00
1.41e-03
1.29e-03
O.OOe+00
1.26e-03
4.00e-05
NM
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
6.77e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
4.00e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
1.12e-03
5.97e-04
O.OOe+00
4.50e-03
1.81e-04
5.39e-04
2.84e-03
1.38e-04
1.42e-05
1.90e-04
1.35e-03
O.OOe+00
1.98e-04
4.72e-04
8.14e-04
O.OOe+00
1.84e-03
1.34e-03
O.OOe+00
2.91e-05
O.OOe+00
5.69e-04
O.OOe+00
6.63e-04
2.80e-04
Section 3/4
Surface
2.62e-03
2.11e-03
2.45e-03
O.OOe+00
1.98e-03
5.86e-04
NM
2.99e-04
4.00e-04
6.46e-05
O.OOe+00
2.10e-03
4.73e-05
1.12e-03
O.OOe+00
8.43e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.62e-04
9.12e-04
7.40e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
6.98e-04
4.68e-04
8.26e-05
8.06e-04
1.39e-04
3.65e-04
2.29e-03
5.06e-05
7.03e-06
2.60e-05
2.46e-03
O.OOe+00
3.42e-04
1.48e-05
1.84e-03
3.74e-06
3.86e-04
6.13e-04
O.OOe+00
3.11e-05
O.OOe+00
7.59e-04
1. 18e-03
3.76e-04
7.51e-04
Section 6/7
Surface
2.98e-04
2.57e-03
2.59e-03
1.67e-03
1.58e-03
2.67e-03
O.OOe+00
2.00e-03
2.60e-03
3.11e-04
1.10e-04
3.60e-04
2.13e-03
5.08e-04
O.OOe+00
2.30e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.89e-03
2.93e-04
4.18e-04
O.OOe+00
1.14e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
1.13e-02
1.08e-02
7.16e-03
1.41e-02
8.08e-03
8.14e-03
3.38e-02
6.24e-03
4.58e-03
4.46e-03
4.34e-02
3.08e-02
4.03e-03
3.15e-03
6.63e-03
2.45e-03
2.25e-01
1.95e-03
1.89e-03
1.03e-02
1.57e-03
1.41e-03
1.30e-03
4.06e-03
1.05e-03
Total Landfill
Gas Ait
Emissions ©
8.23e-03
7.92e-03
7.16e-03
6.98e-03
5.86e-03
5.64e-03
5.45e-03
4.61e-03
4.58e-03
4.46e-03
4.09e-03
3.61e-03
3.28e-03
3.15e-03
2.66e-03
2.45e-03
2.25e-03
.95e-03
.89e-03
.58e-03
.57e-03
.41e-03
.30e-03
.05e-03
.05e-03
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
t-3-Heptene
t-2-Heptene
3,5,5-Trimethylhexene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
2-Methyl-l-Pentene
1 ,2-Dibromocthane
c-2-Hexene
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Carbon Tetrachloride
1 -Melhylcyclohexene
m-Chlorotoluene
o-Chlorotoluene
Bromodichloromethane
1 -Heptene
4-Nonene
Cyclohexene
Cyclopentene
2-Butanone
2-EthyI-l-Butene
Dichlorofluoromethane
2,4,4-Trimethyl- 1 -Pentene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
Vinyl Acetate
Bromochloromethane
Section 1/9
Surface
4.62e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.17e-04
O.OOe+00
l.OOe-04
O.OOe+00
l.OOe-04
1.33e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
O.OOe+00
2.26e-05
8.68e-06
2.84e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
2.13e-06
O.OOe+00
1.45e-04
3.73e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
2.85e-04
O.OOe+00
1.81e-05
O.OOe+00
O.UUe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Gas
Collection
System'
O.OOe+00
5.03e-03
8.53e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
6.00e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.69e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 2/8
Surface
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
8.69e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOc+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
7.13e-05
1.32e-04
5.48e-04
2.18e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOc+00
O.OOe+00
6.27e-04
1.18e-04
O.OOe+00
4.17e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
2.86e-05
2.93e-05
O.OOe+00
2.24e-04
9.69e-05
O.OOe+00
1.07e-05
O.OOe+00
3.63e-05
O.OOe+00
3.53e-05
O.OOe+00
Section 3/4
Surface
2.24e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
2.57e-04
O.OOe+00
3.24e-04
O.OOe+00
1.10e-05
3.31e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
O.OOe+00
8.42e-04
3.00e-04
5.43e-04
O.OOe+00
7.44e-04
1.83e-05
O.OOe+00
9.39e-05
O.OOe+00
5.85e-05
2.42e-04
O.OOe+00
1.68e-04
2.74e-04
O.OOc+00
O.OOe+00
7.19e-05
1.69e-04
1.39e-04
O.OOe+00
3.59e-05
5.32e-05
O.OOe+00
3.44e-05
Section 6/7
Surface
4.75e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.04e-04
O.OOe+00
2.07e-04
O.OOe+00
2.95e-04
4.35e-04
9.58e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.20e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.30e-04
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
1.03e-03
6.03e-03
1.71e-03
7.89e-04
7.64e-04
7.44e-04
6.49e-04
6.27e-04
6.18e-04
6.03e-04
6.58e-03
3.87e-04
3.73e-04
3.17e-04
3.99e-03
2.85e-04
2.24e-04
1.87e-04
1.69e-04
1.50e-04
1.30e-04
7.23e-05
5.32e-05
3.53e-05
3.44e-05
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
1.03e-03
9.96e-04
8.57e-04
7.89e-04
7.64e-04
7.44e-04
6.49e-04
6.27e-04
6.18e-04
6.03e-04
5.72e-04
3.87e-04
3.73e-04
3.17e-04
3.04e-04
2.85e-04
2.24e-04
1.87e-04
1.69e-04
1.50e-04
1.30e-04
7.23e-05
5.32e-05
3.53e-05
3.44e-05
-------
Table 5-17
(Continued)
Compound
4-MethyI-l-Pentene
Neopentane
Butyraldehyde
Chloroprene
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
1-Propanol
1 -Nonene
Vinyl Bromide
p-ChlorotoIuene
Mcthylcyclopentene
Acrylonitrile
Dibromochloromethane
Bromoform
Freon 23
Acetaldehyde
t-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
Section 1/9
Surface
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Gas
Collection
System'
O.OOe+00
1.05e-03
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 2/8
Surface
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
2.01e-05
9.20e-06
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 3/4
Surface
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Passive Vents
8.91e-06
1.79e-05
2.37e-05
1.82e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Section 6/7
Surface
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Landfill Gas
Production
Rates (b)
2.90e-05
1.08e-03
2.37e-05
1.82e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Total Landfill
Gas Air
Emissions ©
2.90e-05
2.71e-05
2.37e-05
1.82e-05
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
NM = Not Measured
'Emissions from gas collection system include emissions from landfill gas condensate produced by landfill gas collection system.
'Total landfill gas production is the sum of emissions measured at the soil surface and passive vents and landfill gas collection system.
Total landfill gas air emissions only include emissions from soil surface and passive vents. Emissions from landfill gas collection system are incinerated.
-------
Table 5-18
Comparison of Average Landfill Gas Composition to
Values Reported in The Literature
Compound
TNMHC
Ethane
Limonene
Toluene
Propane
a-Pinene
Acetone
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Ethylbenzene
n-Butane
n-Nonane
o-Dichlorobenzene
o-Xylene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Chlorobenzene
n-Octane
n-Pentane
Benzene
n-Hexane
Trichlorofluoromethane
Methylene Chloride
Methylcyclohexane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
Vinyl Chloride
Trichloroethene
Chloromethane
1,1.1 -Trichloroethane
Chloroethane
1 ,1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Dichlorofluoromethane
Dibromochloromethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Gas Collection System
438
223
35.4
14.6
13.0
7.85
6.09
5.97
4.71
3.80
3.57
2.17
2.17
1.27
1.15
0.99
0.97
0.93
0.92
0.69
0.55
0.52
0.34
0.27
0.24
0.23
0.19
0.13
0.03
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Range Reported in Literature (a)
234 - 14,294
0 - 1780
470
0.2 - 758
0 - 86.5
446
0-32
0 - 70.9
0.15-428
0-32
167
0
3.7 - 664
0 - 43.99
0-10
152
0 - 46.53
0 - 52.2
0-25
0-11.9
0-174
2.4 - 197
0-19.5
0-48.1
0.01 - 34
0-10.22
0-9
0-9.2
0 - 2.35
0-26.11
0
0-68.3
0-7.85
0
Radian Corporation
5-67
-------
Table 5-18
(Continued)
Compound
Bromoform
Chloroform
Chlorodifluoromethane
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
2-Butanone
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1-Butanol
Acrylonitrile
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Gas CoDection System
(ppm)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Range Reported in Literature (a)
(ppm)
0
0-1.56
0- 12.58
0
129
0
0-0.1
100
0-7.4
0-1.8
0-30.1
ND = Not detected
* Values reported in "Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills - Background Information for Proposed
Standards and Guidelines," March 1991.
5-68
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-19
Emission Factors Based on Flux Chamber Measurements
Compound
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1,3-Butadiene
1,4-Dioxane & 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
1-Butanol & Cyclohexane
1 -Decene
1-Heptene
1-Hexene
1 -Methylcyclohexene
1-Nonene
1-Octene
1-Pentene
1-Propanol
1-Undecene
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,2.5-Trimethylhexane
2,3 .4-Trimethylpentane
2,3-DimethyIbutane
2,4,4-Trimethyl- 1-Pentene
2,4-4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene
2,4-Dimethylpentane
2,5-Dimethylhexane
2-Butanone
2-Ethyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl-l-Butene
2-Methyl- 1-Pentene
2-Methyl-2-Butene
2-Methyl-2-Pentene
2-Methylheptane
uflDSSlOR
Factor
(e/sec-keofMSVV)
1.33e-ll
1.20e-ll
4.23e-14
1.55e-ll
2.81e-12
3.01e-10
9.02e-ll
1.30e-09
2.89e-14
3.58e-14
1.86e-13
6.27e-10
8.26e-14
4.99e-ll
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.97e-12
5.52e-13
O.OOe+00
3.47e-ll
2.04e-13
O.OOe+00
1.41e-12
6.97e-12
6.02e-ll
2.32e-ll
2.82e-13
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.08e-ll
9.56e-12
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.09e-ll
O.OOe+00
1.75e-ll
7.89e-14
O.OOe+00
Radian Corporation
5-69
-------
Table 5-19
(Continued)
Compound
3,5,5 -Trimethylhexene
3-Methyl-l-Butene
3-Methylheptane
3-Methylhexane
3-Methylpentane
4-MethyI-l-Pentene
4-Nonene
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acetylene
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromofonn
Bromomethane
Butyraldehyde
Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodifluoromethane
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chloroprene
Cumene
Cyclohexene
Cyclopentane
Cyclopentene
Dibromochloromethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Dichlorofluoromethane
Dichlorotoluene
Diethyl Ether & 2-Propanol
Ethane
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
Emission
Factor
(g/sec-kgofMSW)
O.OOe+00
1.07e-ll
3.08e-ll
3.63e-ll
1.22e-ll
0.00e400
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
5.74e-ll
4.68e-12
O.OOe+00
5.26e-ll
6.13e-10
O.OOe+00
6.37e-13
O.OOe+00
1.36e-14
O.OOe+00
2.65e-05
5.21e-14
2.22e-10
l.OOe-11
4.34e-12
6.49e-14
1.49e-12
O.OOe+00
1.53e-10
O.OOe+00
1.07e-ll
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.60e-10
8.73e-15
5.81e-13
9.20e-12
6.62e-09
1.34e-10
1.16e-09
1.08e-12
5-70
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-19
(Continued)
Compound
Freon 1 13
Freon 114
Freon 23
Heptanal
Hexachloro-1 ,3-Butadiene
Hexanal
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indan
Indene
Isobutane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isobutylbenzene
Isoheptane + 2,3-Dimethylpentane
Isopentane
Isoprene
Limonene
MTBE, Isohexane, & c-4-Methyl-2-Pentene
Methane
Methanol
Methylcyclohexane
Methylcyclopentane
Melhylcyclopentene
Methylene Chloride
Methylisobutylketone
Naphthalene
Neohexane
Neopentane
Nitrogen
Oxygen
Propane
Propylene
Stvrene
TNMHC
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Total Unidentified VOCs
Trichloroethene
Trichloroethylene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Emission
Factor
(S/sec-kgofMSW)
l.lle-12
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
1.19e-15
1.37e-10
5.42e-ll
4.34e-10
O.OOe+00
4.26e-12
7.12e-10
4.91e-ll
2.14e-10
4.87e-l 1
1.44e-10
1.21e-ll
1.30e-09
1.51e-ll
1.42e-05
7.06e-13
3.95e-ll
1.27e-ll
O.OOe+00
1.15e-ll
2.22e-13
8.22e-ll
7.81e-12
O.OOe+00
1.48e-05
3.56e-06
5.77e-10
4.66e-12
2.84e-10
4.91e-08
4.37e-ll
1.22e-09
1.95e-08
9.18e-12
7.11e-13
7.90e-ll
Radian Corporation
5-71
-------
Table 5-19
(Continued)
Compound
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Bromide
Vinyl Chloride
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
b-Pinene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
c-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
c-2-Butene
c-2-Hexene
c-2-Octene
c-2-Pentene
c-3-Heptene
c-3-Hexene
c-3-Methyl-2-Pentene
m-Chlorotoluene
m-Diethylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
n-Butane
n-Butylbenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Heptane
n-Hexane
n-Nonane
n-Octane
n-Pentane
n-Propylbenzene
n-Undecane
o-Chlorotoluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
o-Ethyltoluene
o-Xylene
p-Chlorotoluene
p-Diethylbenzene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Isopropyltoluene
p/m-Xylene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
t- 1 , 3-Dichloropropene
t-2-Butene
Emission
Factor
(g/sec-kgofMSW)
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
7.21e-ll
1.13e-09
4.07e-10
2.82e-ll
3.55e-14
7.77e-13
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
6.82e-14
O.OOe+00
6.66e-14
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
3.56e-10
5.40e-10
2.77e-10
3.47e-10
4.94e-09
4.99e-ll
3.71e-ll
1.19e-09
1.27e-10
3.96e-ll
5.41e-10
1.15e-09
O.OOe+00
5.24e-10
9.88e-10
5.52e-10
O.OOe+00
7.84e-10
5.56e-10
O.OOe+00
1.28e-09
2.01e-14
8.52e-14
2.68e-12
5-72
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 5-19
(Continued)
Compound
t-2-Heptene
t-2-Hexene
t-2-Pentene
t-3-Heptene
t-4-Methvl-2-Pentene
Emission
Factor
(s/sec-kcofMSW)
O.OOe+00
4.04e-14
2.98e-12
O.OOe+00
O.OOe+00
Radian Corporation
5-73
-------
"
Table 5-20
Comparison of Measured Landfill Gas Emissions to Various Emission Estimation Techniques
Compound
TNMHC
Toluene
p/m-Xylene
Ethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene & t-Butylbenzene
n-Nonane
Methylene Chloride
o-Xylene
1,1-Dichloroethane
Styrene
Chlorobenzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
Vinyl Chloride
Benzene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-TrichIorobenzene
Trichloroethene
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Total Landfill Gas
Production Rates
4.14e+01
1.10e+00
7.59e-01
7.00e-01
6.29e-01
5.81e-01
3.09e-01
2.98e-01
2.25e-01
2.59e-01
1.88e-01
1.68e-01
5.39e-02
5.97e-02
4.85e-02
5.18e-02
5.02e-02
1.41e-02
6.24e-03
4.03e-03
Emission Estimates Based On
LEG Collection System (a)
7.29e+01
2.67e+00
1.26e+00
9.66e-01
1.21e+00
9.09e-01
8.31e-02
4.53e-01
8.48e-02
4.27e-01
2.61e-01
4.89e-01
3.53e-02
1.45e-01
4.57e-02
1.09e-01
3.25e-01
6.47e-02
1.49e-02
5.15e-03
Emission Estimates Based On
Flux Chamber Emission Factors (b)
3.49e+03
8.67e+01
9.10e+01
8.25e+01
9.24e+01
8.46e+01
8.18e-01
3.92e+01
1.10e+00
2.02e+01
1.58e+01
4.36e+01
5.13e+00
3.74e+00
9.46e-01
2-Ole+OO
6.41e+00
6.53e-01
2.00e-01
8.53e-01
n
(a) Estimated emissions = (emissions from landfill gas collection system)*(total landfill mass/mass under influence of gas collection system)
(b)Estimated emissions = (flux chamber emission factors [g/sec-kg waste])*(total mass waste in landfill)
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
6.0 QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS
A comprehensive Quality
Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) effort
was tailored to meet the specific needs of
this project and is detailed in the Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (Anderson,
Burrow, and Eklund, 1995). The QA/QC
effort was implemented to ensure that the
data collected are of known and sufficient
quality to meet the overall project objectives
and to allow qualitative and quantitative
characterization of the composition of the
landfill gas. The control procedures
included, but were not limited to, frequent
and regular instrument calibrations, analysis
of blanks and standards, independent
systems audits of field activities and
equipment and performance audits of
laboratories, use of standard reference
methods, data verification and quality
assessment, and peer review of the data
presentation and conclusions.
The primary objectives of the
QA/QC effort were to control, assess, and
document data quality. In order to
accomplish these objectives, the QA/QC
approach consisted of the following key
elements:
• Definition of data quality objectives
that reflect the overall technical
objectives of the project;
• Design of a sampling, analytical,
QA/QC, and data analysis system to
meet these objectives;
• Evaluation of the performance of the
measurement system; and
• Implementation of appropriate
corrective actions if the performance
of the measurement system did not
meet specifications.
Achievement of these QA/QC
objectives resulted in a set of well-
documented and defensible measurement
data whose quality satisfies the needs of the
project. This section presents a discussion
of data quality and any anomalies or
limitations in the use of the data, based on
results for QC analyses and QA audits.
6.1 Summary of Data Quality
Review of quality indicators suggests
that the data reported are valid and reliable
for their intended use. For any measurement
effort, there exists a degree of uncertainty in
the measurement result. Overall
measurement precision and accuracy, which
include uncertainty in analysis as well as
uncertainty in sampling, were controlled and
assessed by adherence to specifications for
sample collection, analytical method
performance, and analysis of control
samples. Analytical bias was controlled by
routine calibration of all measurement
instrumentation. Potential bias due to blank
effects and recovery efficiency was
monitored by routine analysis of blank
samples and laboratory control standards.
Repeatability of measurement results was
checked both within and between analytical
batches by on-going analysis of calibration
check standards and second source
laboratory control standards, and by
replicate analyses of standards and samples
within a batch. Evaluation of measurement
uncertainty as a function of site parameters,
such as spatial and temporal variability,
were an integral part of the test design, and
are discussed in Section 5 of this report.
Radian Corporation
6-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Overall, the data show a high degree
of reliability. All sample handling, tracking,
and hold time requirements were met.
Documentation of sampling and analysis is
thorough and supports the reported data.
However, some anomalies or concerns
should be noted when interpreting or using
the data for decision-making.
Whereas blind audit sample analysis
results indicated accurate measurements for
most compounds for which recovery
objectives were specified in the QAPP, a
few exceptions were noted. These are
delineated in Section 6.3.2.
Carbon dioxide measurements for
Section 3/4 passive vent canister samples
appear to be biased high, based on the fixed
gas ratios and closure balance. On-site fixed
gas measurements were also taken, both for
all the vents and in-situ, so these results may
be more representative and useful.
6.2 Results of Quality Control
Measures
Results for the QC measures
implemented for field and laboratory
activities are discussed in this section. The
field activities included equipment
calibratiofi checks and analysis of blank and
duplicate QC samples. Analytical activities
included equipment calibration checks and
analysis of laboratory control samples,
laboratory blanks, and matrix spike/matrix
spike duplicates.
The QC data are summarized in this
section. Because of the large number of
compounds analyzed, results for
representative compounds are presented in
most cases to illustrate analytical
performance. Measurement uncertainties
were normal for the types of samples and
analytes, with different species exhibiting
different behaviors in the measurement
systems, as would be expected. Based on
analyst experience and quality control data,
the prominent types of uncertainties or
anomalies in the measurement processes are
discussed.
6.2.1 Field Quality Control
Measurements conducted on site
included determination of landfill gas (CH4,
CO2, and O2), flow rate, hydrogen sulfide,
and mercury. Quality control measures
associated with analyses included daily
calibrations of the analytical instruments,
replicate measurements, and analysis of
blanks. A on-site technical systems audit
was also conducted during sampling
activities. Results of the audit are
summarized in Section 6.3. The audit report
is presented in Appendix O.
Mercury analyses were performed
using a Jerome 431-X Gold Film Mercury
Analyzer that is certified by the supplier
against units traceable to National Institutes
of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Hydrogen sulfide analyses were performed
using a Jerome 631-X Gold Film Hydrogen
Sulfide Analyzer, also traceable to NIST
calibration standards. A GeoGroup Model
GA90 Landfill Gas Analyzer was used for
on-site determinations of methane, carbon
dioxide, and oxygen.
Results for analysis of calibration
check samples showed on-going control of
the measurement processes. The calibration
of each analyzer was checked daily over a
range of instrument responses. The
calibration checks were documented in field
notebooks. Blank sample analyses showed
6-2
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
no evidence of systematic contamination.
The mercury analyzer, which is calibrated at
the factory against NIST traceable standards,
is checked by generating a mercury-in-air
sample, the concentration of which is
dependent on the temperature of the
calibration cell. There was some variation
in generating the calibration check standard
because of difficulty in holding a constant
temperature in the drafty environment of the
on-site trailer while conducting the
calibration check, but the variation was
random, with no evidence of significant bias
in the instrument calibration. The mercury
analyzer calibration data are presented in
Table 6-1 (All tables appear at the end of the
section).
The procedures for determination of
mercury in samples from the landfill gas
collection system and individual landfill gas
extraction wells had to be modified in the
field because of unexpectedly high levels of
mercury. Instead of collecting the mercury
on gold dosimeters, as described in the
Sampling Plan, an alternate analysis scheme
had to be developed in the field. The
method that was used is described in detail
in Section 3 of this document. Basically, the
Jerome mercury calibration system was
adapted to analyze the field samples. During
the development of this method in the field,
high levels of H2S were introduced into the
analyzer from the sample sources.
The Jerome analyzer uses a gold film
technique to quantitate the concentration of
mercury in the samples. This technique is
also sensitive to H2S (the Jerome H2S
analyzer uses the same technique to
quantitate H2S) and uses an acid gas
scrubber to remove H2S prior to analysis.
Since high levels of H2S were introduced
into the analyzer from the landfill collection
header and gas extraction well samples, the
scrubber may have been saturated with H2S
and, therefore, the mercury data may have
been affected. Note: the mercury samples
collected from passive vents would not be
affected by H2S interference because during
desorption of mercury from the dosimeter,
H2S is converted to SO2, which is not on
interferant. To determine if this occurred, a
series of H2S standards were introduced into
the mercury analyzer and the analyzer
response was recorded. The technique used
to introduce the H2S standards was the same
as that used to measure the mercury
concentrations from the landfill gas header
and individual extraction wells. H2S
standards with concentrations between 0 and
100 ppm H2S were injected into the analyzer
to determine instrument response. The
instrument response versus H2S
concentration is shown in Table 6-2.
The results show an increase in false
positive mercury responses with increasing
hydrogen sulfide concentration, but only up
to 2 ng mercury in the presence of 100 ppm
hydrogen sulfide for a 1ml injection volume.
Most of the landfill gas collection
header and extraction well samples had H2S
concentrations of approximately 6.0-70 ppm.
Therefore, the results show, assuming an
average H2S concentration of 70 ppm, that
the potential instrument bias for a typical
sample may have been in the range of 1 ng
mercury. The check results indicate that the
capacity of the acid gas scrubber decreased
relatively slowly, so the actual H2S
interference for the field samples would
have been negligible and almost certainly no
higher than the data presented above. The
mercury analyzer response ranged from 1 to
14 ng for gas collection header samples and
from 6 to 8 ng for gas extraction well
Radian Corporation
6-3
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
samples. Therefore, it is possible that the
lowest measured mercury concentrations
were artifacts of H2S interference. The vast
majority of the measured mercury values,
however, were well above this threshold, so
the overall relative impact of H2S
interference on mercury determinations was
small.
The vane anemometers used for on-
site flow rate determinations were calibrated
by Davis Instruments Calibration
Laboratory. Multipoint calibrations were
performed at the Radian Field Support
Laboratory for the rotameters. The
anemometers and rotameter calibrations
were checked before and after use in the
sampling campaign.
Duplicate Measurements
Duplicate samples were collected
and analyzed for H2S and mercury to assess
the repeatability of results for samples
collected at the same time and place.
Duplicate analysis of individual samples was
also conducted for H2S determinations to
monitor and assess analytical imprecision.
Duplicate analyses cannot be performed on
mercury dosimeters because the entire
sample is consumed during analysis. A
detailed examination of the sources of
measurement variability is discussed in
Section 5, including temporal and spatial
components of variability.
Replicate measurement were taken
for each Tedlar bag sample analyzed on-site
for mercury and hydrogen sulfide. The
precision of the individual measurements
was evaluated for the mid to high-range
samples collected at the gas plant headers
and extraction wells. The precision
estimates are summarized below and
indicate the observed variation of replicate
determinations on individual samples. The
confidence in the reported average value for
each sample increases in proportion to the
square root of the number of determinations;
in this case, three to six readings per sample
were taken with three being typical. The
standard error in the reported average value
for each sample is thus less than 10% for the
mercury determinations, and less than 5%
forH2S.
Range
Std. Dev.
CV
SE
Hg
1-7 ppm
0.4 ppm
16%
9%
H2S
10-100 ppm
4.0 ppm
5%
3%
Standard error (SE) is calculated as the
%CV divided by the square root of the
number of results used to calculate the
average. The data indicate good precision
for these measurements.
The average relative percent
difference (RPD) between duplicate sample
results for field measurements at the gas
collection system and passive vents are
summarized in Table 6-3. These RPDs are
based only on duplicate field sample results
which were reported above the detection
limits. These results show good
repeatability. The only relatively high RPD
values were for oxygen at the gas collection
plant, but the oxygen values were very near
the instrument detection limit (0.5%), so the
RPD value is reasonable. The RPD for
duplicate samples for mercury in the passive
vents was about 30 percent. RPD values
were quite low for H2S in passive vents, less
than 3 percent at an average concentration of
6-4
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
about 50 ppm. At the much lower
concentration measured in the flux chambers
(0.017 ppm H2S), the RPD is greater (18%),
but still indicating good repeatability.
It is characteristic of most
measurement systems that relative
imprecision, such as RPD, increases with
lower concentrations, while the absolute
deviation, expressed in terms of the
measurement concentration, tends to
approach a constant value.
6.2.2 Analytical Quality Control
Results for instrument calibration
checks and analysis of QC samples,
including laboratory control samples (LCS),
laboratory blanks, duplicates, matrix spikes
(MS), and surrogate spike samples are
discussed in this section. These samples
served the dual purpose of controlling and
assessing measurement data quality. The
QC data indicate that, therefore, no
significant problems with measurement data,
that the data has a high degree of reliability,
that QC measures were effective in ensuring
measurement data reliability within the
expected limits of sampling and analytical
error, and, most importantly, that the project
objectives and specifications were met.
Each type of QC data is discussed
with respect to the following parameter
groups:
1) Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
by gas chromatography with multiple
detectors (GC/MD);
2) Fixed gas by thermal conductivity
detector (TCD); and
3) VOCs by gas chromatography with
mass spectroscopy (GC/MS).
As appropriate, results of data obtained for
each landfill sample source (surface flux
chambers, passive vents, gas collection
system, soils, seeps, and condensates) are
presented within each parameter group.
6.2.2.1 GC/MD Analyses
Instrument Calibration Checks
Instrument calibration check results
are used as an indicator of analytical process
control. The flame ionization detector (FID)
and electrolytic conductivity detector
(ELCD) calibrations were checked using
vendor-certified standards for both systems
used to analyze the VOC samples (low-level
samples from the flux chambers and high-
level samples from the passive vents and the
gas collection system).
Results for the daily calibration
checks of the FID indicated that the initial
calibration curves were current and reliable,
the system was in control during analysis,
and acceptance criteria specified in the
QAPP were satisfied. Most ELCD daily
calibration checks were acceptable;
exceptions were methylene chloride (21 of
23 passed), 1,2-dichloroethane (22 of 23
passed), and trichloroethene (22 of 23
passed). Though the individual checks were
outside the calibration acceptance criteria
(50-150%), the average for each analyte was
within the criteria, indicating that overall
instrument performance was not affected
and that the criteria specified by the QAPP
were satisfied. Calibration check results
associated with QCj analysis also indicated
acceptable instrumentation performance.
Radian Corporation
6-5
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
A four-point calibration curve,
analyzed twice a year, is generated by use of
the primary calibration standards referenced
in Section 7.0 of the QAPP. A daily
calibration check standard was analyzed
prior to analysis of project samples.
Samples were diluted in order to bring the
fixed gas concentrations down to the
instrument calibration range.
Results for the daily calibration
checks of the thermal conductivity detector
(TCD) system for analysis of fixed gases
collected from the passive vents designated
for full characterization indicated that the
instrument performance did not change
during sample analysis. All fixed gas
calibration checks were within the QAPP-
specified acceptance criteria. The lack of a
high standard during the early part of
analysis and additional canister dilutions
appear to have resulted in a positive bias in
the CO2 results. The apparent systematic
bias associated with CO2 calibration
primarily affects the data from the vents
sampled in Section 3/4 of the landfill. A
sum and ratio of fixed gases (CH4, CO2, O2,
N2) for the Section 3/4 analyses also indicate
a bias in the CO2 measurements. The on-site
fixed gas analysis results for CO2
measurements provide a more complete and
accurate analysis for these parameters.
Laboratory Control Samples
Laboratory control samples (LCS),
prepared from using second-source
standards (i.e., standards obtained from a
different manufacturer than the one
supplying standards used for calibration), are
used to measure analyte recovery in the
absence of actual sample matrix effects.
One LCS or LCS duplicate pair was
analyzed for each analytical batch to
demonstrate that the analytical system was
in control. The LCS target analyte lists, as
shown in Tables 6-4 through 6-8, are based
on second-source standard cocktails used by
the laboratory to monitor and control
method performance and verify the
reliability of the calibration mixtures. Not
all compounds are checked against second-
source standards, although mid-point
calibration checks are performed every
analytical batch for all calibrated
compounds.
The majority of the LCS recoveries
associated with the FID flux chamber
measurements were within the accuracy
acceptance criteria for GC/MD analyses.
Three of the 30 recoveries for ethylbenzene
and two of the 30 recoveries for p-& m-
xylene were outside the acceptance criteria;
however, the average recoveries for both of
these analytes were within the criteria, and,
therefore, systematic bias is not indicated.
All 30 recoveries for styrene were
outside the acceptance criteria; the average
recovery was 41.8%. Fourteen of 17 styrene
calibration checks were within acceptable
limits and an independent performance
evaluation sample recovery for styrene was
138%. No definite trend for the accuracy of
styrene results can be determined from this
data, but the styrene data clearly show a
greater degree of measurement uncertainty.
The majority of the LCS recoveries
associated with the ELCD were within the
specified accuracy acceptance criteria. Eight
of the 34 recoveries for cis-1,3-
dichloropropene and five of the 34
recoveries for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane were
outside the acceptance criteria; the average
recoveries for both of these analytes were
within the criteria. Summaries of LCS
6-6
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
recoveries for the flux chamber systems are
presented in Tables 6-4 and 6-5.
All of the LCS recoveries associated
with the FID passive vent measurements
were within the specified accuracy
acceptance criteria of 70-130% or 50-150%
recovery.
The majority of the LCS recoveries
associated with the ELCD were within the
specified accuracy acceptance criteria with
the exception of chloromethane/freon 114
and methylene chloride. Three of the 44
recoveries for these analytes were outside
the 50-150% accuracy acceptance criteria;
however, the average recoveries for both
analytes (60% and 70%, respectively) were
within the criteria, indicating that systems
were in analytical control. Summaries of
LCS recovery results for the passive vent
and gas collection system measurements
systems are presented in Tables 6-6 and 6-7.
All LCS recoveries associated with
the TCD system for analysis of fixed gases
were within the specified 70-130% accuracy
acceptance criteria, indicating that the
system was in analytical control. A
summary of recovery results is presented in
Table 6-8.
Blank Samples
Laboratory blanks are used to detect
effects inherent in preparation and analytical
procedures, including reagents, glassware,
and instrument noise. One method blank,
composed of humidified nitrogen, was
analyzed in the same manner as a sample for
each analytical batch to monitor and assess
potential contamination.
The majority of the laboratory blank
results associated with the FID were within
the criteria specified by the QAPP or less
than the target analyte reporting limits. Six
of the 17 blanks were outside the acceptance
criteria for 1-hexene (0.3 ppbV); the range
of 1-hexene detected was 0.38 -1.67 ppbV,
with an average of 0.73 ppbV. Benzene,
toluene, n-decane -f p-dichlorobenzene, and
n-hexane were detected at levels outside the
acceptance criteria in one of the 17 blanks;
the average for each analyte was within the
criteria.
None of the target analytes were
detected above the acceptance criteria
specified by the QAPP in blanks associated
with the ELCD for flux chamber
measurements. These results indicate that
field data were not measurably affected by
laboratory contamination or instrument
noise. Method blank results associated with
flux chamber samples are summarized in
Tables 6-9 and 6-10.
None of the target analytes were
detected above the acceptance criteria
specified by the-QAPP in laboratory blanks
associated with the passive vent
measurement system. These results indicate
that sample data were not measurably
affected by laboratory contamination or
instrument noise. No target analytes were
detected in blanks associated with the
ELCD. FID laboratory blank results
associated with passive vent sample are
summarized in Table 6-11.
Field blanks were collected for flux
chamber samples. Results for analytes
detected in the field blanks are summarized
in Table 6-12. These results point to no
significant blank contamination, except for
ethanol/acetonitrile and diethylether/2-
Radian Corporation
6-7
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
propanol. The high levels of these 2 sets of
coeluting compounds, which are used in the
manufacturer's cleaning process, are
indicators of a faulty canister. This is a
characteristic contamination pattern that was
not observed in any other canisters. Even
low levels of these compounds may be
suspect, however.
None of the target analytes were
detected above the acceptance criteria
specified by the QAPP in blanks associated
with the TCD analysis of fixed gases. These
results in indicate that sample data were not
measurably affected by laboratory
contamination or instrument noise. Method
blank results are summarized in Table 6-13.
Duplicate Samples
Results obtained from analysis of
duplicate samples are used to assess
sampling and analytical variability
(precision). A detailed discussion of the
source of emission variability is presented in
Section 5. A summary of duplicate sample
results for a selected list of prominent VOCs
is presented in Table 6-14. These results
indicate good overall measurement
repeatability. As shown in Table 6-14, the
RPDs exceed the 30% objective for a small
number of compounds. The average
concentration in these compounds was low
in most cases, so the impact on the absolute
concentration variability is small.
6.2.2.2 GC/MS Analyses
Gas chromatography with mass
spectroscopy was used as a confirmation
tool for identification of volatile organic
compounds in canister samples quantitated
by GC/MD. GC/MS Method 8240 was used
to determine volatile organic compounds in
soil, seep water, and liquid condensate from
the gas collection system according to EPA
SW-846 Method 8240.
Quality control activities associated
with GC/MS analyses included initial
multipoint calibration, daily mass
spectrometer tuning and calibration
verification, and analysis of blanks,
laboratory control samples, matrix spikes,
and surrogate spikes.
Method 8240 analyses of solid and
liquid samples met all method
specifications.
LCS results for the GC/MS
confirmational analyses associated with
analysis of the high-level canister samples
show positive recovery bias, in the range of
100-200 percent recovery for most
compounds. However, as a tool for
qualitative confirmation of species
identification, the impact of positive bias is
not such a concern as the inability to detect
or recovery an analyte. LCS results
associated with the analysis of low-level
canister samples showed average results
closer to or less than 100% of these, only
benzyl chloride results were poor, averaging
50% recovery with a standard deviation of
50%. Although identification is not suspect,
the quantitative results for benzyl chloride
should be considered highly variable or
semi-quantitative. Laboratory control
sample results for GC/MS analyses are
summarized in Table 6-15.
Blank Samples
Method 8240 (solids and liquids)
blank sample results are summarized in
Table 6-16 for those compounds in which
the analyte was detected in the blank. A
6-8
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
relatively small number of contaminants
were detected, mostly the very light, highly
volatile species that are not uncommon
laboratory contaminants or which can easily
cross-contaminate through air. These results
show acetone as the only significant
contaminant, with persistent concentrations
near 30
For the canister samples,
tetrachloroethylene, toluene, and xylenes
were detected as contaminants in the blanks,
probably due to ambient levels at the site.
The amounts detected in the flux chamber
field blanks were similar for both GC/MS
and GC/MD analyses. Although helium was
used as the sweep gas for the flux chamber
blank samples, small amounts of nitrogen
(5-6%) and oxygen (1-2%) were measured
in all three field blanks, indicating some in-
leakage of ambient air and consequently,
some low-level VOC contamination. The
same effect would not be expected for
regular flux chamber samples, because the
chamber is inserted into the soil. The
amount of VOC contamination measured in
the blanks was small compared to that
measured in regular samples, so the impact
should not be significant.
Matrix Spiked Samples
Duplicate matrix spiked samples
were analyzed with each batch of liquid and
soil samples analyzed by Method 8240. The
samples were spiked with the standard 8240
matrix spike compound mixture to assess
general method effectiveness in the sample
matrix. (Matrix spikes were not analyzed
with canister samples.) Results for the
matrix spiked sample analyses indicate
effective recoveries for the spiked
compounds. Average recoveries were within
±5 percent of the spiked amount for the soil
and slurry samples, and within ± 30 percent
for the liquid condensate and water samples.
Precision estimates, expressed in
terms of the average relative percent
difference between duplicate matrix spike
recoveries, were within 5 percent RPD for
the solids and within 20 percent RPD for the
liquids. Recovery of toluene was outside the
method recovery limits in one out of eight
spiked sample analyses of liquid samples.
Recoveries were within the objectives for ali
other spiked sample analyses. Matrix spike
recoveries for Method 8240 analyses are
summarized in Table 6-17.
Every sample analyzed by GC/MS
Method 8240 was also spiked with the suite
of surrogate compounds (1,4-
bromofluorobenzene, 1,2-dichloroethane-d4,
and toluene-d8) as specified in the method to
monitor method performance. Recoveries
for the surrogate spike compounds are
presented with each sample result in the
laboratory reports. The surrogate recovery
data show a stable measurement system with
good recovery efficiency in each type of
sample matrix.
Duplicate Samples
Duplicate samples1 were collected to
assess imprecision in the total process of
collecting and analyzing a sample from a
single location and time. Sources of
variability in the emission estimates are
discussed in more detail in Section 5.
Precision estimates based on duplicate
sample analysis results are summarized in
Table 6-18 for GC/MS analyses.
Radian Corporation
6-9
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
6.3 Results of OA Audits
An on-site Technical Systems Audit
of field activities and a Laboratory
Performance Audit of Radian's volatile
organic compound (VOC) analytical
laboratory were conducted to assess the
progress and success of the monitoring effort
in achieving the project data quality
objectives. These audits were conducted by
members of Radian's Quality Assurance
staff who were not involved in the sampling
or data processing activities. Summaries of
the audits follow and copies of the Technical
Systems Audit Report and the Performance
Audit data are attached as Appendix O.
6.3.1 Technical Systems Audit
A Technical Systems Audit of the
sampling and field analysis portions of the
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Emissions Study
was conducted July 6-7, 1995. The
conclusion drawn from this audit was that
all quality control aspects of the sampling
and field analysis tasks at the landfill were
being conducted in accordance with the
requirements of the Quality Assurance
Project Plan/Sampling Plan.
Two minor concerns were identified
related to documentation issues.
Recommendations for resolution of these
issues were discussed with the sampling
team at the time of the audit and each
concern was addressed/resolved while on-
site. An accuracy check of the hydrogen
sulfide analyzers was conducted using an
independent standard; results of the check
were within audit expectations. No further
corrective action or follow-up was required,
and the audit was closed.
Note: Minor concerns are typically
based upon observed inconsistencies in
procedures or other activities that normally
do not directly impact data collection,
analysis, or validity.
6.3.2 Performance Evaluation Audit
Performance audit samples for VOC
and fixed gas analyses were prepared using
standards that were independent of the
calibration standards used for sample
analysis. The samples were prepared in
humidified matrices contained in stainless
steel canisters from the lot used for
collection of samples at the landfill. A total
of three audit samples were prepared. Audit
sample # 950801-01 consisted of low ppb-m
range VOCs to simulate anticipated flux
chamber measurement data. Audit sample #
950719-03 contained VOCs in the low-ppm
range and was prepared in a landfill gas
matrix of methane and carbon dioxide at
volume-percent levels somewhat less than
the levels recorded at the passive vents.
Audit sample # 950719-04 contained
alkanes and aromatics in the low-ppm range
and was prepared in the landfill gas matrix
at the maximum levels found in surveys of
the passive vents.
Most of the audit sample results were
within the recovery ranges specified in the
QAPP. There were a significant number of
compounds for which accuracy
specifications were not given. In these
cases, the audit information is simply
reported with a calculated analytical
recovery.
The potential problems identified
from the audit samples are as follows:
6-10
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
Sample #950801-01
• Ethane recovery was 31 % at a
theoretical concentration of 40.0
ppbV; the expected recovery range is
70-130%;
• 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane recovery
was 1075% at theoretical
concentration of 1.2 ppbV; the
expected recovery range is 50-150%;
• o-Xylene recovery was 400% at a
theoretical concentration of 0.6
ppbV; the expected recovery range is
50-150%;
• Ethanol + acetonitrile (coeluting
pair) were not detected at a
theoretical concentration of 16.5
ppbV (False Negative);
• Methanol was not detected at a
theoretical concentration of 33.7
ppbV (False Negative) and
• trans-2-Pentene was reported as
present at a concentration of 4.0
ppbV (False Positive).
Data users should be aware that
ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, ando-
xylene measurement data at concentrations
similar to those in this audit sample have the
potential to be biased high or low by the
amounts shown. The results for ethanol +
acetonitrile and methanol were not
unexpected because of the well documented
difficulty in sampling and analyzing polar
compounds using stainless steel canisters.
Results for trans-2-pentene at low ppbV
levels have the potential to be reported when
they are not present in the field samples.
Sample #950719-03
• Styrene was reported as present at a
concentration of 6.0 ppmV (False
Positive); and
• o-Xylene was not detected at a
theoretical concentration of 3.3
ppmV (False Negative).
The laboratory reviewed the styrene
and o-xylene results for sample # 950719-03
and found that the peaks for these two
compounds were misidentified because they
are positioned closely together in the
retention time library for the analytical
system. No styrene was present in the audit
sample. An amended report was produced
with the corrected identifications and
quantitations and the result was a recovery
of o-xylene at 73%. Data users should be
aware that the potential exists for this
problem to occur in field measurement data.
Sample #950719-04
• Recovery of propane at 4.6 ppm was
high, with a reported value of 14.6
ppm, or 317% recovery.
• All other recoveries for sample
#950719-04 were within 70-130%.
Data users should be aware that
propane measurement data for passive vent
samples may have a bias at low-ppm
concentrations.
Radian Corporation
6-11
-------
Table 6-1
Jerome Model 431XD Mercury Analyzer Calibration Data
Date
6/28/95
6/29/95
6/30/95
6/30/95
7/01/95
7/03/95
7/03/95
7/05/95
7/05/95
7/06/95
7/06/95
7/07/95
7/08/95
7/08/95
7/08/95
7/10/95
7/10/95
7/11/95
7/11/95
7/12/95
7/12/95
Time
17:22
10:35
10:08
~
8:24
10:05
—
9:30
—
10:20
—
12:35
8:00
8:10
11:15
9:10
9:15
9:40
9:45
10:50
11:00
Mercury
Temp (°F)
19.0
22.0
23.8
—
21.6
20.6
—
23.8
—
23.0
—
22.0
—
20.0
22
~
21
—
22
—
22
Input
Range
.118-.159
.151-.204
.164-.222
0
.138-.187
.129-. 174
0
.164-.222
0
.164-.222
0
.151-.204
0
.129-. 174
.151-.204
0
.138-.187
0
.151-.204
0
.151-.204
Analyzer
Response
.112
.164
.160
0.0
.154
.120
0.0
.204
0.0
.141
0.0
.137
0.0
.123
.140
0.0
.142
0.0
.137
0.0
.124
% Difference from
Boundary of Range
-5.0
In range
-2.4
—
In range
-7.0
—
In range
—
-14.0
—
-9.3
—
-4.7
-7.3
—
In range
~
-9.3
—
-17.9
Analyzer Serial Number: 03123
Operators: Gary Hall. Randy Stephens
6-12
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-2
Summary of Results for H2S Interference Tests on Jerome Hg Analyzer
Input Concentration (ppm H2S)
0
5.97
27.6
50
100
Analyzer Response (ng/ml Hg)
0
0
0.42
0.62
1.9
To Convert
ng Hg
mL
To
m
ppmv Hg
ppmv Hg
g Hg/sec
Multiply By
1000
0.00012
0.00014 x VFR (mVmin)
As an example, the potential Hg bias based on interference from 50 ppm H2S in a gas
collection system header with a nominal flow rate of 100 mVmin, would be:
0.62 -^- Hg x 1000 x 0.00012 x 0.00014 x 100 = 0.001 g/sec Hg.
mL
*VFR = volumetric flow rate.
Radian Corporation
6-13
-------
Table 6-3
Summary of Precision Estimates for Oil-site
Analyses of Field Duplicate Samples
Sample Type
Flux Chamber
Gas Collection System
Gas Collection System
Gas Collection System
Passive Vent
Passive Vent
Compound
Hydrogen Sulfide
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Oxygen
Hydrogen Sulfide
Mercury
Units
ppm
%
%
%
ppm
ppm
Mean
Sample
Cone.
0.017
39.1
56.0
0.50
47.9
1.0
RPD
18.2
2.6
2.1
80.0
2.3
28.9
6-14
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-4
FID LCS Recovery Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Flux Chamber Samples
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
p- & m-Xylene
Styrene
o-Xylene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 ,3,5-Trimelhylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Benzyl chloride + m-DCB
p-Dichlorobenzcne
o-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-TrichIorobenzene
1 ,3-Hexachlorobutadiene
Results (% Recovery)
Range
96-117
84-119
83-110
87-156
65-112
30-61
78-119
61-104
58-102
52-92
54-117
70-110
65-107
42-9 T
50-83
Average
101
93.6
90.7
107
79.8
41.8
92.4
75.2
69.5
64.1
70.6
87.7
78.5
56.6
62.9
SD
6.28
9.22
7.17
16.4
11.1
7.08
9.47
9.85
11.3
9.44
20.1
9.76
9.59
11.4
8.08
%CV
6.19
9.85
7.91
15.3
13.9
16.9
10.3
13.1
16.2
14.7
28.5
11.1
12.2
56.6
62.9
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
70-130
70-130
50-150
50-150
70-130
70-130
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
25-150
25-175
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/30
0/30
0/30
3/30
2/30
30/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
0/30
I
in
•3
-------
Table 6-5
ELCD LCS Recovery Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Flux Chamber Samples
g
i'
c.
o
Analyte
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Chloromethane
Vinyl chloride
Bromomethane
Chloroethane
Trichlorofluoromethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
Mcthylenc chloride
Freon 1 1 3
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Chloroform
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon tetrachloride
1,2-Dichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
cis- 1 ,3-Dichloroprooene
Results (% Recovery)
Range
68-119
74-124
60-115
68-124
72-113
73-116
62-107
67-119
69-115
62-118
62-108
59-113
71-113
70-117
58-116
59-104
67-114
85-172
Average
95.2
102
87.6
98.0
97.1
96.3
88.8
98.4
96.7
97.0
89.9
90.4
97.9
95.3
95.4
90.1
95.6
137
SD
12.7
14.4
13.8
13.9
9.98
10.8
10.8
14.1
10.6
13.6
13.7
13.5
12.4
12.9
15.4
10.9
12.5
19.1
%cv
13.3
14.1
15.8
14.1
10.3
11.3
12.1
14.4
11.0
14.0
15.3
15.0
12.6
13.5
16.1
12.1
13.1
14.0
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
50-150
50-150
50-150
10-175
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
8/34
C/l
cr
i1
i
5
K
00
B
-------
o
i
I.
o
Table 6-5
(Continued)
Analyte
trans- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
Tetrachloroethylene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Results (% Recovery)
Range
70-112
81-137
54-99
66-120
99-193
Average
95.1
111
80.9
99.1
133
SD
9.83
14.3
13.7
13.0
21.7
%CV
10.3
12.9
16.9
13.5
16.5
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
25-175
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/34
0/34
0/34
0/34
5/34
:L
o
o
-------
"fl
Table 6-6
FID LCS Recovery Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Passive Vents
and Gas Collection System Samples
VI
cr
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
n-Decane/p-Dichlorobenzene
Results (% Recovery)
Range
95 to 106
97 to 107
73 to 102
73 to 85
53 to 73
Average
101
103
94
79
62
SD
2.4
3.0
6.4
2.4
4.7
%CV
2.4
2.9
6.8
3.0
7.7
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
70-130
70-130
70-130
50-150
50-150
Number Outside
Criteria/total
0/46
0/46
0/46
0/46
0/46
8
en
O
o
§
-------
Table 6-7
ELCD LCS Recovery Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Passive Vents
and Gas Collection System Samples
Analyte
Chloromethane/Halocarbon 1 14
Vinyl chloride
Methylene chloride
Chloroform
Carbon tetrachloride
1,2-Dichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Results (% Recovery)
Range
44 to 70
87 to 113
46 to 117
99 to 119
95 to 113
74 to 129
84 to 121
51 to 105
Average
60
103
70
109
105
112
109
98
SD
9.35
5.38
16.7
5.20
4.40
13.0
7.06
8.00
%cv
16.0
5.20
24.0
4.80
4.20
12.0
6.50
8.20
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
3/46
0/46
3/46
0/46
0/46
0/46
0/46
0/46
O
13
n
IS)
a-
-------
Table 6-8
LCS Recovery Results for TCD System for
Fixed Gas Analysis of Passive Vents Samples
Analyte
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Methane
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Results (% Recovery)
Range
92 to 109
83 to 104
98 to 118
88 to 97
84 to 120
Average
97
99
103
95
98
SD
3.87
3.39
3.65
1.85
10.0
%cv
4.00
3.40
3.60
2.00
10.0
Acceptance
Criteria
(% Recovery)
70-130
70-130
70-130
70-130
70-130
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/36
0/36
0/36
0/36
0/36
GO
o
8
C/5
B
Q.
Note: Based on mass balance closures and ratios of fixed gases, the carbon dioxide values in the field samples appear to be
high. Therefore, on-site analytical results were used.
-------
Table 6-9
FID Laboratory Blank Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Flux Chamber Samples
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
p-Xylene + m-xylene
n-octane
n-Decane + p-dichlorobenzene
n-propylbenzene
Benzyl chloride + m-
dichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
n-Hexane
1 -Hexene
Results
Range (PPBV)
0.22-0.57
0.22-0.96
0.31
0.20-0.44
0.23-0.69
0.23-1.07
0.25
0.31
0.20-0.50
0.27-0.39
0.38-1.67
Average
0.33
0.41
0.31
0.28
0.36
0.41
0.25
0.31
0.35
0.33
0.73
SD
0.21
0.31
0
0.09
0.22
0.33
0
0
0.21
0.085
0.48
%cv
61.5
74.6
0
32.4
62.2
79.6
0
0
60.6
25.7
66.3
Acceptance
Criteria
0.4
0.5
0.7
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.3
Number
Outside
Criteria/Total
1/17
1/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
1/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
1/17
6/17
13
3
3]
0
C/3
-------
Table 6-10
ELCD Laboratory Blank Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Flux Chamber Samples
cr
Analyte
1 ,3-Hexachlorobutadiene
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Chloromethane + Freon
114
Freon 1 1 3
Methylene chloride
Chloroprene
Dibromochloromethane
cis- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Results
Range
(PPBV)
0.003-0.096
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.20
0.04-0.05
0.02-0.04
Average
0.059
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.20
0.045
0.03
SD
0.04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.007
0.014
%cv
68.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15.7
47.1
Acceptance
Criteria
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
o
GO
S
CL
-------
Table 6-11
FID Laboratory Blanks Results for GC/MD VOC Analysis of Passive Vents
and Gas Collection System Samples
Analyte
Ethane
Chlorobenzcne
2-Methyl-2-butene
m-Xylene/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
Styrene
p-Ethyltoluene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Benzyl chloride/m-dichlorobenzene
n-Decane/p-Dichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
n-Undecane
Limonene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
TNMHC
Results (ppbV)
Range
ND to 999
ND to 67
ND to 29
ND to 23
NDto 15
ND to 49
NDto 18
ND to 27
ND to 81
ND to 84
NDto 71
ND to 66
ND to 34
ND to 16
ND to 67
ND to 28
67 to 669
Average
423
39
29
20
15
39
18
27
32
34
29
38
24
15
41
28
281
Acceptance Criteria
(ppbV)
NS
250
NS
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
NS
NS
250
NS
NS
Number Outside
Criteria/Total
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
0/23
o
NS = Not Specified.
*Average detected value.
-------
Table 6-12
Summary of Flux Chamber Field Blank Results
for VOCs by GC/MD Analysis
Compound
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1-Butanol & Cyclohexane
3-Methylhexane
Acetone (+)
Acetone (+)
Benzene
Cyclopentane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Diethyl Ether & 2-Propanol
Ethane
Ethane
Ethane
Ethanol & Acetonitrile
Ethylbenzene
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene
Result
0.05
0.04
0.08
0.09
0.99
0.1
0.3
0.19
0.1
0.20
2.30
12.6
0.09
13.3
0.03
0.2
104
1
2.1
9.4
747
0.2
0.4
0.5
Units
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
Detection
Limit
0.05
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.1
0.1
0.08
0.35
0.12
0.62
0.62
0.35
0.14
0.1
0.1
0.47
2.46
2.46
2.46
0.3
0.13
0.13
0.95
6-24
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-12
(Continued)
Compound
Ethylene
Ethylene
Hexanal
Indene
Indene
Isobutane
Isobutane
Isobutane
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isobutene + 1-Butene
Isopentane
Isopentane
Limonene
Limonene
Limonene
Methanol (+)
Methylene Chloride
Methylene Chloride
Methylene Chloride
Nitrogen
Nitrogen
Nitrogen
Oxygen
Oxygen
Result
0.6
1.4
0.19
0.19
0.29
0.2
3.3
11.5
4.3
5.9
21.9
1.4
4.7
1
2.4
3.8
4.8
0.04
0.08
0.09
5.36
5.37
6.7
1.45
1.58
Units
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
%
%
%
%
%
Detection
Limit
0.95
0.95
0.12
0.11
0.11
0.54
0.54
0.54
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.5
0.5
0.08
0.08
0.08
1.53
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
Radian Corporation
6-25
-------
Table 6-12
(Continued)
Compound
Oxygen
Propane
Propane
Propane
Propylene
Propylene
Propylene
Styrene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Toluene
Toluene
Total Unidentified Halogenated VOCs
Total Unidentified Halogenated VOCs
Total Unidentified Halogenated VOCs
Total Unidentified VOCs
Total Unidentified VOCs
Total Unidentified VOCs
Trichloroethylene + BCM
Trichloroethylene + BCM
Trichloroethylene + BCM
Trichlorofluoromethane
Result
1.92
0.3
0.69
9.69
0.99
1.101
11.49
0.104
0.304
0.3
0.5
1.5
0.79
2.19
2.49
0.09
0.20
0.50
12.4
13.2
13.3
0.03
0.04
0.1
0.03
Units
%
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
Detection
Limit
0.001
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.09
0.09
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.03
0.03
0.03
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.06
6-26
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-12
(Continued)
Compound
a-Pinene & Benzaldehyde
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
c-2-Butene
c-2-Butene
c-2-Butene
m-Diethylbenzene
m-Ethyltoluene
m-Ethyltoluene
n-Butane
n-Butane
n-Butane
n-Butylbenzene
n-Butylbenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Heptane
n-Hexane
n-Nonane
n-Nonane
n-Nonane
n-Octane
n-Octane
n-Octane
Result
0.08
0.06
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.7
0.07
0.08
0.19
0.3
0.4
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.8
1.6
1.90
0.09
0.19
0.19
0.39
0.50
0.2
0.4
0.90
Units
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
Detection
Limit
0.07
0.04
0.04
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.06
0.11
0.11
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.13
0.26
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.1
0.1
0.1
Radian Corporation
6-27
-------
Table 6-12
(Continued)
Compound
n-Pentane
n-Propylbenzene
n-Propylbenzene
o-Ethyltoluene
o-Ethyltoluene
o-Xylene
o-Xylene
o-Xylene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
t-2-Butene
t-2-Butene
Result
0.2
0.09
0.19
0.09
0.19
0.10
0.2
0.3
0.09
0.19
0.4
0.8
0.2
1
Units
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
Detection
Limit
0.32
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.19
0.19
0.2
0.2
6-28
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-13
Laboratory Blanks Results for TCD System for Fixed Gas Analysis of
Passive Vents Samples
Analyte
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Methane
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Results (%)
Range
0 to 0.32
0 to 1.5
0 to 0.30
OtoO
0 to 0.88
Average
0.10
0.61
0.028
0
0.15
Acceptance Criteria
>• (%)
<0.5
<2.0
<1.0
<1.0
|_ <1.0
Number Outside Criteria
0/19
0/19
0/19
0/19
0/21
a
3
-------
Table 6-14
Summary of Duplicate Sample Results for VOC Analyses by GC/MD
Compound
No. of Pairs w/
Compound Detected
Avg Cone
(ppmv)
Avg
RPD
Extraction Wells
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methvlene Chloride
n-Butane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
o-Xylene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1.2
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.9
0.9
1.3
0.3
1.1
4.7
5.9
1.8
1.0
2.5
14.3
3.5
6.4
3.0
5.8
2.2
0.7
15.5
0.5
0.3
30.6
26.0
26.1
0.3
18.6
17.7
57.5
21.3
16.9
23.7
23.9
20.0
10.9
20.5
20.1
17.5
22.2
51.2
18.7
18.8
29.0
18.3
26.7
17.7
6-30
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-14
(Continued)
Compound
No. of Pairs w/
Compound Detected
Flux Chambers
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene Chloride
n-Butane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
o-Xylene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
Avg Cone
(ppmv)
7.5
0.3
1.6
NA
0.0
2.0
0.4
2.0
18.5
5.8
67.5
39.1
2.2
28.9
10.9
2.9
0.4
5.7
4.0
15.4
4.5
7.6
0.4
0.5
Avg
RPD
9.5
85.9
69.5
NA
15.0
35.9
14.0
85.0
8.8
23.2
40.1
72.9
38.1
25.5
29.7
17.0
15.6
15.8
17.7 .
11.4
69.7
28.5
2.6
94.8
Radian Corporation
6-31
-------
Table 6-14
(Continued)
Compound
No.of Pairs w/
Compound Detected
AvgConc
(ppmv)
Avg
RPD
Passive Vents
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzene
Benzyl Chloride & m-Dichlorobenzene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Isobutane
Isopentane
Methylene Chloride
n-Butane
n-Decane & p-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nonane
n-Undecane
o-Xvlene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
7
2
3
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
4
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
8
9
8
8
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.6
2.4
2.0
2.1
10.6
6.6
0.8
0.4
3.0
16.6
7.5
4.1
5.6
15.6
2.6
0.9
21.9
0.3
3.0
9.6
41.7
14.9
13.6
17.5
5.6
52.0
9.5
4.4
15.9
6.5
6.7
6.2
4.9
53.6
4.5
9.8
9.9
9.4
6.9
16.9
2.4
10.4
15.0
6-32
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-15
Summary of Laboratory Control Sample Results for GC/MS Analyses
Analyte
No.ofLCS
% RecoTery
Mean
StdDev
High-level VOC Canister GC/MS (ppm)
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
p-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
91
102
146
92
176
151
104
210
164
144
102
186
166
18.0
17.2
30.1
4.4
82.0
30.9
15.1
64.1
41.4
28.0
6.6
46.4
39.2
Min
64
77
100
87
96
109
80
130
119
103
96
121
108
Max
114
125
179
101
339
189
123
313
226
176
114
255
228
Low-level VOC Canister GC/MS (ppb)
Benzene
Benzyl chloride
Bromomethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
1,2-Cibromoethane
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
81
49
88
81
92
84
98
91
94
6.0
50.2
14.0
15.4
12.0
20.6
21.5
20.0
12.8
72
1.5
73
54
70
63
63
71
72
92
106
110
94
105
113
126
116
111
Radian Corporation
6-33
-------
Table 6-15
(Continued)
Analyte
m-Dichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
c- 1 ,2-Dichloroetheylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
p-Ethyltoluene
Freon 113
Freon 1 14
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-butadiene
Methylene chloride
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachlororethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
No.ofLCS
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
% Recovery
Mean
77
73
71
78
84
92
87
109
74
161
130
113
81
78
81
30
86
51
157
91
121
34
88
136
76
StdDev
16.7
16.9
15.9
6.0
16.1
18.5
12.6
23.8
9.5
57.2
45.4
15.3
13.3
12.8
9.9
14.5
18.0
7.4
34.2
13.0
40.7
18.0
19.0
60.0
6.1
Min
53
48
48
72
68
63
73
79
64
107
75
93
64
65
71
14
68
43
115
68
71
13
57
80
66
Max
99
97
93
87
104
118
105
149
91
271
187
135
101
96
97
59
110
63
216
105
183
63
111
247
86
6-34
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-15
(Continued)
Analyte
Trichlorofluoromethane
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinly chloride
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
No. ofLCS
8
8
8
8
8
8
% Recovery
Mean
76
68
74
86
85
90
StdDev
6.5
12.5
14.7
18.6
13.0
15.8
Min
68
51
56
65
72
73
Max
86
86
96
111
105
117
VOCs in Liquid Samples by GC/MS Method 8240 (^g/L)
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromofonn
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Dibromochloromethane
Di chlorodifl uoromethane
1 1-Dichloroethane
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
101
69
103
100
108
90
83
113
98
120
91
85
92
144
84
89
100
99
8.5
6.6
6.2
2.4
3.5
9.1
2.1
9.6
3.3
5.5
3.6
3.2
2.9
121.0
3.4
3.9
8.1
3.5
84
59
93
95
104
79
81
103
94
111
84
81
87
93
80
83
90
92
111
78
112
102
114
103
87
132
103
126
94
89
95
443
88
93
111
103
Radian Corporation
6-35
-------
Table 6-15
(Continued)
Analyte
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
c- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)
Methylene chloride
Styrene
1 ,1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl acetate
Vinly chloride
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
No. of LCS
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
% Recovery
Mean
113
85
100
95
109
104
96
100
109
76
96
91
89
100
116
88
92
91
103
80
100
99
StdDev
2.0
3.5
2.5
3.9
3.2
3.0
2.0
5.8
6.6
3.5
2.0
4.2
4.5
2.6
3.6
3.3
4.2
3.7
9.0
2.9
1.9
2.1
Min
110
80
96
87
106
101
93
94
98
72
93
86
82
95
112
83
83
85
93
77
97
97
Max
116
90
103
100
115
109
98
109
119
81
99
97
96
102
121
93
96
96
118
85
102
102
VOCs in Soils by GC/MS Method 8240 teg/kg)
Acetone
Acrolein
8
8
131
98
22.8
28.9
103
63
163
134 1
6-36
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-15
(Continued)
Analyte
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromofonn
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Dibromochloromethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
t- 1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
c-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methvl-2-pentanone (MIBK)
No.«fLCS
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
% Recovery
Mean
102
100
105
91
90
104
100
107
94
84
90
112
84
91
106
100
120
95
102
92
100
98
97
96
99
StdDev
5.4
2.1
2.9
3.8
7.7
7.1
4.9
12.2
3.0
4.8
3.6
5.8
5.8
2.0
4.9
4.7
9.5
7.4
3.8
5.8
7.2
5.5
3.7
7.0
7.2
Min
93
96
100
85
78
95
92
96
90
76
84
103
78
88
98
91
106
85
96
84
89
90
92
87
88
Max
109
102
109
96
102
119
105
126
99
89
95
119
94
94
112
104
132
104
107
100
109
104
102
109
108
Radian Corporation
6-37
-------
Table 6-15
(Continued)
Analyte
Methylene chloride
Styrene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl acetate
Vinly chloride
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
No.ofLCS
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
% Recovery
Mean
81
97
94
96
101
119
93
95
100
102
85
101
101
StdDev
3.9
2.4
3.7
5.0
2.3
7.8
2.7
2.4
6.6
14.0
7.3
3.9
4.1
Min
72
94
86
90
98
104
90
91
96
86
75
95
95
Max
84
101
98
104
105
125
97
98
116
118
97
106
106
6-38
Radian Corporation
-------
Table 6-16
Summary of Blank Sample Hits for GC/MS Analyses
Sample Type
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Flux Chamber
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Section
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
6/7
1/9
1/9
1/9
1/9
Blank Type
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
System blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Analysis
Method
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
GC/MS
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
SW8260A
Compound
2-Butanone
Acetone
Dibromomethane
Methylene Chloride
Acetone
Dibromomethane
Methylene Chloride
2-Butanone
Acetone
Dibromomethane
Methylene Chloride
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Toluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
2-Butanone
Acetone
Dibromomethane
Methylene Chloride
Result
7.03
27.1
0.573
0.829
21.6
0.509
0.721
4.27
21.7
0.548
0.813
0.119
0.34
0.801
0.933
1.26
1.43
0.46
0.275
0.409
6.73
27.6
0.355
0.54
Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ppbV
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Detection
Limit
1.6
2.87
0.59
3.03
2.87
0.59
3.03
1.6
2.87
0.59
3.03
0.0463
0.0556
0.112
0.112
0.0851
0.0851
0.0854
0.1
0.1
1.6
2.87
0.59
3.03
Radian Corporation
6-39
-------
Table 6-17
Summary of Matrix Spike Duplicate Analysis Results for GC/MS Method 8240 Analyses
Analyte
No. of
MS/MSD
Pairs
% Recovery
Mean
Range
Acceptance
Critera
Relative Percent
Difference
Mean
Range
Acceptance
Critera
No. Outside
Criteria
Soil Samples
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,1-DichIoroethene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
3
3
3
3
3
102
102
100
96
99
97-108
98-106
98-106
94-97
97-102
67-141
67-127
31-172
75-131
71-149
1.2
1.5
2.2
0.3
1.3
0-3.0
0-2.9
0-7.8
0-1.0
0-2.0
<15
<12
<61
<14
<35
0
0
0
0
0
Liquid Samples
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
4
4
4
4
4
108
101
87
128
102
97-145
95-105
78-92
97-271
97-107
37-151
37-160
62-118
47-150
71-157
11
4.5
11
20
4.7
2.9-28
2.9-8.1
2.3-23
2.9-62
2.0-7.8
53
52
133
53
47
0
0
0
1
0
i
C/5
i1
ex
2
5
-------
Table 6-18
Summary of Duplicate Sample Results for VOCs by GC/MS
Compound
No. of Pairs w/
Compound
Detected
Flux Chambers
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,4-Difluorobenzene
2-Bromo- 1,1,1 -trifluoroethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Avg
Conv
(ppmv)
5.265
0.449
2.075
1.73
4.35
0.16585
2.11
0.2615
0.621
0.443
1.205
Avg
RPD
90.6
34.7
1.1
34.5
127.8
94.2
28.4
61.6
6.8
54.2
55.6
Passive Vents
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,4-Difluorobenzene
2-Bromo- 1,1,1 -trifluoroethane
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Ethylbenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
o-Xvlene
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10.775
4.645
0.42
0.4945
0.7505
0.265
0.326
18.15
0.1725
9.87
15.3
18.7
2.9
4.2
3.9
13.6
1.2
8.3
24.9
10.7
Radian Corporation
6-41
-------
Table 6-18
(Continued)
Compound
p-Dichlorobenzene
p-Ethyltoluene
p-Xylene + m-Xylene
Styrene
Toluene
Vinyl Chloride
No. of Pairs w/
Compound
Detected
1
1
1
1
1
1
Avg
Conv
(ppmv)
1.705
2.765
26.5
0.424
33
2.215
Avg
RPD
32.3
14.8
9.8
15.1
21.8
15.8
6-42
Radian Corporation
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
7.0 REFERENCES
1. Anderson, E., D. Burrows, and B.
Eklund. Determination of Landfill
Gas Composition and Pollutant 8.
Emission Rates at Fresh Kills
Landfill, Quality Assurance Project
Plan/Sampling Plan. Report to Carol
Bellizzi of U.S. EPA, Region II
under EPA Contract No. 68-D3-
0033, Work Assignment 1-41. June
28,1995. 9.
2. Doom, M.R. J., et al. Estimate of
Methane Emissions From U.S.
Landfills. EPA-600/R-94-166.
September 1994.
10.
3. Doom, M. and M. Barlaz. Estimate
of Global Methane Emissions from
Landfills and Open Dumps. EPA-
600/R-95-019. February 1995.
4. Eklund, B. Practical Guidance for
Flux Chamber Measurements of
Fugitive Volatile Organic Emissions. 11.
J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc., Vol.
42, December 1992.
5. Eklund, B., et al. Control of Air
Emissions from Superfund Sites.
EPA/625/R-92/012. November
1992.
6. Eklund, B. Suitability of FUR 12.
Measurement Approaches for Use at
Fresh Kills Landfill. Memorandum
to Carol Bellizzi of U.S. EPA,
Region II. May 30,1995.
7. Gleason. Personal communication
from Phil Gleason of NYC DOS to
Barry Walker of Radian Corp. July
1995.
Kienbusch, M. Measurement of
Gaseous Emission Rates From Land
Surfaces Using an Emission Isolation
Flux Chamber - User's Guide. EPA
600/8-86-008 (NTIS PB86-223161).
February 1986.
Kuo, I.R. Air Emissions from
Codisposal Superfund Sites - Phase
I. Memorandum to Anne Pope of
U.S. EPA/OAQPS/AQMD.
February 8,1990.
NY Department of Environmental
Conservation. Ambient Air Quality
Characterization of Fresh Kills
Landfill -1994 Preliminary Annual
Report. Division of Ah-Resources
and NYSDEC Region II. February
1995.
Reinhart, D.R., C.D. Cooper, and
D.R.H. Seligman. Landfill Gas
Emission Monitoring Using a
Modified Flux Chamber Approach.
Presented at the 86th Annual
AWMA Meeting (Paper 93-RA-
133.01), Denver, CO, June 13-18,
1993.
Schmidt, C., et al. Assessment of
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Emissions Using Optical Remote
Sensing and Flux Chamber
Technologies. Presented at the 87th
Annual AWMA Meeting (Paper 94-
TP26B.03), Cincinnati, OH, June 19-
24,1994.
Radian Corporation
7-1
-------
Fresh Kills Landfill Gas Study
13. Thomeloe, S.A. and R.L. Peer.
EPA's Global Climate Change
Program - Global Landfill Methane.
Presented at the 84th Annual
AWMA Meeting (Paper 91-6.12),
Vancouver, B.C., June 1991.
14. U.S. EPA. Air Emissions from
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills -
Background Information for
Proposed Standards and Guidelines.
EPA-450/3-90-011a. March 1991.
7-2
Radian Corporation
------- |