En^nm'enta! Protection EPA-600/R-05/142
Agency October 2005
A CASE STUDY
DEMONSTRATING
U.S. EPA GUIDANCE FOR
EVALUATING LANDFILL
GAS EMISSIONS
FROM CLOSED OR
ABANDONED FACILITIES
SOMERSWORTH
SANITARY LANDFILL
SOMERSWORTH, NEW
HAMPSHIRE
-------
EPA-600/R-05/142
October 2005
A CASE STUDY DEMONSTRATING U.S.
EPA GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATING
LANDFILL GAS EMISSIONS FROM
CLOSED OR ABANDONED FACILITIES
SOMERSWORTH SANITARY LANDFILL
SOMERSWORTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
by
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC.
Cedar Terrace Office Park, Suite 250
3325 Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard
Durham, North Carolina 27707-2646
EPA Contract No. 68-C-00-186
Task Order Number 3
Ms. Susan Thorneloe
Office of Research and Development (ORD)
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL)
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division (APPCD)
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washingtion, DC 20460
-------
Abstract
The report describes a case study that applies EPA-600/R-05/123the guidance for conducting air pathway
analyses of landfill gas emissions that are of interest to superfund remedial project managers, on-scene coordina-
tors, facility owners, and potentially responsible parties. The case study exemplifies the use of the procedures
and tools described in the guidance for evaluating LFG emissions to ambient air. The air pathway analysis is used
to evaluate the inhalation risks to offsite receptors as well as the hazards of both onsite and offsite methane
explosions and landfill fires. Landfill gases detected at the site were methane and chemicals of particular concern
(COPCs) that encompassed nonmethane organic compounds, 1,1-dichloroethene, benzene, chlorobenzene,
chloroethane, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, methylene chloride, toluene, trichloroethene, vinyl chloride, and xylenes.
The report includes values of 90th percentile concentration of COPCs and isopleths of the COPCs overlaid on an
aerial photograph of the site.
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's
land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to
formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the
ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program is
providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science
knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants
affect our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency's center for
investigation of technological and management approaches for preventing and reducing risks from
pollution that threaten human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research
program is on methods and their cost-effectiveness for prevention and control of pollution to air, land,
water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of
contaminated sites, sediments and ground water; prevention and control of indoor air pollution; and
restoration of ecosystems. NRMRL collaborates with both public and private sector partners to foster
technologies that reduce the cost of compliance and to anticipate emerging problems. NRMRLs research
provides solutions to environmental problems by: developing and promoting technologies that protect
and improve the environment; advancing scientific and engineering information to support regulatory
and policy decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure
implementation of environmental regulations and strategies at the national, state, and community levels.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan.
It is published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user
community and to link researchers with their clients.
Sally Gutierrez, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
in
-------
EPA Review Notice
This report has been peer and administratively reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Vir-
ginia 22161.
Disclaimer
This guidance is intended solely for informational purposes. It cannot be relied upon to create any rights enforce-
able by any party in litigation with the United States. This guidance is directed to EPA personnel; it is not a final
action and does not constitute rulemaking. EPA officials may decide to follow the guidance provided herein, or
they may act at variance with the guidance, based on site-specific circumstances. The guidance may be reviewed
or changed at any time without public notice.
IV
-------
Table of Contents
Section Page
Abstract ii
Foreword iii
Disclaimer iv
List of Figures vi
List of Tables vii
Acknowledgment viii
Executive Summary ix
1 Demonstration Objectives 1
2 Current Site Description 3
3 Site History 5
4 Field Activities and Data Collection 7
4.1 Landfill Surface Screening Analysis 7
4.2 Hot Spot and Homogeneity Determinations 11
4.3 Sampling Activities 11
4.3.1 Landfill Soil Gas Sampling 11
4.3.2 Passive Vent Gas Sampling 15
4.3.3 Perimeter Well Gas Sampling 15
4.3.4 Ambient Air Sampling 15
4.4 Quality Assurance and Data Evaluation 15
4.4.1 Accuracy 15
4.4.2 Precision 16
4.4.3 Completeness 16
5 Estimation of Landfill Gas Emissions 17
5.1 LandGEM Modeling of LFG 30
5.2 SCREEN3 Modeling of LFG 32
6 Risk Calculations 35
7 Findings and Conclusions 39
Appendices
A Site Activity Photographs A-l
B Wilcoxon Statistical Analysis B-l
C Laboratory Results C-l
D LandGEM Model Runs D-l
E SCREEN3 Model Runs E-l
-------
List of Figures
Figure Page
1 Location and Orientation of the Somerwsorth Solid Waste Landfill 4
2 Screening Sampling Grid Locations 8
3 Measured Screening Results forNMOC 12
4 Measured Screening Results for Methane 13
5 Somersworth Sampling Locations 14
6 NMOC Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 18
7 1,1-Dichloroethene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 19
8 Benzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 20
9 Chlorobenzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 21
10 Chloroethane Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 22
11 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 23
12 Methylene Chloride Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 24
13 Toluene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 25
14 Trichloroethene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 26
15 Vinyl Chloride Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 27
16 m,p-Xylene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 28
17 o-Xylene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling 29
18 Example LandGEM Model Output 31
19 NMOC Emission Rates Versus Time 32
20 Modeling Area Defined for SCREEN3 33
VI
-------
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Somersworth Screening Sample Results 9
2 COPCs Commonly Found in LFG 17
3 Analytical Results for COPCs 30
4 90th Percentile Landfill Gas Concentrations for COPCs 30
5 COPCs'Emission Rates 32
6 Maximum Annual COPC Concentrations 32
7 Risk Assessment Analysis 35
Vll
-------
Acknowledgment
Grateful appreciation is given to the following individuals for their review and thoughtful suggestions
in support of the preparation of this case study and for the Fact Sheet or the Guidance for Evaluating
Landfill Gas Emissions from Closed or Abandoned Facilities: Ed Hathaway (EPA Region 1), Roger
Duwart (EPA Region 1), David Healy (Maryland Department of Environment), Gary Jablonski (Rhode
Island Department of Environmental Management, Fred MacMillan (EPA Region 3), Craig Mann
(Environmental Quality Management, Inc.), Dave Mickunas (EPA-ERTC), Dave Newton (EPARegion
1), Dan Pazdersky (Harford County Maryland), Bill Rhodes (EPA-ORD), Tom Robertson (Environmental
Quality Management, Inc.), Ken Skahn (EPA-OSWER), Susan Thorneloe (EPA-ORD), and Bob Wright
(EPA-ORD).
Vlll
-------
Executive Summary
The Somersworth Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site (the "Site") is located one mile southwest of the center of the
city of Somersworth in Stafford County, New Hampshire. The Site includes an approximately twenty-six acre
waste disposal area. With the cessation of land fill operations, the city installed four ground water monitoring
wells near the Site's northern and western boundaries. Samples taken from these wells indicated the presence of
volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination. As a result of this and subsequent investigations, the landfill
was placed on the National Priority List (NPL) on September 8, 1983. Approximately ten acres of the eastern
portion of the landfill have been reclaimed by the city for recreational facilities; tennis and basketball courts, ball
fields, and a playground.
This case study exemplifies how the Guidance for Evaluating Landfill Gas Emissions From Closed or Aban-
doned Facilities (EPA-600/R-05/123) can be used to evaluate landfill gas emissions. It illustrates the usefulness
of the information and procedures presented in the guidance. The Sommersworth site included near-by single
family homes, institutional buildings, amulti-family dwelling, and recreational facilities (i.e., two baseball fields,
two basketball courts, and two tennis courts). An infiltration gallery was part of the super fund site remediation
efforts. The gallery was used to remove contaminated groundwater from below the landfill and to re-inject it into
the subsurface. The re-injected groundwater would flow through a permeable reactive barrier that was designed
to oxidize chlorinated organic compounds. There were several LFG monitoring wells with elevated methane
levels.
By applying the investigative techniques and recommended practices, the research team was able to:
1 Determine where the landfill gases are escaping into the atmosphere,
2 Identify the chemicals of potential concern,
3 Quantify the speciated LFG emission rates,
4 Identify the most likely to be affected at off-site location(s), and
5 Characterize ambient air concentrations.
This case study report provided data and information that were used by the remedial project manager to:
1 Assess the health risk associated with the emissions from the landfill,
2 Determine if additional site investigation effort is needed,
3 Evaluate the level of effort associated with the existing LFG monitoring program,
4 Determine if the previously proposed remedial design needed to be altered,
5 Evaluate the need for institution controls and future land use policy decisions, and
6 Decide if the risks and hazards associated with the landfill gas needed to be controlled with LFG
control technology.
IX
-------
A Case Study
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 1. Demonstration Objectives
The purpose of the activities described in this document 05/123). It was also the intent of this demonstration to pro-
was to provide a demonstration of the procedures described vide an example case study to be included in the guidance
in the Guidance for Evaluating Landfill Gas Emissions from for reference by the practitioner. These efforts were not
Closed or Abandoned Facilities (Guidance) (EPA/600/R- intended to provide a comprehensive site analysis or com-
plete risk assessment.
-------
A Case Study
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 2. Site Description
All site descriptions contained in this section are based
solely on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Superfund Record of Decision for the Somersworth Sani-
tary Landfill dated June 21, 1994 and from onsite field
activities and observations. The Somersworth Sanitary
Landfill Superfund Site (the "Site") is located on the north
side of Blackwater Road approximately 300 to 400 feet
west of the intersection of Blackwater Road and High Street
(State Route 9) and one mile southwest of the center of the
city of Somersworth in Strafford County, New Hampshire.
Figure 1 shows the approximate location and orientation
of the Site.
The Site includes an approximately twenty-six acre waste
disposal area and adjacent wetlands northwest of the former
landfill. The city owns the entire landfill area and much of
the wetlands. The landfill was operated by the city from
mid-193 0 until 1981 when the city began taking waste s to
a regional incinerator. From 1981 to the present, those
wastes that cannot be incinerated are stockpiled in the south-
west portion of the landfill and hauled away. Approximately
ten acres of the eastern portion of the landfill have been
reclaimed by the city for recreational facilities; tennis and
basketball courts, ball fields, and a playground.
Numerous residential properties exist to the north, south,
and east of the Site, including an apartment building lo-
cated adjacent to the Site at the northeast corner. A fire
station and a National Guard Armory are located just east
of the Site.
The landfill is entirely within the Peter's Marsh Brook sur-
face drainage basin. The Peter's Marsh Brook is a tribu-
tary to Tate's Brook that flows into the Salmon Falls River,
the water supply for Somersworth, New Hampshire and
Berwick, Maine.
Numerous soil gas monitoring wells have been installed
and are routinely monitored around the extent of the land-
fill. The majority of these wells are located along the bor-
ders immediately adjacent to residential development.
From previous studies there is an indication that the ground-
water flows northwesterly towards the Peter's Marsh Brook
and discharges to the brook and adjacent wetlands. A de-
commissioned municipal water supply well (well no. 3) is
located approximately 2300 feet north-northwest of the Site.
-------
Bcse nap »os photog'-QDhed on 11 Hor 1996 by -the Notiorol Aerol Photogrop>>^ Progran ond digitized by thf USGS ODD FVoQron or
Th» bos* nap is projected in Universal 'rartsverse Hercotor CJTM) Zone :9 on th» Mor-th ftnericon do tun of 1983-
05 Del EDO!
4.789.BDO
§
s
Figure 1. Location and Orientation of the Somersworth Solid Waste Landfill
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 3. Site History
The Somersworth Sanitary Landfill accepted municipal and
industrial wastes from the mid-1930's to 1981. The land-
fill began as a burning dump in the northeast corner of the
Site. In 1958 burning was stopped and land filling began.
Natural soils were excavated beyond the working area, the
excavation was filled with refuse, and covered at the end
of each day with the excavated natural, sandy soils. The
landfill expanded in a general westerly direction. The east-
ern portion of the landfill was not used for disposal after
1975. At that time preparations began for a recreational
park on that portion of the landfill. The park was com-
pleted in late 1978.
In 1981 the city ceased waste disposal operations at the
landfill and joined the Lamprey Regional Solid Waste Dis-
posal Cooperative. Waste was thenceforth disposed at the
cooperative's incinerator in Durham, New Hampshire. With
the cessation of land filling operations, the city installed
four ground water monitoring wells near the Site's north-
ern and western boundaries. Samples taken from these wells
indicated the presence of volatile organic compound (VOC)
contamination. As a result of this and subsequent investi-
gations, the landfill was placed on the National Priority
List (NPL) on September 8, 1983.
In 1989, the Somersworth Landfill Trust (SLT) was formed
by the city of Somersworth and approximately thirty busi-
nesses and industries, which had an interest in the site. The
SLT voluntarily signed an Administrative Order by Con-
sent with EPA and the State of New Hampshire. By this
order, which took effect on April 28, 1989, the SLT agreed
to complete limited aspects of the remedial investigation
and to prepare the feasibility study for the Site.
Based on the results of the remedial investigation and the
alternatives presented in the feasibility study, EPA issued
a Record of Decision (ROD) on June 24, 1991, document-
ing the selection of an innovative technology to remediate
groundwater at the site. This technology uses elemental
iron in a permeable reactive "wall" which treats contami-
nated groundwater as it flows through it. A key part of this
remedy is a permeable landfill cover that allows precipita-
tion to flush contamination through the waste and be treated
as it passes in the groundwater through the wall. The wall
was completed in October of 2000. Landfill cover materi-
als range from sandy soil to tight clays and varies in depth
from six inches to three feet. Atop this was placed the per-
meable landfill cover, consisting of six inches of sandy
gravel and six inches of loam. This was completed in the
summer of 2001 when it was seeded. Therefore, the total
depth of cover material on the landfill ranges from one and
one-half to four feet.
In order to prevent the off-site, subsurface migration of
landfill gases, principally methane, a perimeter landfill gas
collection trench is scheduled for construction in 2003.
-------
A Case Study
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 4. Field Activities and Data Collection
Field activities for the Somersworth Sanitary Landfill lo-
cated in Somersworth, New Hampshire were conducted
from July 29, 2002 through July 30, 2002. Site activities
included debriefing, landfill surface screening analysis,
screening data reduction, hot spot and homogeneity deter-
minations, landfill soil gas sampling, passive vent gas sam-
pling, perimeter well gas sampling, and ambient air sam-
pling. Appendix A contains pictures from the site activi-
ties.
To provide a framework for the field activities, a 30 m by
30m sampling grid was developed across the landfill area
prior to the field activities. This sampling grid was devel-
oped to include the entire extent of the landfill boundary
area and extend 30m beyond that boundary area. This grid
was then numbered for each node location, forming a ser-
pentine sampling pathway across the grid. A total of 179
sampling locations comprised the sampling grid layout
developed for this site. A reference point was identified
using an identifiable landmark on the site to locate the start-
ing point. Figure 2 shows the grid and pathway used for
the screening analysis.
4.1 Landfill Surface Screening Analy-
sis
Once on site, the reference point was visually located, and
using a handheld global positioning system (GPS), the start-
ing point (Grid No. 1) was located to begin the screening
analysis. The screening analysis included measurements
for non-methane organic compounds (NMOCs) using a
photo ionization detector (PID) and for methane (CH4)
using a flame ionization detector (FID). Both the PID and
FID were held no more than one inch above the ground
while measurements were being made. The PID and FID
were calibrated to approximately 1 ppm using zero air and
5 and 20 ppm gases. It should be noted that the field in-
strumentation was very sensitive and drifted quite signifi-
cantly due to slight gusts of wind across the landfill cover.
Readings were taken for approximately one minute, and
the average value excluding the extreme highs and lows
was recorded. In conducting the serpentine walk across
the site, an effort was made to identify areas containing
cracks and gaps in the landfill cover, and to the extent pos-
sible, measurements were made at these locations. All pre-
determined sampling locations were not accessible for a
variety of reasons ranging from being located on private
property to inaccessible by the field crew due to extreme
overgrowth. An attempt was made to collect a reading at
each location, with measurements being collected not
greater than 10 m from the predetermined locations. If it
was necessary to skip a location due to inaccessibility
within the acceptable 10m range, then replicate readings
were collected at the next accessible location. These repli-
cate readings were intended to provide for additional qual-
ity assurance and quality control (QA and QC) data and
were not intended to back fill missing data due inacces-
sible areas. Duplicate readings were also taken at predefined
locations as part of the QA and QC efforts. These predeter-
mined locations were selected based on a random number
generator. All screening data were recorded on field log
data collection forms along with any field notes relevant
to this specific location. There was 95 percent data collec-
tion efficiency. Table 1 provides the screening sample re-
sults.
-------
oo
SasE mop tras photographed on 11 Mar 1SS8 by the National Aerial Photography aroQ-"ar. ard Digitized by the USGS 003 Pro^an on 05 Get KlOL
The boat nnp is p^Cij^dted "n L*1lvtr-£aL T^aMSvefat Mtrtator iUTMJ ZtSrtt 19 cm the Morth Anwleort datun Sf 1993.
Somersworth Landfil
Somersworth, NH
,790,000
Sampling grid is
30 m by 30 m
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC.
3325 DURHflN-CH^PO. HILL BDULEVflSB, SUITE 250
3URHftH, NEHTH QARO-ENA 37707
f919) 4B9-5E99 FASi (519? 4B9-5552
SDMERSVDRTH LANDFILL
Fig £, SanpUng Location Map
Sonersworth, New Hanpshire
030177,0003
0
Figure 2. Screening Sampling Grid Locations
D)
(/>
05
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table 1 . Somersworth Sere
^"d Sample ID No.
1 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 001
2 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 002
3 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 003
4 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 004
5 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 005
6 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 006
7 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 007
8 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 008
9 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 009
10 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 010
11 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R Oil
12 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 012
13 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 013
14 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -D 003
15 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -ROM
16 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 015
17 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 016
18 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 017
19 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 018
20 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 019
21 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 020
22 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 021
23 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 022
24 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 023
25 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 024
26 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 025
27 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 026
28 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 027
29 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 028
30 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 029
31 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 030
32 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 031
33 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 032
34 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -D 005
35 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -D 006
36 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 033
37 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 034
38 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 035
39 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 036
40 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 037
41 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 038
42 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 039
43 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 040
44 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 041
45 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 042
1 ND = not detected
b NA = not available
ening Sample Re
Actual UTM
Coordinates
Easting Northing
347418
34723
347424
347422
347423
347420
347392
347392
347391
347391
347389
347394
347391
NAb
347361
347357
347368
347361
347363
347354
347361
347360
347363
347334
347335
347331
347335
347334
347332
347331
347331
347333
347332
NA
NA
347302
347301
347302
347304
347302
347300
347306
347298
347303
347291
4790016
4790042
4790076
4790105
4790136
4790156
4790135
4790102
4790075
4790045
4790016
4789985
4789959
NA
4789954
4789966
4790018
4790058
4790076
4790108
4790136
4790168
4790197
4790216
4790193
4790165
4790133
4790107
4790075
4790047
4790015
4789985
4789956
NA
NA
4789951
4789988
4790016
4790046
4790077
4790108
4790140
4790160
4790199
4790226
JSUltS
NMOC
Cone.
ND"
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
: en,
Cone.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
8
NA
ND
0.5
0.5
ND
1
1.5
ND
1
1.2
1
ND
5
3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
1
ND
0.5
ND
ND
ND
120
7
0.5
1
Table 1. Some
tinued)
No!1 ^P1'
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
" ND
»NA
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
LFSG-02-07
rsworth Screening Sample F
Actual UTM
; ID No. Coordinates J
Easting Northing
29 02 -R 043
29 02 -R 044
29 02 -R 045
29 02 -R 046
29 02 -R 047
29 02 -R 048
29 02 -R 049
29 02 -R 050
29 02 -R 051
29 02 -R 052
29 02 -R 053
29 02 -R 054
29 02 -R 055
29 02 -R 056
29 02 -R 057
29 02 -R 058
29 02 -R 059
29 02 -R 060
29 02 -R 061
29 02 -R 062
29 02 -R 063
29 02 -R 064
29 02 -R 065
29 02 -R 066
29 02 -R 067
29 02 -R 068
29 02 -R 069
29 02 -R 070
29 02 -R 071
29 02 -R 072
29 02 -R 073
29 02 -R 074
29 02 -R 075
29 02 -R 076
29 02 -R 077
29 02 -R 078
29 02 -R 079
29 02 -R 080
29 02 -R 081
29 02 -R 082
29 02 -R 083
29 02 -R 084
29 02 -R 085
29 02 -R 086
29 02 -R 087
347306
347272
347272
347273
347272
347273
347272
347270
347273
347272
347272
347272
347274
347242
347244
347242
347242
347242
347242
347243
347242
347243
347243
347242
347245
347212
347211
347213
347210
347210
347211
347212
347212
347212
347212
347210
347213
347182
347180
347184
347182
347182
347184
347181
347182
4790255
4790257
4790223
4790192
4790164
4790134
4790106
4790076
4790045
4790016
4789983
4789955
4789930
4789933
4789958
4789986
4790017
4790045
4790077
4790105
4790136
4790168
4790197
4790225
4790257
4790255
4790226
4790197
4790166
4790134
4790104
4790075
4790045
4790015
4789986
4789955
4789926
4789929
4789956
4789989
4790017
4790046
4790076
4790106
4790135
tesults
NMOC
Cone.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
i (con-
: en,
Cone.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5
ND
0.5
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
ND
= not detected
= not available
continued
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table 1. Somersworth Sen
tinued)
^"d Sample ID No.
91 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 088
92 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 089
93 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 090
94 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 091
95 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 092
96 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 093
97 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 094
98 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 095
99 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 096
100 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 097
101 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 098
102 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 099
103 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 100
104 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 101
105 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 102
106 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 103
107 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 104
108 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 105
109 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 106
110 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 107
111 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 108
112 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 109
113 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 110
114 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -Rill
115 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 112
116 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 113
117 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 114
118 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 115
119 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 116
120 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 117
121 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 118
122 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 119
123 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 120
124 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 121
125 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 122
126 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 123
127 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 124
128 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 125
129 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 126
130 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 127
131 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 128
132 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 129
133 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 130
134 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 131
135 LFSG-02-07 29 02 -R 132
11 ND = not detected
b NA = not available
sening Sample F
Actual UTM
Coordinates J
Easting Northing
347179
347181
347184
347152
347151
347151
347152
347151
347152
347152
347153
347151
347152
347153
347119
347123
347122
347123
347122
347124
347123
347122
347123
347123
347089
347093
347090
347094
347091
347092
347091
347092
347093
347093
347065
347065
347064
347062
347062
347063
347063
347062
347058
347031
347032
4790168
4790196
4790219
4790227
4790202
4790164
4790134
4790105
4790075
4790044
4790016
4789984
4789955
4789931
4789931
4789958
4789986
4790017
4790046
4790078
4790107
4790136
4790166
4790197
4790193
4790164
4790136
4790105
4790076
4790045
4790015
4789987
4788855
4789927
4789956
4789988
4790017
4790046
4790074
4790106
4790137
4790170
4790197
479196
4790167
tesults
NMOC
Cone.
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
i (con-
: en,
Cone.
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Table 1. Somersv
eluded)
§* Sample 11
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
189
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
PV1
PV2
,PV3
Valve
Box
aND
»NA
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
LFSG-02-07 29
NA
LFSG-02-07 29
NA
= not detected
= not available
vorth Sen
DNo.
02 -R 133
02 -R 134
02 -R 135
02 -R 136
02 -R 137
02 -R 138
02 -R 139
02 -R 140
02 -R 141
02 -R 142
02 -R 143
02 -R 144
02 -R 145
02 -R 146
02 -R 147
02 -R 148
02 -R 149
02 -R 150
02 -R 151
02 -R 152
02 -R 153
02 -D 012
02 -D 013
02 -R 154
02 -R 155
02 -R 156
02 -R 157
02 -R 158
02 -R 159
02 -R 160
02 -R 161
02 -R 162
02 -R 163
02 -D 015
02 -R 164
Bening Sample F
Actual UTM
Coordinates
Easting Northing
347027
347032
347032
347031
347032
347032
347032
347002
347000
347004
347008
346999
347006
347000
347000
346971
346975
346968
346968
346971
346969
NA
NA
346941
346952
346950
346940
346943
346943
346912
346912
346913
346915
NA
NA
346891
NA
347353
347352
347336
347385
4790131
4790105
4790075
4790045
4790015
4789986
4789956
4789952
4789988
4790023
4790048
4790076
4790105
4790137
4790166
4790164
4790136
4790103
4790073
4790045
4790015
NA
NA
4790033
4790061
4790079
4790107
4790139
4790164
4790135
4790105
4790076
4790055
NA
NA
4790079
NA
4790062
4790062
4790061
4790049
tesul
NMO
Com
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
0.7
0.3
ND
ts (con-
>C CH,
:. Cone.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
91
505
500
84
continued
continued
10
-------
Somersworth, NH
4.2 Hot Spot and Homogeneity Deter-
minations
The screening data collected were used for two analyses.
The first was for a hot spot analysis. This was accomplished
by importing the screening data set into a graphical con-
touring software package (Surfer) to produce concentra-
tion contours that were layered over an aerial photographic
image of the site. This method allowed for a visual deter-
mination of where the higher concentrations were recorded
during the screening analysis. This method also allowed
the data set to be divided into two data sets based on the
contours derived from these data. This population division
was used as part of the homogeneity determinations. Fig-
ures 3 and 4 show the concentration contours for NMOCs
and methane, respectively.
The second analysis provided a determination of the ho-
mogeneity of the site. This was accomplished through sta-
tistical means by using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum statistical
method, which determines whether two data sets are sta-
tistically similar. If the two sets are similar, then the two
populations are determined to be one nearly homogeneous
area. If the two data sets are determined not to be statisti-
cally similar, then the two sets are said to be two non-ho-
mogeneous areas. To accomplish this task the hot spot
analysis was used to determine if there appeared to be two
distinct population sets. For this site it was shown that the
entire sampling grid appeared to be one nearly homoge-
neous area. Appendix B contains the Wilcoxon data analy-
sis. As mentioned earlier, for the purposes of this statisti-
cal analysis all non-detect, replicate, and duplicate mea-
surements were excluded from this analysis.
4.3 Sampling Activities
Sampling activities encompassed sampling landfill soil gas,
passive vent gas, perimeter well gas, and ambient air. Fig-
ure 5 shows the locations of all sampled locations. Each of
these sampling methods will be discussed further in the
following sections.
4.3.1 Landfill Soil Gas Sampling
As part of this demonstration, landfill soil gas samples were
collected for the chemicals of potential concern (COPCs)
via Summa canisters, which were sent to an off-site com-
mercial laboratory for analysis. Field instrumentation was
used at each of the designated sampling locations. These
instruments were used to measure fixed gases (CO2, N2,
and O2), which were used to verify that landfill gas (LFG)
was being collected. Sampling was conducted using a slam-
bar to drive a sampling hole through the landfill cover, a
sampling probe was inserted into the landfill area, and the
hole was sealed around the probe to minimize ambient air
inleakage. The slam bar was inserted to approximately 5
feet below grade.
Based on the data analysis conducted, it was determined
that this site consisted of one homogeneous area. It was
determined that six Summa canister samples would be col-
lected for purposes of this demonstration. The six LFG
samples were collected at the locations that had the high-
est recorded readings for methane gas. It should be noted
that, due to the absence of detectable NMOC concentra-
tions during the screening analysis, it was determined that
methane gas concentrations would be used to determine
further sampling strategies and that amples would be col-
lected at grid location Nos. 13, 26, 42, 43, 89, and 113.
These sampling locations are denoted in the Figure 5 as
LFG Grid "X" where "X" is grid number 13, 26, and so
forth. LFG Samples were subsequently not collected at Grid
Location No. 13 because it was very close to the public
roadway and subsurface conditions prevented the slam-
bar from penetrating the surface soils. Laboratory analyti-
cal results can be found in Appendix C.
11
-------
479040
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850-
4789600
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 3. Measured Screening Results for NMOCs (ppm)
-------
479040
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950-
4789900
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 4. Measured Screening Results for Methane (ppm)
-------
4790400
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
Ambient Air
Sampling Location
Perimeter Well
Sampling Location
Landfill Gas (Slambar)
Sampling Location
SGP9 SGP10
ruses
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 5. Somersworth Sampling Locations
-------
Somersworth, NH
4.3.2 Passive Vent Gas Sampling
While conducting the screening analysis, several uninten-
tional passive vents were observed on the site. These vents
were in the form of (1) pipes protruding from the contami-
nated groundwater pump station, (2) pipes protruding from
the distribution box associated with the infiltration gallery
and, (3) drilled auger holes that were associated with an
abandoned plan to install lights on the baseball field. The
slam-bar technique was used in the vicinity of the drilled
auger holes. A piece of Teflon tubing was fed through the
vent pipes and modeling clay was used to form a seal around
the pipe. Summa canister samples were collected for
COPCs and fixed gases. The locations of the passive vents
were determined by using a GPS unit. These passive vent
locations were identified as the wet well (LFG Grid WW),
the infiltration gallery (LFG Grid IG), and at the baseball
field abandoned lighting holes (LFG Grid PV2A). Appen-
dix C presents the laboratory analytical results.
4.3.3 Perimeter Well Gas Sampling
The guidance recommends that sampling be conducted at
the perimeter wells located nearest to the hot spots and at
the closest off-site receptor. For this site demonstration,
sampling was conducted at twelve of the perimeter wells,
which are denoted on Figure 5 as SPG"X" where "X" is
the perimeter well number (1A, 2, 3, and so forth). All
twelve wells were located in close proximity to off-site
receptors (i.e., residential houses or apartments). At each
of these locations, Summa canisters were used to collect
the samples and analyzed for COPC, fixed gases, and meth-
ane. The Summa canister sampling rate was set to approxi-
mately 0.1 L/min to minimize the potential for ambient air
leakage. Appendix C presents the laboratory analytical re-
sults.
4.3.4 Ambient Air Sampling
As recommended by the guidance, sampling should be
conducted of the ambient air at the location where the high-
est NMOC concentrations were measured. However, for
this site demonstration, ambient air sampling was conducted
at the locations where the highest methane concentrations
were measured. It should be noted that methane concen-
trations were used to derive sampling strategies due to the
absence of detectable NMOC concentrations found during
the screening analysis. Three samples were collected us-
ing a Summa canister. These three locations were identi-
fied as grid Nos. 42,43, and PV2A (passive vent located at
the baseball field) and sre denoted as Amb. Grid 42, Amb.
Grid 43, and Amb Grid PV2A. Appendix C presents the
laboratory analytical results.
4.4 Quality Assurance and Data
Evaluation
The primary purpose of this project is to establish the use-
fulness of the guidance document and identify areas that
need to be clarified or expanded. The field efforts are a
means to collect the information needed to implement the
procedures included in the guidance. A secondary purpose
of the project is to provide the RPMs with information that
will allow them to determine if LFG controls are needed
and if compliance with applicable relevant and appropri-
ate requirements (ARARs) has been achieved. Data qual-
ity objectives are a starting point of an interactive process,
and they do not necessarily constitute definitive rules for
accepting or rejecting results. The measurement quality ob-
jectives have been defined in terms of standard methods
with accuracy, precision, and completeness goals.
Uncertainty associated with the measurement data is ex-
pressed in terms of accuracy and precision. The accuracy
of a single value contains both the measurement's random
error component and the systematic error, or bias. Accu-
racy thus reflects the total error for a given measurement.
Precision values represent a measure of only the random
variability for replicate measurements. In general, the pur-
pose of calibration is to eliminate bias, although inefficient
analyte recovery or matrix interferences can contribute to
sample bias, which is typically assessed by analyzing ma-
trix spike samples. At very low levels, blank effects (con-
tamination or other artifacts) can also contribute to low-
level bias. The potential for bias is evaluated by method
blanks. Instrument bias is evaluated by using control
samples.
4.4.1 Accuracy
Accuracy of laboratory results has been assessed for com-
pliance with the established QC criteria using the analyti-
cal results of method blanks, reagent or preparation blank,
matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate samples, and field
blanks. The percent recovery (%R) of matrix spike samples
is calculated using
%R = ^ xlOO
Where A = the analyte concentration determined experi-
mentally from the spiked sample,
B = the background level determined by a sepa-
rate analysis of the unspiked sample, and
C = the amount of the spike added.
15
-------
A Case Study
The laboratory did not detect any of the analytes in any
sample blanks. The minimum and maximum recovery for
the entire set of laboratory control samples (LCS) was
greater than 69 percent and less than 119 percent. The re-
covery of hexachlorobutadiene was outside the lower con-
trol limit of 70 percent. The low recovery indicates that
the sample results may be biased low. The method speci-
fies that 90 percent of the analytes must be within the 70 to
130 percent range. This criterion was met.
The 4-bromofluorobenzene surrogate spike recovery was
outside of the upper range for 13 out of 20 field samples.
The maximum 4-bromofluorobenzene surrogate spike re-
covery was 243 percent. The high 4-bromofluorobenzene
surrogate recovery is indicative of matrix interference, and
the results may be biased on the high side. All other spike
surrogate recovery values were within the target range of
70 to 130 percent.
4.4.2 Precision
The analytical results between matrix spike and matrix
spike duplicate (MS and MSB) analyses for each COPC
have been assessed. The relative percent difference (RPD)
was calculated for each pair of duplicate analysis using
RPD =
S-D
(S+D)/2
xlOO
Where S = First sample value (original or MS value) and
D= Second sample value (duplicate or MSB value).
Except for methylene chloride, acetone, and hexane in the
duplicate ambient air samples, the RPD for each of the
matched sample pairs was less than 6 percent. The labora-
tory reported concentrations of methylene chloride and ac-
etone in both of the duplicate ambient air samples. The
laboratory reported hexane in one of the duplicate ambient
air samples but not the other. The RPD for methylene chlo-
ride and acetone in the ambient air samples was calculated
to be 56 and 47 percent, respectively. The laboratory re-
ported concentrations for methylene chloride, acetone, tolu-
ene, and hexane in the blind reference standard. The re-
ported values for the blind reference standard are less than
five times the method detection limit (MDL) for each of
the contaminants. These four contaminants were not ex-
pected to be in the blind reference standard. The RPD for
the laboratory control samples (LCS) ranged from 0 to 20
percent. Except for hexachlorobutadiene, the calculated
RPD for each LCS analyte was less than 5 percent.
This narrow range indicates that the laboratory was ca-
pable of reproducing the analytical results. Although, nei-
ther methylene chloride, hexane, nor acetone was found in
the associated laboratory blanks, they are common labora-
tory contaminants.
4.4.3 Completeness
Completeness is a measure of the amount of valid data
obtained from a measurement system compared to the
amount that was expected under normal conditions. The
sampling and analytical goal for completeness is 80 per-
cent or more for all samples tested. The percent complete-
ness was calculated by using
Completeness^/*) -
(number of valid data)
' number of samples collected ^
, for each parameter analyzed)
-XlOO
Ninety seven percent of the targeted data was collected
and validated.
16
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 5. Estimation of Landfill Gas Emissions
After all samples were collected, it was possible to esti-
mate the air impact of this site through the methods de-
scribed in the guidance. For the purpose of this demon-
stration, it was determined that only select COPCs com-
monly found in LFG would be fully characterized. Table 2
provides a list of those COPCs commonly found in LFG
and those considered in this demonstration. From previ-
ous site activities and visual inspection of concentration
isopleths generated from the laboratory results, the data
were treated as one homogenous area for analysis. Those
COPCs that contained nondetect data were eliminated from
further investigation. Figures 6 through 17 show the soil
gas concentration isopleths of all COPCs with detected
concentrations. These figures provided a visual presenta-
tion of the laboratory results that were used to further un-
derstand the dynamics of this landfill. Table 3 provides the
analytical results for the landfill. The data were analyzed,
and the 90th percentile concentrations were determined.
Table 4 provides the 90th percentile values of the COPCs
for the landfill.
Table 2. COPCs Commonly Found in LFGab
1,1,1 -Trichbroethane (methyl chloroform)
1,1-Dichloroethene (vinylidene chloride)
1,2-Dichbroethane (ethylene dichloride)
Acrylorritrile
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Chforofluorocarbons
Chloroform
Dichlorobenzene
Ethylene Dibromide
Hydrogen Suffide
Mercury
Methybne Chbride
Perchforoethylene (tetrachforoethylene)
Toluene
Trichloroethylene (trichloroethene)
Vinyl Chbride
Xylenes
11 Constituents associated with carcinogenic and chronic
noncarcinogenic health effects that are routinely measured
b Source: EPA, 1997
17
-------
oo
4790400
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
ZUSGS
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 6. NMOC Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppmv)
-------
479040t
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
V W*fc «SP"« S _
. IUSGS
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 7.1,1-Dichloroethene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
479040'
4790350-|
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900-
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 8. Benzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
47904DO
4790350-
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 9. Chlorobenzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
4790400
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
478990
4789850 i
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 10. Chloroethane Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
4790400-
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789350
4789800
3468DO 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 11.1,4-Dichlorobenzene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
4790400
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200 U
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950 (
4789900
4789850
4789800
.
3^6800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 12. Methylene Chloride Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
479040
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950 !
4789900-
4789850
4789800 r- p- ,
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 13. Toluene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
4790400
4790350-;
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 14. Trichloroethene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
47904DO
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100 ;
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 15. Vinyl Chloride Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
oo
47904D'
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200-
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
478990I
4789850
4789800-
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 16. m,p-Xylene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
4790400
4790350
4790300
4790250
4790200
4790150
4790100
4790050
4790000
4789950
4789900
4789850
4789800
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
Figure 17. o-Xylene Concentration Isopleths from Summa Sampling (ppbv)
-------
A Case Study
Table 3. Analytical Results for COPCs
Grid
ID
No.
02
N2
CH4
CO2
O
0
(ppmvC)
26
42
43
89
113
113
PV2A
WW
IG
0.95
0.6
0.91
0.41
0.57
ND
0.17
ND
16
55
13
51
13
2.2
0.95
2.5
ND
79
31
53
36
50
54
54
64
ND
ND
14
30
13
37
48
47
34
ND
3.2
970
2200
1100
2800
1800
1800
2000
ND
160
l,l-Dichloroeth<
(ppmv)
0.01
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
m
(ppmv)
0.07
0.26
0.04
0.24
0.12
0.12
0.075
0.0011
ND
Chlorobenzer
(ppmv)
ND
0.02
ND
0.02
ND
ND
ND
0.0014
ND
Chloroetham
(ppmv)
0.15
ND
0.06
0.52
0.38
0.37
0.016
0.0026
ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzi
(ppmv)
ND
ND
ND
2.00
0.04
0.036
ND
ND
0.0055
Methylene Chloi
(ppmv)
0.04
0.23
0.26
0.04
ND
ND
0.018
0.016
0.0022
Toluene
(ppmv)
0.01
0.07
ND
4.50
0.56
0.54
0.047
0.0024
0.0016
Trichloroethent
(ppmv)
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.0031
0
O
(ppmv)
0.66
1.20
1.30
0.54
0.17
0.16
0.068
ND
ND
1
ft
S
(ppmv)
0.01
0.28
ND
1.40
2.10
2.1
2.3
ND
ND
§
i
o
(ppmv)
0.016
0.18
ND
0.56
0.7
0.7
0.8
ND
ND
Table 4. 90th Percentile Landfill
COPCs
Gas Concentrations of
COPC
NMOC
1 , 1 -Dichloroethene
1 ,4-DichlorobenzEne
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Methylene Chloride
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xybne
90th Percentile
Concentration
(ppmvC)
2380
0.00152
0.4288
0.244
0.0208
0.408
0.236
1.348
0.01428
1.22
2.14
0.72
5.1 LandGEM Modeling of LFG
The 90th percentile values derived from the data set were
then used as input values for the LandGEM model to esti-
mate the LFG emission rates for each of the COPCs. To
model this site the following parameters were used:
1 Methane generation rate (k): 0.05/yr. (AP-42 default)
2 Methane generation potential (L0): 170 m3/Mg (AP-
42 default)
3 Year Opened: 1958.
4 Current Year: 2003.
5 Landfill Type: Co-disposal.
6 Landfill Capacity: 300,000 Mg. This value was de-
rived from a literature search of previous site investi-
gations. A report prepared by GeoSyntec in October
2001 indicated that this landfill contained approxi-
mately 300,000 Mg of refuse.
7 Acceptance rate (1958-1980): 13,043.48 Mg/yr. This
value was calculated using the Autocalc function within
LandGEM. This was performed due to a lack of his-
torical acceptance rate data available for this site. To
perform this calculation the landfill capacity value was
entered as the refuse in place for the year 1981, as his-
torical data indicated this was the year the site was
closed. Once the refuse in place was entered for the
year 1981, all years in which the landfill was active
were selected, including closure year (1958-1981).
With these years selected the Autocalc function was
initiated and the acceptance rate was derived for each
of the active years as an average value for all years
selected.
8 Methane percentage: 58%. This was based on the 90th
percentile of the field sample data results.
9 NMOC Concentration: 23 80 ppmv as carbon. This was
based on the 90th percentile of the field sample data
results.
10 Air Pollutants (COPCs). Modified per 90th percentile
values shown in Table 4.
With all values input, LFG emission rates for each COPC
were estimated using the LandGEM model. Figure 18
shows an example output file for NMOC emissions from
the model. Figure 19 shows the emission rate data for
NMOC versus time. Table 5 provides the emission rates
estimated for each COPC. Appendix D contains all the
LandGEM model runs for the landfill.
30
-------
Somersworth, NH
Model Parameters
Lo : 170.00 mA3 per Mg ***** User Mode Selection *****
k : 0.0500 Iper yr ***** User Mode Selection *****
NMOC : 2380.00 ppmv ***** User Mode Selection *****
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
Carbon Dioxide : 42.0000 % volume
Landfill Parameters
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 1958 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year : 2003
Capacity : 300000 Mg
Average Acceptance Rate Required from
Current Year to Closure Year : 0.00 Mg per year
Model Results
NMOC Emission Rate
Year Refuse in Place (Mg) (Mg per yr)
(Cubic m per yr)
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1.304E+04
2.609E+04 :
3.913E+04 i
5.217E+04 (
6.522E+04
7.826E+04 {
9.130E+04 <
1.043E+05
1.174E+05
1.304E+05
1.435E+05
1.565E+05
1.696E+05
1.826E+05
1.957E+05
2.087E+05
2.217E+05
2.348E+05
2.478E+05 :
2.609E+05 :
2.739E+05 :
2.870E+05 :
3.000E+05 :
3.000E+05 :
3.000E+05 :
L631E+00
U82E+00
1.658E+00
5.061E+00
7.396E+00
5.666E+00
).874E+00
.102E+01
.212E+01
.316E+01
.415E+01
.509E+01
.598E+01
.683E+01
.764E+01
.841E+01
.915E+01
.984E+01
L051E+01
U14E+01
L174E+01
L231E+01
L285E+01
L174E+01
L068E+01
4.549E+02
8.877E+02
1.299E+03
1.691E+03
2.063E+03
2.418E+03
2.755E+03
3.075E+03
3.380E+03
3.670E+03
3.946E+03
4.209E+03
4.459E+03
4.696E+03
4.922E+03
5.137E+03
5.341E+03
5.536E+03
5.721E+03
5.897E+03
6.064E+03
6.223E+03
6.375E+03
6.064E+03
5.768E+03
2001
2002
2003
3.000E+05
3.000E+05
3.000E+05
8.406E+00
7.996E+00
7.606E+00
2.345E+03
2.231E+03
2.122E+03
2200
2201
2202
3.000E+05
3.000E+05
3.000E+05
4.012E-04
3.816E-04
3.630E-04
1.119E-01
1.065E-01
1.013E-01
Figure 18. Example LandGEM Model Output
31
-------
A Case Study
1950 1S70 1930 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 2110 2130 2150 2170 2190
Figure 19. NMOC Emission Rates Versus Time
Table 5. COPCs' Emission Rates
COPC
NMOC
1,1-Dichloroethene
1 ,4-Dichbrobenzene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Methybne Chloride
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
2002 Emission Rate
(Mg/yr)
7.996
5.744xlO-6
2.457xlO-3
7.43 IxlO'4
9.127X10'5
1.026xlO-3
7.814xlO-4
4.842X10'3
7.314X10'5
2.973xlO-3
8.857xlO-3
2.980xlO-3
5.2 SCREEN3 Modeling of LFG
The next step in characterizing the emissions of LFG is to
evaluate the ambient impact of each of the COPCs, and it
is necessary to use an atmospheric dispersion model for
this. For demonstration purposes, SCREENS was used to
provide a screening level assessment. The landfill was
treated as an "area" source within the model. In order to
accomplish this, the landfill was defined into a rectangular
area as shown in Figure 20. From this area, the landfill
was modeled at a unity emission rate of 1 g/s to provide
maximum 1 hr concentration for the landfill. Because the
landfill was modeled on a unity basis, the emission rates
generated from the LandGEM model could in turn be mul-
tiplied by this unity-derived concentration to determine the
1 hr maximum concentrations for each COPC. To convert
these concentrations to a representative annual concentra-
tion, all derived 1 h concentrations were multiplied by the
appropriate multiplying factor of 0.08. If an alternative av-
eraging timer is to be evaluated, the reader is referred to
Section 2.2.1.4, Dispersion Modeling and to Table 2-3 of
the Guidance. Table 6 provides the maximum annual con-
centrations for each COPC. Appendix E contains the
SCREENS model runs for the landfill.
Table 6. Maximum Annual COPC Concentrations
COPC
NMOC
1 , 1 -Dichloroethene
1 ,4-Dichbrobenzene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Methybne Chbride
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chbride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
Total Concentration
(jig/in?)
20.69
1.4486xlO-5
6.356X10'3
1.922xlO-3
2.361xlO-4
2.654X10'3
2.021xlO-3
1.253xlO-2
1.892xlO-4
7.691xlO-3
2.291X10'2
7.709xlO-3
32
-------
Somersworth, NH
4790401
Landfill ModelifflArea
CO
z
LU
LU
cr
a
(D
T3
CD
I
Q
CO
CD
O)
"CD
T3
o
o
CM
ut
346800 346850 346900 346950 347000 347050 347100 347150 347200 347250 347300 347350 347400 347450 347500 347550 347600
33
-------
A Case Study
34
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 6. Risk Calculations
The risk assessment provided in this section is for illustra-
tive purposes only. It is not intended to represent a com-
plete and detailed risk assessment for determining further
actions at this site.
In order to calculate the incremental risk associated with
exposure to a COPC, the time averaged emission rate for
the time period of concern must first be determined. The
equation for determining the time averaged emission rate
is
< E >= (I/ED) :
(h/2):
where
< E > = Time-averaged emission rate (megagrams
per year),
ED = Exposure duration (years),
h = Time-step interval (years), h=lyr,
£0,1,2...» = Emission rate at the end of the first year
(E0) and each succeeding year from
LandGEM (megagrams per year), and
n = Number of time-steps (n = ED).
This time averaged emission rate is then entered into the
atmospheric dispersion model to estimate the average ex-
posure point concentration of the COPC. Using this ap-
proach, a dispersion model run will be required for each
chemical of concern. Alternatively, if the dispersion model
is run assuming the emission rate is at unity (1 g/m2»s), the
dispersion model will generate a normalized air concen-
tration in (micrograms per cubic meter per gram per square
meter second) at the receptor of concern. The estimated
ambient air concentration (micrograms per cubic meter) is
determined by multiplying the dispersion coefficient and
the time averaged emission rate. The LandGEM model runs
for the Somersworth Landfill predicted very low emission
rates, and the emission rate for every COPC was declining
from 2002 forward. Hence, it was decided to use only the
2002 emission rates to calculate, for illustrative purposes,
the ambient air concentrations. These predicted ambient
air concentrations were then compared to the target con-
centrations in Table 7.
Table 7. Risk Analysis
CAS
No.
75354
106467
71432
108907
75003
75092
108883
79016
75014
108383
95476
Chemical
1 , 1 -Dichforoethylene
1 ,4-Dichbrobenzene
Benzene
Chforobenzenr
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Methylene chloride
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chbride (chforoethene)
m,p-Xybne
o-Xylene
Basis
of
Target -
Cone.
NO
NC
Cb
NC
NC
C
NC
C
C
NC
NC
Ctarget , Target Indoor Air Concentration to NH Regulated
Satisfy both the Prescribed Risk Level (R) Toxic Air
and the Target Hazard Index (HI) Pollutant Annua
R=10-4, ffl=l
(Hg/m3)
2.0xlO+02
8.0xlO+02
31.
60.
l.OxlO404
520.
4.0xlO+02
2.2
28.
7.0xlO+03
7.0xlO+03
R=10 5, ffl=l
(Hg/m3)
2.0xlO+02
8.0xlO+02
3.1
60
1.0xlO+04
52
4.0xlO+02
0.22
2.8
7.0xlO+03
7.0xlO+03
R=10-6, HI=1 Ambient Limits
(M-gArf) (Hg/m3)
2.0xlO+02
8.0xlO+02
0.31
60
1.0xlO+04
5.2
4.0xlO+02
2.2xlO-°2
0.28
7.0xlO+03
7.0xlO+03
67
800
3.80
154
10.000
414
400
640
100
1033
1033
Total
. Ambient Air
11 Cone.
' (Hg/m3)
1.5xlO-°5
6.4xlO-°3
1.9xlO-°3
2.4xlO-°4
2.7xlO-°3
2.0xlO-°3
1.3xlO-°2
1.9xlO-°4
7.7xlO-°3
2.3xlO-°2
7.7xlO-°3
* NC = noncancer risk
b C = cancer risk
35
-------
A Case Study
Table 7 identifies target media concentrations correspond-
ing to risk or hazard based concentrations for ambient air
in residential settings. Only air concentrations that satisfy
both the prescribed cancer risk level and the target hazard
index are included in Table 7. The approach described here
also can be used to evaluate chemicals not listed in the
tables. It must be emphasized that the concentrations pre-
sented in Table 7 are screening levels. They are not clean-
up levels or preliminary remediation goals nor are they
intended to supercede existing criteria of the lead regula-
tory authority. The lead regulatory authority for a site may
determine that criteria other than those provided herein are
appropriate for their specific site or area.
The sources of chemical data used in the calculations nec-
essary to create Table 7 were EPA's Superfund Chemical
Data Matrix (SCDM) database and EPA's Water 9 data-
base whenever a chemical was not included in the SCDM
database. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
is the preferred source of carcinogenic unit risks and non-
carcinogenic reference concentrations (RfCs) for inhala-
tion exposure.1 The following two sources were consulted,
in order of preference, when IRIS values were not avail-
able: provisional toxicity values recommended by EPA's
National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA)
and EPA's Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables
(HEAST). If no inhalation toxicity data could be obtained
from IRIS, NCEA, or HEAST, extrapolated unit risks and
RfCs were derived by using toxicity data for oral exposure
(cancer slope factors and reference doses, respectively)
from these reference sources using the same preference
order. Toxicity databases such as IRIS are constantly be-
ing updated; this table is current as of August 2002. Users
of this guidance are strongly encouraged to research the
latest toxicity values for contaminants of interest from the
sources noted above.
The ambient air concentrations in the table are risk-based
screening levels calculated following an approach consis-
tent with that presented in HEAST (U.S. EPA, 1997). Sepa-
rate carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic target concentra-
tions were calculated for each compound when both unit
risks and reference concentrations were available. When
inhalation toxicity values were not available, unit risks and
reference concentrations were extrapolated from oral slope
factors or reference doses, respectively. For both carcino-
gens and non-carcinogens, target air concentrations were
1 U.S. EPA. 2002. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).
http://www.epa.gov/iriswebp/iris/index.html (accessed October
2005)
based on an adult exposure scenario and assume maximum
exposure of an individual (i.e., exposure to contaminants
24 hours per day, 7 days per week, over 30-year residen-
tial exposure). An inhalation rate of 20 m3/day and a body
weight of 70 kg are assumed and have been factored into
the inhalation unit risk and reference concentration toxic-
ity values.
Unit risks were extrapolated from cancer slope factors us-
ing
URF = CFS xIRx
BW)\ jug
where
URF = unit risk factor (micrograms per cubic
meter)"1,
CSF = cancer slope factor,
IR = inhalation rate (cubic meters per day), and
BW = body weight (kilograms).
Reference concentrations were extrapolated from reference
doses using
RfC=RfDxBWx\-^
. IK
where
RfC = reference concentration (milligram per
cubic meter) and
RfD = reference dose (milligram per kilogram per
day).
For carcinogens,
Ccancer = TCR/URF
and for noncarcinogens,
Cnmcer=THQxRfC
where
mcer = target indoor air carcinogen concentration
(micrograms per cubic meter),
Cnoncancer= target indoor air noncarcinogen concen-
tration (micrograms per cubic meter),
TCR = target cancer risk (e.g., l.OxlO"5), and
THQ = target hazard quotent (e.g., 1.0).
For most compounds, the more stringent of the cancer- and
non-cancer-based contaminant concentrations is chosen as
the target air concentration that satisfies both the prescribed
cancer risk level and the target hazard quotient.
36
-------
Somersworth, NH
cancen ^ noncancer)
The target concentration, however, was preferentially se-
lected for those compounds that had both an inhalation-
based toxicity value and an oral -extrapolated value. The
selected screening level was preferentially based on the
non-extrapolated toxicity value chosen to calculate the ac-
ceptable ambient air concentration.2
For ease in application of the table, the indoor air concen-
trations are given in units of micrograms per cubic meter.
The conversion from parts per billion by volume to micro-
grams per cubic meter is
C[/?/»KV] = C
where
xi(r
atm
xlO"
m
L
xRx-
T
MWxl06[jUg/g
R = gas constant (0.0821 L»atm/mole»K),
T= absolute temperature (298 K), and
MW= molecular weight (grams per mole).
The calculated target air concentrations are listed in the
tables along with a column indicating whether cancer or
noncancer risks drive the target concentration. If the expo-
sure scenario of concern is an adult resident living at the
receptor location being most impacted, the forward-calcu-
lation of incremental risks begins with the estimated ambi-
ent air concentration (i.e., Cair in micrograms per cubic
meter). For carcinogenic contaminants, the risk level is
calculated as
URF xEFxEDxC
Risk =
where
ATC X 365dqys/yr
Risk= incremental risk level, unitless (e.g.,
IxlO-6),
2 The target air concentration for trichloroethylene is the lone
exception to this rule. The target concentration is based on a
carcinogenic unit risk extrapolated from an upper bound oral
cancer slope factor of 4x10'1 (mg/kg/day)"1 cited in NCEA's draft
risk assessment for trichloroethylene (EPA, 2001). However, as
noted in that document, available evidence from toxicological
studies suggests similar carcinogenic effects from both the oral
and inhalation routes of exposure. The existence of this evidence
gives greater weight to the extrapolated unit risk, and given that
the unit risk produces a lower target concentration than the non-
extrapolated RfC, the unit risk-based value is adopted here as
the target air concentration for trichloroethylene.
Cair = annual average ambient air concentration
for each carciogen (micrograms per cubic
meter),
ATc = averaging time for carcinogens (years70
yr),
EF = exposure frequency (days per year350
days), and
ED = exposure duration (years30 yr).
For noncarcinogenic contaminants, the hazard quotient is
calculated as
HO =
ATNC X 365 days/yr
where
HQ = Hazard quotient, unitless (e.g., 1.0) and
ATNC = Averaging time for noncarcinogens
(year30 yr)
Table 7 illustrates the results of using the above equations
and discussions. The last column in Table 7 represents the
total ambient air concentration in micrograms per cubic
meter. This value is derived by multiplying the emission
flux values from LandGEM by the ambient air concentra-
tion from the dispersion model (SCREEN3) when run at a
unity emission rate (1 g/s). These values would be com-
pared to the appropriate risk derived concentrations as seen
in the previous three columns to determine if a particular
COPC is above or below an acceptable air concentration
and whether further actions or investigations may be
needed. Again Table 7 is presented for illustrative purposes
only and is not intended to represent the results or conclu-
sions drawn from a detailed risk assessment.
In conclusion, based solely on the risk calculations,
no further air investigations or remedial actions would ap-
pear to be warranted. However, other factors often come
into play and additional investigations may be desired (e.g.,
Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy).
37
-------
A Case Study
38
-------
Somersworth, NH
Section 7. Findings and Conclusions
This case study documents how the guidance can be used
to evaluate landfill gas emissions. It illustrates the useful-
ness of both the information and the procedures presented
in the Guidance for Evaluating Landfill Gas Emissions from
Closed or Abandoned Facilities. The Somersworth site in-
cludes near-by single family homes, institutional buildings,
a multi-family dwelling, and recreational facilities (e.g.,
two baseball fields, two basketball courts and two tennis
courts). An infiltration gallery is part of the super fund site
remediation efforts. The gallery is used to remove con-
taminated groundwater from below the landfill and to re-
inject it into the subsurface. The re-injected groundwater
flows through a permeable reactive barrier that is designed
to oxidize chlorinated organic compounds, and there is con-
cern that volatile chemicals may be allowed to reach the
atmosphere through the cover. There are several LFG moni-
toring wells with elevated methane levels.
By applying the investigative techniques and recommended
practices, the research team was able to:
1 Determine where the landfill gases are escaping into
the atmosphere,
2 Identify the chemicals of potential concern,
3 Quantify speciated LFG emission rates,
4 Identify the most likely to be affected off-site
location(s), and
5 Characterize ambient air concentrations using disper-
sion models (An alternative to this would be to use the
ground-based ORS results directly).
This case study report provided data and information that
were used by the remedial project manager to:
1 Assess the health risk associated with the emissions
from the landfill,
2 Determine if additional site investigation effort is
needed,
3 Evaluate the level of effort associated with the exist-
ing LFG monitoring program,
4 Determine if the previously proposed remedial design
needed to be altered,
5 Evaluate the need for institution controls and future
land use policy decisions, and
6 Decide if the risks and hazards associated with the land-
fill gas needed to be controlled with LFG control tech-
nology.
Specific to the Somersworth site the following lessons were
learned:
The conventional field screening, discrete sampling,
laboratory analysis, and modeling procedures provided
the information needed to assess the risks and hazards
associated with the LFG emissions. The turn-around
time for the laboratory was measured in weeks. The
data reduction and modeling efforts require 2-3 man
days of effort, so health risks could not be quantified
on a real time basis. Readily available equipment and
ordinary environmental technician skills are required
to obtain quality results. These techniques are capable
of achieving lower analytical detection limits when
compared to the open-path Fourier transform infrared
(OP-FTIR) technique that was also demonstrated at
this site.
The OP-FTIR and radial plume mapping technique also
provided the information needed to assess the risks and
hazards associated with the LFG emissions on a real
time basis.
Sophisticated equipment and highly skilled equipment
operators were required to obtain quality results. The
success of this demonstration effort encouraged inves-
tigators within EPA ORD to evaluate other remote sens-
ing technologies. The research team believes that us-
ing a tunable diode laser has been demonstrated to work
well when evaluating landfill gas emissions. This new
technology can be operated by two field technicians.
The tunable laser equipment is more robust and less
sensitive to adverse environmental conditions such as
high humidity and wind when compared to the FTIR
equipment. Effort is underway through EPA's Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards to develop an
EPA test method that uses ground-based optical remote
39
-------
A Case Study
sensing devices. The method has been drafted and is
under review.
The two techniques yielded very similar results. The
major difference is that ground-based optical remote
sensing (ORS) allows direct measurements of ambi-
ent concentration for use in risk assessment evalua-
tion. The conventional techniques require use of a
mass emission model (i.e., LandGEM) and dispersion
model (SCREENS, ISCST, AERMOD, and so forth)
and field equipment that is readily and commonly
available. As noted earlier, the other difference is with
the access to results with the ground-based ORS re-
sulting in much quicker results on a real time basis.
High levels of methane gas (above the LEL) were dis-
covered in the infiltration gallery. Special precautions
are needed to minimize the potential for ignition and
to ventilate the gallery prior to it being entered for
maintenance and repairs.
The highest LFG emission rates were associated with
cracks, excavations, and penetrations of the landfill
surface cover material. This discovery emphasized the
need for proper maintenance and repairs.
Using the data from this research, a risk level below
IxlO'5 was calculated based on the prediced COPC
concentration in the air.
40
-------
Somersworth, NH
Appendix A
Site Activity Photographs
A-l
-------
A Case Study
Somersworth Superfund Landfill Site
General View of the Somersworth Landfill Site
A-2
-------
Somersworth, NH
Baseball Fields on the Somersworth Site
Basketball Courts on the Somerswoth Landfill
A-3
-------
A Case Study
General View of the Tennis Courts on the Somersworth Landfill
Close-up of the Tennis Courts
A-4
-------
Somersworth, NH
Cracks in the Tennis Court Surface
m
EH
i»VB» »*"":,." ilj l , //* 7 t
^'W^P^'%iP9^H
Base of the Tennis Court Light Poles
A-5
-------
A Case Study
Drainage Cilvert on the Site
Playground on the Somersworth Landfill
A-6
-------
Somersworth, NH
^m . e^HMBftMHx . . >-"4unnBar^^H
Valve Box near the Baseball Field at the Site Entrance
Abandoned Hole for Baseball Field Lighting Installation
A-7
-------
A Case Study
Somersworth Site Looking East
West Side of the Somersworth Site
A-8
-------
Somersworth, NH
Wetlands on the West Side of the Somersworth Landfill
Access Road Around the West Side of the Site
A-9
-------
A Case Study
Monitoring Wells on the Landfill's West Side
Gas Line Marker on the Somersworth Site
A-10
-------
Somersworth, NH
Infiltration Pumping System on the Somersworth Site
Infiltration Gallery
A-ll
-------
A Case Study
Damaged Monitoring Well
- > »
Storm Water Drain on the Somersworth Site
A-12
-------
Somersworth, NH
Residential Dwellings South of the Somersworth Landfill
National Guard Armory Southeast of the Landfill
A-13
-------
A Case Study
Fire Rescue Building on the East Side of the Site
Sampling a Somersworth Landfill Gas Well
A-14
-------
Somersworth, NH
Appendix B
Wilcoxon Statistical Analysis
B-l
-------
A Case Study
Wilcoxon Two-Sample, Rank-Sum Test
In order to properly characterize and establish a sampling
method for each landfill, it is necessary to identify those
areas that are nearly homogeneous in composition. This is
determined following the screening procedures. Through
application of statistical methods on the screening data, it
is possible to divide the landfill into nearly homogeneous
areas. For the purpose of this guidance, it was decided to
use a method referred to as the Wilcoxon two-sample, rank-
sum test, or simply the rank-sum test. This is a statistical
method used to determine if two independent sample popu-
lations are statistically similar (i.e., they have the same mean
and median). For this application, statistically similar popu-
lations refer to areas within the landfill that are nearly ho-
mogeneous.
The first step is to assign the screening data that was col-
lected to two populations (i.e., east landfill and west land-
fill) as
n = HI + «2
where
n = entire screening data set,
H! = population of size HI;
H2 = population of size «2, and
HI < n2.
Once the all data has been assigned to one or the other
populations, all the data must be placed in ascending order
regardless of which population it was assigned and assigned
a rank from 1 to n. In case of ties, all tied values should be
assigned a ranking that is the mean of the tied rankings.
For example, if two values are tied for the second lowest
value, they both would be assigned a ranking of 2.5, which
is the mean of the second and third ranking spots. After all
values have been ranked, the ranks associated with the
values from the smaller population, «1; are added and the
sum denoted as T. Once T is derived, it is compared
with the values in Table X to decide on a given level of
significance. Table X can be used for a given combination
of H! and H2 up to a total population size (H) of 20. If T' a <
T' Za/2, then the two popu-
lations can not be considered statistically similar and are
therefore two nonhomogeneous areas.
Continue this process until all areas of the landfill have
been divided into distinct homogeneous areas.
B-2
-------
Somersworth, NH
TABLE X DISTRIBUTION OF THE RANK SUM T
The values of T'a. T\_tt. and a are such that, if the rc, and n2 observations are
chosen at random from the same population, the chance that the rank sum
T' of the n, observations in the smaller sample is equal to or less than T' is
a and the chance that 7"'is equal to or greater than 7";_a is a. The sample
sizes are shown in parentheses (n,, n2)
r. r,_.
(1.9)
1 10 .100
(1,10)
1 11 091
(2,3)
3 9 .100
(2.4)
3 11 067
(2.5)
3 13 .047
4 12 .095
(2.6)
3 15 .036
4 14 .071
(2,7)
3 17 .028
4 16 .056
(2,8)
3 19 .022
4 1 8 .044
5 17 .089
(2,9)
3 21 .018
4 20 .036
5 19 .073
(2,10)
3 23 .015
4 22 .030
5 21 .061
6 20 .091
(3,3)
6 1 5 .050
7 14 .100
(3,4)
6 18 .028
7 17 057
(3,5)
6 21 018
7 20 .036
8 19 .071
(3,6)
6 24 .012
7 23 .024
8 22 .048
9 21 .083
(3,7)
6 27 .008
7 26 .017
8 25 .033
9 24 .058
10 23 .092
r. T\.a ,
(3,8)
6 30 006
7 29 .012"
8 28 .024
9 27 .042
10 26 .067
11 25 .097
(3,9)
6 33 .005
7 32 .009
8 31 .018
9 30 .032
10 29 .050
11 28 .073
(3,10)
6 36 .003
7 35 .007
8 34 .014
9 33 .024
10 32 .038
11 31 .056
1 2 30 .080
(4.4)
10 26 .014
11 25 .029
12 24 .057
13 23 .100
(4,5)
10 30 .008
11 29 .016
12 28 .032
13 27 .056
14 26 .095
(4,6)
10 34 .005
11 33 .010
12 32 .019
13 31 .033
14 30 057
15 29 .086
(4,7)
10 38 .003
1 1 37 .006
12 36 .012
13 35 .021
14 34 .036
15 33 .055
16 32 .082
(4,8)
10 42 .002
11 41 .004
T, »",-. 0
(4,8) (Com)
1 2 40 008
13 39 014
14 38 024
15 37 036
16 36 055
17 35 .077
(4.9)
10 46 001
11 45 .003
12 44 .006
13 43 .010
14 42 .017
15 41 .025
16 40 .038
17 39 053
18 38 .074
19 37 .099
(4.10)
10 50 .001
1 1 49 .002
1 2 48 004
13 47 .007
14 46 .012
15 45 .018
16 44 .026
17 43 .038
18 42 .053
19 41 .071
20 40 .094
(5.5)
1 5 40 .004
16 39 .008
17 38 .016
18 37 .028
19 36 .048
20 35 .075
(5.6)
15 45 .002
16 44 .004
17 43 .009
18 42 .015
19 41 .026
20 40 .041
21 39 .063
22 38 .089
(5,7)
15 50 .001
16 49 .003
1 7 48 .005
18 47 .009
n r,_.
(5,7) (Com.)
19 46 .015
20 45 .024
21 44 037
22 43 .053
23 42 074
(5.8)
15 55 .001
1 6 54 .002
1 7 53 .003
18 52 .005
19 51 .009
20 50 .015
21 49 .023
22 48 .033
23 47 .047
24 46 .064
25 45 ,085
(5,9)
1 5 60 .000
16 59 .001
1 7 58 .002
1 8 57 .003
1 9 56 .006
20 55 ,009
21 54 .014
22 53 .021
23 52 .030
24 51 .041
25 50 .056
26 49 .073
27 48 .095
(5,10)
1 5 65 .000
16 64 .001
17 63 .001
18 62 .002
19 61 .004
20 60 .006
21 59 .010
22 58 .014
23 57 .020
24 56 .028
25 55 :038
26 54 .050
27 53 .065
28 52 .082
(6.6)
21 57 .001
22 56 .002
23 55 .004
B-3
-------
A Case Study
DISTRIBUTION OF THE RANK SUM T (continued)
T* T'i-. "
(6.6) (Com)
24 54 008
25 53 .OT3
26 52 .021
27 51 032
28 50 .047
29 49 .066
30 48 .090
(6,7)
21 63 .001
22 62 .001
23 61 .002
24 60 .004
25 59 .007
26 58 .011
27 57 .017
28 56 .026
29 55 .037
30 54 .051
31 53 .069
32 52 .090
(6.8)
21 69 .000
22 68 .001
23 67 .001
24 66 .002
25 6S .004
26 64 .006
27 63 .010
28 62 .015
29 61 .021
30 60 .030
31 59 .041
32 58 .054
33 57 .071
34 56 .091
(6,9)
21 75 .000
22 74 .000
23 73 .001
24 72 .001
25 71 .002
26 70 .004
27 69 .006
28 68 .009
29 67 .013
30 66 .018
31 65 .025
32 64 .033
33 63 .044
34 62 .057
r. r,_. 0
(6,9) (Conr)
35 61 .072
36 60 .091
(6.10)
21 81 .000
22 80 .000
23 79 .000
24 78 .001
25 77 .001
26 76 .002
27 75 .004
28 74 .005
29 73 .008
30 72 .011
31 71 .016
32 70 .021
33 69 .028
34 68 .036
35 67 .047
36 66 .059
37 65 .074
38 64 .090
(7,7)
28 77 .000
29 76 .001
30 75 .001
31 74 .002
32 73 ,O03
33 72 .006
34 71 .009
35 70 013
36 69 .019
37 68 .027
38 67 .036
39 66 .049
40 65 .064
41 64 .082
(7-8)
28 84 .000
29 83 .000
30 82 .001
31 81 .001
32 80 .002
33 79 .003
34 78 .005
35 77 .007
36 76 .010
37 75 .014
38 74 .020
39 73 .027
40 72 .036
r; *,-
(7.8) (Cont )
41 71 .047
42 70 060
43 69 .076
44 68 .095
45 67 116
(7.9)
28 91 .000
29 90 000
30 89 .000
31 88 .001
32 87 .001
33 86 .002
34 85 .003
35 84 .004
36 83 .006
37 82 008
38 81 .011
39 80 .016
40 79 .021
41 78 .027
42 77 .036
43 76 .045
44 75 .057
45 74 .071
46 73 .087
(7.10)
28 98 .000
29 97 .000"
30 96 .000
31 95 .000
32 94 .001
33 93 .001
34 92 .001
35 91 .002
36 90 .003
37 89 .005
38 88 .007
39 87 .009
40 86 .012
41 85 .017
42 84 .022
43 83 028
44 82 .035
45 81 .044
46 80 .054
47 79 .067
48 78 .081
49 77 .097
(8.8)
36 100 .000
n J1-. «
(8,8) (Cont.)
37 99 000
38 98 000
39 97 .001
40 96 .001
41 95 001
42 94 .002
43 93 003
44 92 .005
45 91 .007
46 90 .010
47 89 .014
48 88 ,019
49 87 .025
50 86 .032
51 85 .041
52 84 .052
53 83 ,065
54 82 .080
55 81 .097
(8,9)
36 108 .000
40 1 04 .000
41 103 .001
42 102 .001
43 101 .002
44 100 .003
45 99 .004
46 98 .006
47 97 .008
48 96 .010
49 95 .014
50 94 .018
51 93 .023
52 92 .030
53 91 .037
54 90 .046
55 89 .057
56 88 .069
57 87 .084
(8,10)
36 116 .000
41 111 ,000
42 110 .001
43 109 .001
44 108 ,002
45 107 .002
46 106 .003
47 105 .004
48 104 .006
49 103 .008
B-4
-------
Somersworth, NH
DISTRIBUTION OF THE RANK SUM F (continued)
n ru. «
<8, 1 0) (Co/if.)
50 102 .010
51 TO! .013
52 100 .017
53 99 022
54 98 .027
55 97 .034
56 96 .042
57 95 .051
58 94 .061
59 93 .073
60 92 .086
(9,9)
45 126 .000
50 121 .000
51 120 .001
52 119 001
53 118 .001
54 117 .002
55 116 003
56 115 .004
57 114 .005
n r,_ a
(9.9) (Conf.)
58 113 .007
59 112 .009
60 111 .012
61 110 .016
62 109 .020
63 108 025
64 107 .031
65 106 .039
66 105 .047
67 104 .057
68 103 .068
69 102 .081
70 101 .095
(9.10)
45 1 35 .000
52 1 28 .000
53 127 .001
54 126 .001
55 125 .001
56 124 .002
57 123 003
n ru «
(9,i6) (Com.)
58 122 .004
59 121 .005
60 120 .007
61 119 .009
62 118 .011
63 117 .014
64 116 .017
65 115 .022
66 114 .027
67 113 .033
68 112 .039
69 111 .047
70 110 .056
71 109 .067
72 108 .078
73 107 .091
(10,10)
65 145 .001
66 144 .001
67 143 .001
68 142 .002
T. r(-. "
(10,10) (Com}
69 141 .003
70 1 40 .003
71 139 .004
72 138 .006
73 137 .007
74 136 .009
75 135 .012
76 134 .014
77 133 .018
78 132 .022
79 131 .026
80 130 .032
81 129 038
82 128 045
83 127 .053
84 126 .062
85 125 .072
86 124 ,083
87 123 095
B-5
-------
A Case Study
TABLE IV I DISTRIBUTION
df
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
n
n
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
inf.
,100
3.078
1.886
1.638
1.533
1.476
1.440
1.415
1.397
1.383
1.372
1.363
1.356
1.350
1,345
1.341
1.337
1.333
1.330
1.328
1.325
1.323
1.321
1.319
1.318
1.316
1.315
1.314
1.313
1.311
1.282
.050
6.314
2.920
2.353
2.132
2.015
1.943
1.895
1.860
1.833
1.812
1.796
1.782
1.771
1.761
1.753
1.746
1.740
1.734
1.729
1.725
1.721
1.717
1.714
1.711
1.708
1.706
1.703
1.701
1.699
1.645
.025
12.706
4.303
3.182
2.776
2.571
2.447
2.365
2.306
2.262
2.228
2.201
2.179
2.160
2.145
2.131
2.120
2.110
2.101
2.093
2.086
2.080
2.074
2.069
2.064
2.060
2.056
2.052
2.048
2.045
1.960
.010
31.821
6.965
4.541
3.747
3.365
3.143
2.998
2.896
2.821
2.764
2.718
2.681
2.650
2.624
2.602
2.583
2.567
2.552
2.539
2.528
2.518
2.508
2.500
2.492
2.485
2.479
2.473
2.467
2.462
2.326
.005
63.657
9.925
5.841
4.604
4.032
3.707
3.499
3.355
3.250
3.169
3.106
3.055
3.012
2.977
2.947
2.921
2.898
2.878
2.861
2.845
2.831
2.819
2.807
2.797
2.787
2.779
2.771
2.763
2.756
2.576
df
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
inf.
Sommersworth Landfill Site
29-30 July 2002
Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis (Run 1)
13
18
3 1
172
- 1 .49844
5.0%
1.645
ACCEPT
Population 1 size
Population 2 size («2)
Total population size («)
Sum of Ranks (Wrs)
Large Sample Statistic (Zrs)
Confidence Interval
Accept or Rej ect H0?
B-6
-------
Somersworth, NH
Somers
29-30 J
Wilsoxc
i
Grid
No.
51
52
53
54
66
74
76
77
89
91
96
113
143
sworth Landfill Site
luly 2002
>n Rank Sum Analysis
UTM Coordinates
of Grid Node M^
Easting
347272
347272
347272
347272
347242
347212
347212
347212
347182
347182
347152
347122
347002
Northing
4790136
4790106
4790076
4790046
4790136
4790166
4790106
4790076
4790106
4790166
4790166
4790166
4789958
3 (Run 1, Population 1)
:thane S^ Assign Prelim No
:onc. R^ Pop. Set Ranking
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
3
2
0.5
6
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
3
2
0.5
6
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 13
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 13
1 25
1 23
1 1
1 28
1 13
' Ties Final Po£ 1
24 Ranking JL~ n
12
12
12
8
12
12
12
8
2
2
12
1
8
6.5
6.5
6.5
16.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
16.5
25.5
23.5
6.5
28
16.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
16.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
16.5
25.5
23.5
6.5
28
16.5
Somersworth Landfill Site
29-30 July 2002
Wilsoxon Rank Sum Analysis (Run 1, Population 2)
Grid
No.
12
13
16
17
19
20
22
23
24
26
27
32
36
38
42
43
44
45
UTM Coordinates
of Grid Node ^
Easting
347392
347392
347362
347362
347362
347362
347362
347362
347332
347332
347332
347332
347302
347302
347302
347302
347302
347302
Northing
4789966
4789956
4789986
4790016
4790076
4790106
4790166
4790196
4790226
4790166
4790136
4789986
4789956
4790016
4790136
4790166
4790196
4790226
;thane M'
:onc. j
2
8
0.5
0.5
1
1.5
1
1.2
1
5
3
0.5
1
0.5
120
7
0.5
1
nX *»& Prelim N°
lank Pop- Set Ranking
2
8
0.5
0.5
1
1.5
1
1.2
1
5
3
0.5
1
0.5
120
7
0.5
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
23
30
1
1
13
22
13
21
13
27
25
1
13
1
31
29
1
13
' Ties Final P$' 1
24 RankmS 172.0
2
1
12
12
8
1
8
1
8
1
2
12
8
12
1
1
12
8
23.5
30
6.5
6.5
16.5
22
16.5
21
16.5
27
25.5
6.5
16.5
6.5
31
29
6.5
16.5
B-7
-------
4700400
172 4
03
00 4
/TRnRnn
i
N
A
^
> 4
1 4
l
4
NI
i i
i '4
1 4
1 4
N
I- ' 1
I 4
1 «
> 4
1 4
1
»^
4
4
4
4 *-
I 4
1 4
I 4
.47,
> 4
> 4
^
»
»
4
I
1
.46
» ^
> 4
N
s
> 1
. 4
1 4
1 4
» 4
» 4
1
. 4
t 4
> 4
X
>,
t
>
»
\
»
> 1
346ann 347nnn 347?nn 347400
Somersworth Screening Sampling Locations for Wilcoxon Run 1 Populations
347ROO
O
D)
(D
O>
Q.
-------
Somersworth, NH
Appendix C
Laboratory Results
C-l
-------
A Case Study
Table 1. Summary of VOCs from July 2002 SUMMA Sampling at the Sommersworth Landfill, Somersworth NH
October 2002
Concentration in parts per billion by volume
Sample Number
Sample Location
1,1-Dichloroethene
cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene
trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene
,1-Dichloroethane
,2-Dichloroethane
,4-Dichloroebenzene
,2,4-TrimethylberizEre
,3,5-TrimethylberizEre
2-Butanone (methyl ethyl ketone)
2-Propanol
4-Ethyltoluene
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Cyclohexane
Ethyl Benzene
Freon 11
Freon 12
Freon 113
Freon 114
Heptane
Hexane
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrahydroiiiran
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xybne
129611
Grid Node
42
IP
U
U
U
U
U
84
48
U
U
U
160
260
U
24
U
U
4800
240
U
78
U
110
1900
2600
230
U
U
U
65
U
1200
280
180
129621
Grid Node
26
7.6
19
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
490
68
U
U
150
U
U
U
U
100
U
230
U
140
44
U
U
U
7.0
U
660
10
16
129631
Grid Node
43
U
16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
40
U
U
62
U
U
U
U
91
U
220
72
180
260
U
U
U
U
U
1300
U
U
12964
Grid Node
42 Amb2
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
26
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
4.0
23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
12965
Grid Node
42 Amb Dup
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
4.1
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
12966
Grid Node
43 Amb
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
12
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
3.8
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
129671
PV2A
U
U
U
U
U
U
450
160
U
U
230
U
75
U
U
16
U
12,000 E4
1800
U
78
U
35
7400 E
8400 E
18
U
U
U
47
U
68
2300
800
The acceptable QC limits for percent recovery of teh surrogate 4-bromofluorobenzene in samples 12961, 12962,
12971, 12973, 12974, 12976, 12977, 12979, and 12980 were exceeded. The data for l,2,4-trimethylbenzene;
1,4-dichlorobenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, chlorobenzene, ethyl benzene, styrene, tetrachloroethene, m,p-xylene, and o-
estimates in these samples.
Amb = ambient
U = not detected
E = estimated because the concentration exceeded the calibration range
12963, 12967, 12969, 12970
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene,
xylene should be regarded as
continued
C-2
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table 1. Summary of VOCs from July 2002 SUMMA Sampling at the Sommersworth Landfill, Somersworth NH (continued)
October 2002
Concentration in parts per billion by volume
Sample Number 12968
Sample Location PV2AAmb
1,1-Dichloroethene
cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene
trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethare
1,2-Dichloroethare
1 ,4-Dichloroebenzene
1 ,2,4-TrimethyIbenzEne
1 ,3 ,5-TrimethyIbenzErE
2-Butanore (methyl ethyl ketone)
2-Propanol
4-Ethyltoluene
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Cyclohexane
Ethyl Benzene
Freon 11
Freon 12
Freon 113
Freon 114
Heptane
Hexane
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrahydroiuran
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xybne
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
9.5
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
7.1
U
1.5
U
U
U
U
U
U
129691
Grid Node
89
U
84
U
57
U
2000
1100
380
48
62
530
160
240
U
20
520
U
1500
1300
U
430
130
160
2700
2500
38
36
13
U
4500
59
540
1400
560
129701
Grid Node
113
U
9.7
U
U
U
36
190
88
U
U
170
51
120
U
U
380
U
1700
2400
U
48
U
55
2300
1700
U
U
U
U
560
U
170
2100
700
129711
Grid Node
113 Dup
U
9.2
U
U
U
36
190
89
U
U
180
U
120
U
U
370
U
1600
2400
U
48
U
55
2200
1600
U
U
U
U
540
U
160
2100
700
12972
GridWW
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
38
7
U
430 E
1.1
U
1.4
2.6
U
25
U
U
19
U
6.0
U
31
16
5.8
U
1200 E
2.4
U
U
U
U
129731
GridIG
U
U
U
U
U
5.5
2.6
2.3
U
U
U
8.5
U
U
U
U
U
22
U
U
9.0
19
14
U
U
2.2
U
U
U
1.6
3.1
U
U
U
129741
SGP5
U
8.3
U
U
U
26
U
U
U
U
U
75
38
U
U
U
U
280
64
U
480
U
150
370
1200
7.8
U
U
U
26
U
280
42
10
The acceptable QC limits for percent recovery of teh surrogate 4-bromofluorobenzene in samples 12961, 12962,
12971, 12973, 12974, 12976, 12977, 12979, and 12980 were exceeded. The data for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene,
1,4-dichlorobenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, chlorobenzene, ethyl benzene, styrene, tetrachloroethene, m,p-xylene, and o-
estimates in these samples.
Amb = ambient
U = not detected
E = estimated because the concentration exceeded the calibration range
12963, 12967, 12969, 12970
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene,
xylene should be regarded as
continued
C-3
-------
A Case Study
Table 1. Summary of VOCs from July 2002 SUMMA Sampling at the Sommersworth Landfill, Somersworth NH (continued)
October 2002
Concentration in parts per billion by volume
Sample Number
Sample Location
1,1-Dichloroethene
cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene
trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene
,1-Dichloroethane
,2-Dichloroethane
,4-Dichloroebenzene
,2,4-TrimethyIbenzEne
,3,5-TrimethylberizEre
2-Butanone (methyl ethyl ketone)
2-Propanol
4-Ethyltoluene
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Cyclohexane
Ethyl Benzene
Freon 11
Freon 12
Freon 113
Freon 114
Heptane
Hexane
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrahydroiiiran
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xybne
12975
SGP6
3.1
4.0
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
72
9.0
U
U
36
U
U
U
U
32
U
96
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.4
U
360
U
U
129761
SGP6
Dup
2.7
3.8
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
65
7.8
U
U
34
U
U
U
U
28
U
84
U
22
U
U
U
U
2.2
U
320
U
U
129771
SGP14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
20
2.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
18
U
58
U
7.3
U
U
U
U
U
U
33
U
U
12978
SGP13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
130
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
18
460
U
14
U
U
47
U
U
U
4.0
U
U
U
U
129791
SGP4
U
U
U
U
U
10
U
U
U
U
U
U
69
U
U
U
U
82
8.6
U
100
U
64
U
600
U
U
U
U
12
U
10
U
U
129801
SGP3
U
33
U
U
U
39
U
21
U
U
U
130
77
U
U
U
U
560
200
6000
2400
U
35
1600
1500
100
U
U
U
290
U
220
190
52
12981
SGP11
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
7.1
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
23
U
5.4
U
U
5.3
U
U
U
2
U
U
1
U
The acceptable QC limits for percent recovery of teh surrogate 4-bromofluorobenzene in samples 12961, 12962, 12963.
12971, 12973, 12974, 12976, 12977, 12979, and 12980 were exceeded. The data for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-
1,4-dichlorobenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, chlorobenzene, ethyl benzene, styrene, tetrachloroethene, m,p-xylene, and o-xylene
estimates in these samples.
Amb = ambient
U = not detected
E = estimated because the concentration exceeded the calibration range
.12967, 12969, 12970
trimethylbenzene,
should be regarded as
continued
C-4
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table 1. Summary of VOCs from July 2002 SUMMA Sampling at the Sommersworth Landfill, Somersworth NH (concluded)
October 2002
Concentration in parts per billion by volume
Sample Number
Sample Location
1,1-Dichloroethene
cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene
trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 ,4-Dichloroebenzene
1 ,2,4-TrimethyIbenzEne
1 ,3 ,5-TrimethyIbenzErE
2-Butanore (methyl ethyl ketone)
2-Propanol
4-Ethyftoluene
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Cyclohexane
Ethyl Benzene
Freon 11
Freon 12
Freon 113
Freon 114
Heptane
Hexane
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrahydroiuran
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
m,p-Xylene
o-Xybne
12982
SGP10
U
u
U
u
u
u
1.3
U
U
U
U
6
U
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
28
U
8.2
U
U
6.4
U
2.4
U
1.6
U
U
1.3
U
12983
SGP2
U
90
U
U
U
U
240
130
U
U
230
U
590
U
U
U
U
1700
4000
U
U
U
190
3600
2100
U
U
U
U
1900
U
1300
10,000
2200
12984
SGP9
1.5
3.2
9.5
7.1
40
U
1.6
U
6.5
U
U
78
2.5
4.8
1.6
32
14
U
2.3
U
28
0.99
18
U
U
U
u
u
u
8.3
U
25
8
2.2
12985
SGP1A
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
5.3
U
u
u
u
1.5
U
U
1.3
7.1
U
26
U
U
4.4
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
12986
SGP8
U
U
u
u
u
u
1.1
u
u
u
u
39
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.2
U
2.4
U
4.1
U
U
22
U
U
u
4.3
U
U
3.6
1
12987
RST
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
5.4
U
U
U
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
8.7
29
U
U
U
3.2
U
U
U
U
12988
TRIP
U
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
9.1
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
The acceptable QC limits for percent recovery of teh surrogate 4-bromofluorobenzene in samples 12961, 12962, 12963
12971, 12973, 12974, 12976, 12977, 12979, and 12980 were exceeded. The data for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-
1,4-dichlorobenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, chlorobenzene, ethyl benzene, styrene, tetrachloroethene, m,p-xylene, and o-xylene
estimates in these samples.
Amb = ambient
U = not detected
E = estimated because the concentration exceeded the calibration range
,12967, 12969, 12970
trimethylbenzene,
should be regarded as
C-5
-------
A Case Study
Table 2. Summary of Fixed Gas and NMOCs from July 2002 Sampling at the Somersworth Landfill, Somersworth NH
October 2002
Sample Number
Sample Location
Oxygen (%)
Nitrogen (%)
Methane (%)
Carbon Dioxide (%)
NMOC (ppmvC)3
Sample Number
Sample Location
Oxygen (%)
Nitrogen (%)
Methane (%)
Carbon Dioxide (%)
NMOC (ppmvC)
Sample Number
Sample Location
Oxygen (%)
Nitrogen (%)
Methane (%)
Carbon Dioxide (%)
NMOC (ppmvC)
Sample Number
Sample Location
Oxygen (%)
Nitrogen (%)
Methane (%)
Carbon Dioxide (%)
NMOC (ppmvC)
12961
Grid Node
42
0.6
13
53
30
2200
12968
PV2A
Amb
20
82
U
U
U
12975
SGP6
1.2
72
13
9.8
490
12982
SGP10
9.5
76
U
11
270
12962
Grid Node
26
0.95
55
31
14
970
12969
Grid Node
89
0.41
13
50
37
2800
12976
SGP6
k3\jjr \j
Tliin
uup
2.7
74
12
9.2
460
12983
SGP2
0.24
2.7
54
45
2300
12963
Grid Node
43
0.91
51
36
13
1100
23970
Grid Node
113
0.57
2.2
54
48
1800
12977
SGP14
4.6
82
2.4
9.2
270
12984
SGP9
10
78
U
11
250
12964
Grid Node
42 Amb1
20
81
U2
U
U
12971
Grid Node
113 Dup
U
0.95
54
47
1800
12978
SGP13
17
79
U
3.6
99
12985
SGP1A
12
78
U
8
190
12965
Grid Node
42 Amb Dup
20
82
U
U
U
12972
GridWW
18
80
1.7
4
150
12979
SGP4
1.4
66
10
23
820
12986
SGP8
15
77
U
6.3
160
12966
Grid Node
43 Amb
21
82
U
U
U
12973
GridIG
16
79
U
3.2
160
12980
SGP3
3.9
48
21
25
1100
12987
RST
U
70
15
15
520
12967
PV2A
0.17
2.5
64
34
2000
12974
SGP5
2.9
53
20
25
900
12981
SGP11
16
78
U
4.2
120
12988
TRIP
U
0.3
U
U
U
1 Amb = ambient
2 U = not detected
3 ppmvC = parts per million by volume carbon
C-6
-------
Somersworth, NH
Appendix D
LandGEM Model Runs
D-l
-------
A Case Study
Contents
Table Dl. Methane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-3
Table D2. NMOC Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-7
Table D3. 1,1-Dichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-ll
Table D4. Chlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-15
Table D5. Benzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-19
Table D6. Chloroethane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-23
Table D7. Dichlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-27
Table D8. Methylene Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-31
Table D9. Toluene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-35
Table DIO.Trichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-39
Table Dll. Vinyl Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-43
Table D12. m,p-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-47
Table Dl3. o-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 D-51
D-2
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D1. Methane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202.
],o : 1 '0.00 in'37 / Mg »«**" Usfvr Mo.de .Selection
k : 0.0500 1/yr ***** rjsor Mode- Selection *****
MMOC : 2380.00 pprnv **>-" Jisftr Mod ft Selection 4
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
O,iibon Dioxide : 42.00(10 * volume
Landfill typo ; Co-Disposal
Year Opened : ]93L;
-j
9 .
i .
1.
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1
1.
2 ,
2 .
v .
2 .
v .
2 .
3 .
3 .
3.
3 .
5
^
^.
3 .
5 .
i, .
3 .
3 .
nee Kate Required r.
! Yo-ai ' <* C' ~" f , 'nji'e Yi
M<
In Piac-e (My!
304E+04
609K+04
913E+04
217t;< 04
522E+-04
826Ei 04
130E+04
045E< 05
174E+05
304 Ei 05
43bF+Oh
565t;' 05
t>S»6E-s-05
826Ki 05
957E-f05
087Ei 05
/:"i 7E-05
348E< 05
47UE+03
60 9E" 05
7 39E-MJ5
870E+05
OOOE+03
OOOEi 05
OOOE+05
OOOEi 05
UOOE+03
OOOE+05
OOOF.-f 0!)
OOOEi 05
OOOF+05
OOOEi 05
000 E-*- 05
OOOE+05
oooi-:+o5
OOOE+05
OOilF.-fOh
0 0 0 E i 0 5
com
-ai : '7
-,c]e ] p.e
i
^
2
1
4
5
5
S
6
6
7
8
Pi
il
9
q
9
9
1
i
9
q
8
8
8
7
6
6
t>
c
0
!:
u
4
1 )O HI j / yf^ii.
suits
Meti'iane Eniission Kate
(My/yi ) (Cubic ri./yrj
. 397E+01 1 . 1 ~nE~~c
. 44 "j.K+n;; . ' .
. 113E+02 . 1> "E- r
. 749Ki 02 , . ^ i.
:. u ^ p 4 1 1 - ~ "^ _ i -
. 9 ; 1 E i 0 '' .---,
. 479E + 02 ' . _ z.+
. OOOKI 02 . , ' - .
. 49GE+02 . -- r
,9G7Ei02 . ^ ' -
./49E+U2 _.' 2*
f- -< r.t y , f| - i u (
. 002E+02 1 . 1 5E- "
. 352E) 02 3 . _ _E '
. B84E + 02 ' . 'i "-i .,
. OOOEi 02 4. . i i^
. 301E + 02 _ . E+02
. 920EI 02 . r '
. 4 8 3 E4"'.' 2 - . _ _ ~~ ! (
. 072E+02 1 . _' E- '')
. 67BE+02 T _ 11 - "_ ,
. .30 BE i 02 3 . i '< - ' l"
.947E+02 ' .
. 6 0 3 E i 0 2 < . i t ' ' r
. 286E+02 '. <-__ET i-
. 980E+02 - . 'i "E- "
. 68 8!-;+ 02' . r i i- "
.410E+02 .21 E- c
.147E+02 . 14'- -
.896Ei02 . ^' E
continued
D-3
-------
A Case Study
Table D1. Methane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
i i Refuse In Place (Mg) (Mg/yr)
I
r ^
1 i
r
~
?
Til I
n K. t
OUUEf
OOOEt
0 0 17 K. t
OOOEf
OOOFf
3 . 0 0 0 E t
3. UOOEf
3 .
00
0 0
00
0 0
OEf
OEt
OEf
OKf
_ 1 - 3 . 0 0 OEf
f " ^
_ ' '
^ ~ 1
_ i
_ '
1
- -
- -
! *
1
_
^ " *
J
r,
_
l
C.
^
1 j I
,1
- «_
1 ^
j
r
_ ,
_ a
_ t
- i
r 1
_i
r
_
3 .
3 _
5 .
i; _
2
3 .
j ,
3.
3.
-; .
~;
3 .
3 ,
5
3 .
1 ) I i
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00
00
00
00
I j o
IJIJ
00
0 0
00
0 0
Ml
00
0 0
0 0
ft 0
00
1 1 (J
0 0
' ' LI
0 0
0 0
0 0
00
00
OEf
OEi
OEt
OEf
0 K l
OEf
OEf
OE t
OE«
OEf
05
Oh
0 5
05
Oh
05
0 5
05
0 5
0 5
03
05
05
0 3
05
0 5
03
i") S
Ob
q
2.43
2 . 3 1
f '
1,
] .
1,
1 .
1 ,
1 .
1 ,
1 ,
1 .
1 .
1 ,
1 .
1 ,
1,
OKMJh 9 .
OEf 05 8 ,
OEf
OEf
OEt
OFf
OEf
OEI
OEf
OE'
OEf
OEi
UEf
r.) v. t
OEf
OEi
DEf
0 E t
3 . OOOE+
3 .
0 Ci
00
02
R
. 9
.8
. 7'
. 6
.4
9
9
9
Q
1
3
7
.40
. 1
p.
6
ft
4
. 4 0
,94
. r-,
0
"Etn-'
hF.f 0,:
bEt 02
lEfOI"
3Ef02
OEt 03
2Ef 02
OE' 02
3Ei 02
lEf 02
3 Ef 0 2
OEf02
OF.f02
5E'02
3Et 02
4Ef03
9Kto?
7Ef02
BEfo;-'
,j E f i.)^
9Et02
4Ef Ul
2 E i 0 1
3Ef 01
"EfOl
1 i' i
i . l L £1 f
1 >-
. i Lf
.4 r »
" ~ ^ +
~^>
- - i
_. " £f
~
_. 1 ' £f
4 r1^
_ . ^ ^ ^
_ . 1 _L
i 2f
< in
1 Tf
1 . 1 r ,
"^ i
4 I*-
j f (
1 i ' E-*
1 T
r
r
'
r
c
r
c
-
r
05 8,OS2E+01 .IE-"
0 r'
i i h
Q r,
Ub
02
0 "i
i") S
! i S
05
Ob
i") 2
05
05
i 1 S
05
US
7 ,
(>
6.
>:>,
'3.
C,
5,
s .
, 6
. 9
.:-,
Q
,7
.4
9
6
V
0
Ci
0
8 E ' 0 1
2Ef Ul
3 E i 0 1
6EfOl
2 E t 0 I
^ p j. o t
3EKU
hF.f 01
~ . A 1 t f
, t
^ . I t~ !
llf
" -, 1 ~ "
Ef
. , E
1 ""^
i
r.
a
,
j
4
3.160Ei01 ."itt
4 .
4 ,
. 9
. n
ft
4 . 4 4
4 ,
4 .
3 .
3 ,
OEt 05 3,
OEf
03
.8
.4
2
1
z
3
5
9
3 . 0 Ol OEf 0 5 3.15
5 .
31 .
3 .
(III
0 0
( } ( 1
00
u u
OEf
OEi
OEf
OEi
OEf
r " 3.000Ef
'
=
' >
i 1
_ i
i ^
1 ! r
,
^ 1 ~
1
_ i
-
^
1
"
4
L
3 t
3 .
5 .
5 ,
3 .
7
~
3 .
5 .
3 _
1 1 ( I
00
00
00
U IJ
0 0
o o
00
( ) 0
0 0
( 1 ( )
1 II t
on
0) Ol
00
00
00
1 II 1
OEf
OEt
OEf
OEt
OEf
OEf
n Ef
OEf
OEf
OEt
OEf
nE.f
OEf
OF.f
OE t
OEf
i i£f
0 S
0 5
i. j h
05
0 3
05
03
i J 5
Oh
05
1 i S
0 5
0 5
05
( J h
05
Oh
1 1 S
0 3
0 ^
03
C) 5
Oh
1 1 3
2 ,
Cf
. 8
7
5
OEf 01
9Et 01
lEf 01
5 E i 0 1
9Ef 01
3 E ' 0 1
6Ef 01
9Et 01
OEf 01
OEf 01
7'EfUl
2 E i 0 1
3; L
< f ^ i
"Lf
i . _r >
"" f
1 c.
1 < i _~
, ^--.E
_Ef
J ! " f
24> "-
1 . 1 b
4
^
i
!
f
1
a
4
a
1
4
i
2. 6 94 Ef 01 - . ^ a
2 ,
2 .
j ,
2 ,
1 ,
1 ,
1 ,
1 .
1 ,
1 ,
1 ,
1 .
1.
1 .
1 ,
1 .
1 ,
9.
'-* .
rt
.4
. G
, 1
r S
.4
o
3
1
9
9
0
1
C,
2K.HJI
''Ef 01
9Ef 01
SF.f 01
8 E t 0 1
OiF.f 01
8 E t 0 1
bEf Ul
8Ef 01
4Ef01
4Ef01
BEfOl
. ^ lit.
Ef
| "^ c IT »
ff
' r IT f
.111 f
^ . 1 ^
L -
_ . r ^ r E *
44 1
h --
. ^ ~ ,
.406E(01 .. L,
. 1
.4
I
E
9
4
1
;jp^.-) ]
-' E f U "t
riKf 01
lEf 01
9Ef 01
2Et 01
OEf 0(i
6EfOO
.
i r *
1 -, I *
. "_i E i
1 . a ff
. i ^E
. i -' ,
j Ef
,
j
]
,
4
1
i
,
1
]
1
4
a
4
1
1
4
4
D-4
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D1. Methane
Year
2077
707ii
2079
2080
208 1
208 3
3084
2085
2 0 8 6
208"?
2 0 0 ft
20S9
20 W
2091
2092
V| } ^":<
7094
2095
2096
2097
20 3fc>
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
21 08
2109
2110
'/ 1 1 I
2112
2113
211 4
2115
211 6
71 17
2118
2119
2120
2122
2173
2124
2173
2126
2127
"' 1 "' 8
7 1 7: 9
2130
2 1 3 1
2132
2133
2134
21 35
213b
2 1 3 7
2138
2 1 3 9
>' 14 n
214!
2142
2 1 4 3
2144
2145
214G
2147
Emission
Rcfuco
3 t
3'.
3 .
3 ,
7
~
3.
7 .
3 t
3 .
3 .
3 _
3 .
3.
3 .
3 .
3 _
3 _
3 .
7
;
3 .
3 .
3 _
5 .
3 .
3.
3 .
7
'i.
3 .
^
j!
3 .
5 .
3 .
3
3 .
?. .
3 .
3 .
5 .
7 .
3.
5 .
3 .
5 .
3.
3 .
Rate from Year
In Place (Mg!
000 E< 05
OOOF.-t-Ob
OOOLi 05
0 0 0 K i 0 5
0 0 0 E + 0 5
OOOE+03
0 0 0 E * 0 5
OOOE+03
OOOE-OS
ooo r: i 05
OOOE+05
OOOK+05
OOOE+05
OOOE+03
0 0 0 E i 0 5
000 Et 05
llilHE+175
0 0 0 K i 0 5
OOOE+05
OOOE+03
OOOEi05
OOOE< 05
OUOE+05
0 0 0 K I n 5
0 0 0 F.+ 0 5
onQ[-:+ 05
OOOE+05
nnotii 05
o o o t; * o 3
OUOE+05
noon i 05
OOOE+05
0 0 0 E * C! 5
OOOF.-t-Ob
OOOE<05
UOOE+05
0 0 0 1; i 0 5
OOOE+05
000 Ei 05
OOOF+03
n n n ^ » o 5
OOOE+05
0 0 Q E i 0 5
OOOE+U5
OOOE+05
i ) o ( > p + n s
000 E' 05
OOOE+05
OOOEi 05
0 0 0 E+ U 5
OOOE+05
OOOE+05
000 EI 05
OlKlF.H-Ob
OOOE' 05
OOOE+U5
OOOE+05
OOOK+05
OOOE+05
0 00 F.+ i i 3
OOOE* 05
OOOE+05
UUOE-t-Ob
0 0 0 {] + 0 5
OOOE+05
OOOE+03
0 0 0 E * 0 5
OOOE+03
OOOE+05
OOOE i 05
1959 to 2202
(
8 .
7 .
7
(-
6 .
u .
6 .
5 .
5 .
5 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
f
4 .
;
3 .
7 .
3 .
3 _
2 .
V.
2 .
~
2 .
i .
i .
i .
i .
i .
i.
i .
i .
i.
i .
i
.I
i .
M
9 .
8 .
;;
8 .
7 _
b .
b.
6 .
s
5 .
3 .
I .
4 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
7 .
3 .
2 .
V .
(continued)
Mg/yr) ( il i \
529EiOO ^. _ 1
1 1 <£ + - 1
643.F.+ 00 . -r
319EIOO . ^ _
01 j F+00
7 17 E i 0 0
4.? OKI 00
177E+00 " . "" 12*
921E+00
68 1E+00 " . ' E.-
4b3F.+(.l()
'' '', i'< E i 0 0 .1
0 2 9 E * 0 0
8 3 v E+ 0 0 > -
4G8E+00 ._ --
399F+(10 -i"-
1 3 8 E I 0 0 . " i ~"
985 EI 00 ,.,"!_
039E+00 - 2+
7 0 I K I 0 0 -, i
569E+00 . "" ' E-
444K+00 +
325E+00 . 12-
2 1 1 E i 0 0 . ^ j
103E+00 _ 2-
OOlEtOO
903E+00 _ E^
81 OKI 00 I 4
722E+00 . r ^*
G 3 6 E i 0 0 . i
hh3F+CH)
482EIOO _.
41UE+OU _ 2-
v. 4 1 K, i 0 0 i
27GE+00 -."in
2 1 4 E i 0 0 '.12
134F+00
fl Q Q y j f s f]
044E+00
0 5 r, [/_ ,-, I , t
9 90 E- 01 . ~-
bbl F-01
134E-01 ^ ^
73BF-01
360E-01 . i
U U 1 E- 'J 1 ^ E
bOOE-Ol . --
335F-01
026E-01
732R-01
455t;-01 .^ i
187E-01 4 -
934E-01 . " _ _
693K-01
4b4E-01 . ^_ -
747E-01
039E-01
0 4 7' F,- (H ' i "
,-;sSE-'!l
477 K,- 0 '1
307E-01 . r~~~~
146F.-01 1 '-
992E-01
B4VF.-01
7U8E-01 - L 2+
576K-01
D-5
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D1. Methane Emission Rate from Year 1959
,r Refuse In Place (Mg)
., 1 i
i .. <
_i'
ir
r
r
i' i
r
"1 -
_ir
i r
_i
i
11
_i
L
1 ( 1
1 i /
_ I
^ _L '
i
[
-_ j
! ~
s
_ i
l"
_1
1 ~
1 J
_1 -
1
_,!- -
_1
i- i
_i ^
i
_ i '
_i
-1
-1 -
i
1 -.
I
1 -i
i
_1
1 '
1 1
2 1 1 '
3302
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
71
3
5
3
3
3
j
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
7
~'s
3
..3
^
3
3
3
^
5
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.
. 000 E < 05
. OOOF+Oh
. OOOEi 05
. on OKI 05
. OOOE+05
. OOUF.+ 05
. 000 Ei 05
. OOC;F,+03
. OOOEi 05
. n n o K i o 5
. OOOE+05
. onor;+05
. OOOE+05
. OUOF,+ 05
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOQEi-05
111 K!E+l75
. 0 0 0 K < 0 5
.OOOE+05
. OOOE+03
. OOOEi 05
. 0 0 0 tl * 0 5
. UOUE+U3
. 000 KI 05
. OOOE+05
. n 0 0 E+ 0 5
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 E ( 0 5
. OOOEi 05
. OUOE+03
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Oh
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. onnKi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. ()f)(!F+03
. OOOE' 05
. UOUE+03
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. ()(!(JE + 03
. OOOEi 05
. OOUF+Ob
.OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOC1E+0!)
. OOOEi 05
. UOC1E+03
to 2202 (concluded)
[Mg/yrj
2. 450E-01
7 . 331 E-ul
2 . 2 1 7 E- 0 1
5. 109K-01
2 .OOGE-01
1 . 90BE-01
1 . 8 i 5 E- 0 1
1 . 7X6F,-01
1 . 5b3'K-01
1.4SoE-Cl
1.41 4K-01
i. 545E-01
1 .279E-01
1.217E-01
1.157E-01
1 . i 0 1 E- 0 1
1 .r)47K-0'l
9. 9G1E-02
9. 475E-02
9.013E-02
3 . 574E-02
8 . 1 5 3 E- 0 2
7 . 7581-3-03
7 . 379E-02
7.0191-;- 0 2
(3. (377E-02
,, T^r, ] ].-_(-);
6. U42E-U2
5.747E-02
3 . 4G7E-02
3 . 3i-)f)K-05
4 . 947E-02
4 . 705E-02
4 .476E-02
4 ,2D7£-02
4.05 O E- 1.1 2
3 . 852E-02
3.GG4E-02
3. 48GE-02
3 .316E-02
3 . 154E-02
3 . OOOE-02
2 .854E-02
2 . 713E-U2
2 .582E-02
/ . 4S6E-02
2. 337E-02
3.273E-112
2. 11 4 £-02
2.011E-02
1 .917E-02
I .B20R-03
1.731E-02
1 .647E-U2
. i "
^ "
. ;.-
i -
. H"ETI
+
" fc
L -
^ . i ^
" ^
1 1 *"
[ ^a
H' "-
^ . ^ 1 ^. *
^ . 1L (
=+
1 " *-
r ^
.
^
.
. I E- _
i
E
,
,' ".IT
. 1 1
J_
<
- ^ , - ^
r
1"- ]
~
]_
~T J . ]
^- 1
. _ 2 1
^ . 1 "~
^
- - ' 2- 1
1
i-* i
2~
-> 1
1
1
. j. <^i 1
14^ J
- ~ 1
.
. ' " " 1
"- 1
D-6
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D2. NMOC Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
],o : 1 '0.00 rn''?. / Mg »«**" User Mode Selection
k : 0.0500 1/yr ***** (jscr Mode- Selection *****
MMOC : 2300.00 ppmv **>-" n = er Mode Seleotion 4
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
O^sibGh Dioxide : 42.00GO % volume
Landfill typo ; Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 195 Closure Year : 0.00 Hu/ycai
.fbn
19G
19G8
1 969
1970
1971
1 97 2
1973
197 4
1 97 b
1976
1 9'.' 'I
1978
1 97 9
1 98 0
1 98 1
1982
1 98 3
1984
198b
198 6
1 987
1988
1 9B9
1990
1991
1992
D-7
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D2. NMOC Emission Rate from Year 1 959 to
ir Refuse In Place (Mg)
__
MM
_' M
I II I
-Ml
Ml *
' 1
*_ ' 1 *
' ] r
_ '1
i !
|1 -
> ] <
I !__
L
i |
1 ! -
_"_ I
!
_ i 1
^i 1^ ~
_
1 1 '
_'l
I '
_M
*- f
1 L.
i i
_l '
'' '"
_ J
114
_ i
_ I i J
i 4
_' ! 1
_ >r
i 41,
-. ' r
_n-
-u i l
_i L
I |! 1
I U
r
'-}
' ,
Or ""
1
-1 r
1
-' -
-M
1
-M,
< , Ij
M
.1
i j~
i ^ '
I
i ,~
M ,
_M
2076
.3
3
3
3
"l
3
3
j
3
3
/i
}
3
3
3
-^
3
3
^
3
3
3
3
3
*
3
5
3
3
3
?,
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
^
3-
3
3
3
I
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
3;
3
;-;
. 000 E< 05
. OOOF+Ob
. OOOHf 05
. OOOf-H 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOR+05
. 000 El 05
. OWiF.+ Ob
. OOOE« 05
. 0 0 OKI 0 3
. OOOE+05
. OOOK + Ofi
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE< 05
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
1 MKSE+05
. 00 OK' 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
0 0 0 F I 0 5
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. UUOE+Ub
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOK+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE< 05
nno P.J. 1 1 ~
. 0 0 0 E * 0 5
. OOOE+05
. 000 fit 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF+Oh
. OOOE- 05
. OOOE+Ob
. 000 K ) 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Ei 05
. MO(JF.+03
. OOOE' 05
. UUOE+Ub
. OOOE" 05
. OIH3 E+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+Oh
. OOOE< 05
. OOOF+05
. 000kl<05
. UUOE+Ub
. OOOE+05
. OOOF+03
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF.+ 0-.
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+Ob
.OOOE+05
. 0001-:+ 05
. OOOE+05
. OOUE+OS
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOF.+ Oh
. OOOE+05
. OOOK+Ofi
. OOOE+05
. OOOF+03
. OOOE i 05
. OOOF+05
. U 0 0 E+ 0 5
. 000 Ki 05
2202 (continued)
(Mg/yrj
0
6
r.(
r^
S
i.
,\
4
4
4
7
5
3
3
3
2
2
i-'
1
i
i
i
1
1
[
L
]
1
1
1
9
9
K
8
H
7
b
6
u
3
3
5
4
4
4
4
3
~>
"-{
3
3
3
2
2
2
V
1
. 5 4 7 E i 0 0
. 237E + 00
. 924EI 00
. o.^'iKi 00
. 3GOE+00
[ } 4 i'-1 17 -| j' l i' 'i
. 8 5 0 E i 0 0
. 61 7E+00
. 388Ei 00
. 1 7 t K i 0 0
.971E+00
. 777K+00
. 593E+00
.41 BE+liO
.251E( 00
. 092 Ei 00
Q .-5 y ^ ; | f ,
. 7 98 K i 0 0
.6G2E+00
. 33^:E+iK)
. 408E) 00
.2S1E) 00
. 17 9E+0 0
. 075Ki 0|7
. 972E+00
. 3 7 61-;+ Of)
. 784E+00
. 697EI 00
. 614E + 00
.536Ei 00
. 4 G1E + OU
. 5S9HI 00
. 322E+0 0
, 2 5 7 E i 0 0
. 1 96E+00
. 1 3 8 E i 0 0
. 082E+UU
. 029KI 00
. 792E-01
. 31 4 E- 01
. BhDE-Ol
. 428E-01
. 017E-U1
. 626E-01
. 23 4 E- 01
. 900E-01
. 363E-in
.243E-01
. 939E-01
.649E-01
. 374E-01
.112 E- 0 1
. B62E-01
.G25E-01
.400E-01
.185E-01
.981E-01
.787E-01
. 60,"'K-0']
. 42bE-Oi
.2S9E-01
.100E-01
. 949E-i)l
. 805E-01
. 6i59K-0'l
.53SE-01
.41 3F.-01
.297E-01
.183E-01
. 07BE-01
. 977K-01
' ' L r / 't
"
^ . r
- ET
-.
'. ^
" -
. _ i
x.i
1 r
' . S
"-
, ^
. ^ ^
,
. _"E^
"-
"^ ' ^^
'.
i"
"" . i_"~
-
" E
i , ~
s, U ^
i~
_
'
" -
. ^ ! _,
I I
7 -
E ~
.
^ . ^
^ ^ ~-
- . ^ - ~
42*
. '_ E-
-t
. i^^
-
. L.
-
1 ~"^
1
- ~
1 . "^~
i . i ^
_ 1 _ ^_ -f _
^ . r i E- _
T
_ r c £_ 1
" - 1
. , H- 1
"- 1
^ _- 1
~ ,-*
-, ]
~ 1
I ~"~ |
^+ 1
1 " !
D-8
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D2. NMOC Emission Rate from Year 1 959 to 2202 (continued)
Refuse In Place (Mg) (Mg/yr)
- ~" 3. OOOE'
3. OOOE+
~' " i 3. OOOEt
3. OOOF.t
_| - ' 3 . OOOE-t-
3. DOOE+
_ J 3.000 Ei
4 3 . OOOE-r
i 3. OOOEt
i i 3.000K)
3.000E+
3. OOOK-i-
3.000 E4-
3. OOOF. +
3. OOOE t
_ 3 , 0 0 0 E t
3 UHOE +
'4 3.00 0 K t
~4' 3.000E+
3.000E+
_ '" 3 . 000 Ei
_' ' 3. OOOE<
, ~.n j j ( i [ i r? 4.
In 5.GOOKt
3.000E+
3 . OOOF.+
_ i 3.000E4-
_[' 3. OOOEt
3 . IH.IIIE +
_1 3.000E+
i 5, .no n F.I
1 i 3.000E+
_il 3. OOOE >
11 3.000E+
_il 3. OOOF. <
I 3.DU9E4-
11 3. OOOKt
± 1 " 3 . 0 fi 0 E +
_11 3. OOOEt
M 3.000F.+
_U 3. OOOE'
-i < i. UUUE +
_ ' _ 3 . OOOEt
_1 3 . UOOE+
L 3 . OOOE+
Oh
0 3
0 5
09
05
J 3
05
0 5
0 j
l.*l 9
05
0)3
05
0 9
0 5
0 5
05
l JO
05
0 5
i ,u
0 5
0 5
05
05
n 9
IS
n -7
09
05
Ob
0 5
ns
05
05
05
Lib
0 5
05
05
0 5
0 5
1.88
i. > ^0
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I.
i
1
9
o
o
*
5
. 4
"J
. }
. 1
. 0
. 0!
. B
p
. 4
_ n
1
6
9
G
9
f;;
7
1
3
o
£
"7 t lv'1
7
G
6
^
9
5
9
5
''"
. 9
. 6
. 3
.1
7
i
8
6
G
0
2
(Cut
OE-01 5.2
9F.-01 4.9
2E-01 4.7
9K-0
OE-0
5F.-0
3 E- 0
^ 17 f )
1 h' 0
9K- 0
1E-0
5 K- 0
2E-0
VF.-O
6E-0
^ i*' n
9E- 0
7 K- 0
5E-0
3E-0
8E-0
0 E- 0
9 E- 9
4 K.- 0
4 E- 0
8 I'1,- 0
5 E- 0
5 E- 0
7 E- 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
V
2
3
V
3
~
4.411 K- 0 7
3
3
3
"-,
2
3
2
2
. 1
q
. G
.4
, 2
T
!g
q
. fj
. h
.4
. 3
. 1
. 9
9
6E- U
4 .
4 .
"-; t
2 .
2 .
2 ,
i.
i .
i .
i .
i.
i .
i .
i .
i .
i .
3
3
0
8
,:
3
8
1
0
g
7
G
.,-
^
1
0
9
g
h
3
5
4
-"
1
91 K-n;: 1 . !
9'"
6
(J
r,
I
4
2
9
a
8
7E-02
1E-02
,3 E- 0
8 E- 0
Q E u
7K-0
3 E~ 0
5 E- 0
5E-0
IE- 0
3 E- 0
Q ^ f)
4 E- 0
2E-0
2
^
2
2
2
2
i .
i.
9.
9.
3 .
B
7
7
6 .
b .
6.
3 .
U
0
h
1
^:-
C
/
1
7
4
1
c
46
1 5
95
8 G
Q /
17
45
R jj,'
79
:^9
n 5
7 o
r. -i
4 2
"~s"
;:9
"; f'i
3 6
46
8 U
n "-*,
30
(*) L'1
'- i
1 5
m/'
D:
K, *
£*-
F,+
E i
F 4-
li *
Hi
E +
i1',"**
E^'
F,+
E*
E *
E+
F. i
E +
P 4-
E <
E *
E-f
K, '
£4
K +
E+
E i
E '
E +
K)
5 9 E -*-
08 E»
S4
16
49
4 7
G4
Of )
54
24
11
13
E-r
E '
F
F.I
F -f
F ^
E-f
E >
E +
E«
E +
2 5.529E+
3. OOOE + Ob 1 . ;>!J3K-03 9 .2
.. _ i 3. OOOEi
1 3.000E+
1 3.000E(
_ _ 3.01JUE+
1 3.000E+
i 3 . IJOOE+
1 " 3 . OUOE+
-1-. 3, OOOEt
-j j j p [ j p ^
0 'D
09
05
09
05
05
U T1
05
f i 3
^1 3 . nuuE+03
1 3 . OOOK+
3.000E+
1 3.000E4-
3. OOOE i
< 3.009E+
_ 1 J j . UOOE+
, 1 . I.HJUK +
' ' 3. OOOE+
1 3. OOOF. +
1 " 3 . OOOEt
' ~ 3.000E+
_l-> 3.0UUE+
'4" 3. OOOF. i
1*1 ';
0 5
09
05
( ) 5
u:>
0 5
95.
05
05
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
^
9
9
8
H
8
7
. 6
5 E~ 0'
6F,-()
3E-0
60
2 5.003
V
4 .
4 .
5
. 344E-02 4.3
. 4G
. _/
. 2!
. 1
, 0
. 0
o
.4
9
b
0
4
5
4
b
0
3
8E-0
7F-0
2E- 0
4 E- 0
o
^
4 .
0
B
b
39
2 /
06
96
q 7
OG
F.+
E '
F.+
E i
E +
E-J-
F.+
si
yr)
01
0 1
01
0 1
01
1)1
01
ill
01
0 1
01
0 1
01
ill
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
0 1
01
01
00
00
i j 0
0 9
0 0
0 0
( ) 1. 1
00
t } IJ
0 o
f J LI
0 0
00
0 C1
00
0 0
' j IJ
00
oo
00
2E-02 3.35
-------
A Case Study
Table D2. NMOC Emission Rate from
Re f u a o I n
1 , 3. OOOE
3.000F
_ l 3 . 0 0 0 E
1 3. 00 OK
_ c _ 3 . 0 0 0 E
5 . 0 0 ( ] F
_lc i 3. OOOE
11 3.nf)OF
3. OOOE
i 3. .nui IK
r 3. 00 OF.
i 3. OOOE
.3. OOOF.
i < j, , u 0 0 E
_ 3 , 0 0 0 E
a 3 l i ( i i' } E
< 3. OOOE
' 3 . OOOF,
_ 1 3 . 0 0 0 E
~1 ' 3. OOOE
3 . u 0 0 E
3. OOOF.
5 . 0 0 0 E
3 . OOOF.
_1 i 3. OOOE
_ ' 3. OOOE
_ 1 3.00 0 E
3 . OOOE
_! 3. OOOE
1 3. OOOE
_ ^ 5 . 0 O1 0 E
i 3. OOOF.
_1 ' 3 . OOOE
__ -. 3. OOOE
l 3. OOOF.
3. OOOE
~~ ~ 7.0 0 '0 E
3. OOOF
~ 3 . 0 0 0 E
7 . i ' Of i E
_l 3. OOOE
3. OOOE
i 3. OOOE
' ' ' H 3 . 0 0 0 F.
3. OOOE
l 3. OOOE
3. OOOE
Year 1 959 to
Place (Mg)
> 0
-r (}
* 0
0
-i-O
+ 0
f 0
-rO
3
h
5
^
5
c;
S
2202 (concluded)
(Kg/yr)
5 .
u
4 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
. 4 0
, 1 3
. 83
. 'o4
,42
,f:d
, u 0
. B (.i
2E-03
f.] F.-03
BE- 03
9K-03
2 E- 0 3
' ? F { 'i "}
"' E 0 7
6F.-03
.05 3.621E-03
< 1 1
-r Li
-r 0
+ 0
* 0
i 0
* 1 '!
i 0
+ 0
+ 0
* 0
* 0
4- (J
* 0
+ 0
-*- 0
i-O
0
-*-u
i 0
+ 0
* n
f I-1
+ 0
4-[J
* 0
+ 0
1 "l
-*-(}
* 0
+ 0
j 0
-*- 0
+ 0
"- 0
''
r.h
c
c
L'1
^
f-,
5
:.)
5
[>
b
N
j
r!
5
b
h
r%
b
r.
c,
5
h
5
b
r,
5
ETj
s
^
s
'J
s
2 .
2 .
2 .
2 .
1 ,
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
i .
l .
1 .
i.
l ,
1 ,
q
9,
8 .
R
3 .
-r
6 .
b .
.44
. 1 1
, 96
, 8 ?
,63
r-] 3
, 42
, 1 9
, Oii
ap
, 89
, 79
, 7 1
, C2
, 5 4
, 4 7
, 4 0
, 3 3
, 2 to
. 20
,09
, 0 7
. B 6
, 3.8
, 9'Z
,49
, 07
.o
,31
95
,61
2 9
. 'So
4E-U3
6E-03
6F.-03
4E-03
OE-03
2E-03
2E-03
7 E 0 3
9K-03
GE-03
9E-03
7E-03
OE-03
HE- 03
OK- 05
7E-03
a K-O 3
2 E- 0 3
OE-03
2 E-U 5
7 E- 03
5E-03
IE- 03
7E-03
BE- 04
7E-04
9 E-U 4
3 K-0 4
3E-04
"= f 0 4
OF.-04
4E-04
bE-04
2E-04
b E- 0 4
5.G93E-04
S
h .
* 05. 5 .
+ 0
* 0
h
5
4 .
4 .
,41
, 15'
, 90
6K-04
IE- 04
OF,- 04
, 661E-04
(Cub
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
9.
B .
B .
7 ,
-
6 .
b.
S ,
5 .
b .
4 .
4 .
4 .
5 .
3 .
3.
3 .
7
2 ,
2 .
2 .
2 ,
1.
1.
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
ic m/yr)
507E*00
433F, + i.l()
364 E) 00
2 97 K <00
234E+00
17/4F,-fOU
HGEiOO
Ub2F,+OO
OlOEiOO
609K-0 I
140E-01
b94K-f'I1
270E-01
B67E-01
483E-01
11SE-01
T/lE-01
4 4 1 K-0 1
12 7 E-U 1
jj;j:>E-01.
544E-01
273E-01
016E-01
7 7;.' K-0 1
539E-01
31 7K-01
107E-01
907E-01
716E-01
535E-01
3G2E-01
042E-01
894E-01
7b3E-«,)l
619E-01
431E-U1
369K-01
254E-01
14.1E-01
03,'-3F,-01
940E-01
04bE-01
755E-01
G70E-01
588E-01
51 1F.-01
437E-01
3b7E-»1
300E-01
D-10
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D3. 1,1-Dichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
i,o : 1~0.On m'''3 / M,-| **»-* User Mode Selection *****
k : 0.0500 1/yr * ' * * user Mode Selection **it*
MMOC : 23BO.OO ppmv ***** User Mode .Teleotior. *****
Methane : 53.0000 I volume
Carbon Dioxide : 42.0OOO '* volume
Air Pollutant : 1,1-Dichioroethene (HAL7VOC)
Molecular Wt - OH.'14 Concentration - 0.001r!,":0 ppmV
Landfill type : C o-L'i spos a 1
Year Opened : 1953 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 2003
Ave r arf£
Yeui
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
1963
1 964
1 965
1966
1 967
1968
1969
1 97 0
1971
1972
1 973
1974
197b
1976
1977
1978
1 9V 9
1 98 0
1 9B 1
1982
1983
1984
1 9iib
1 96 o
1 9B7
1988
1989
1990
] 9 9 i
1992
1 993
1994
1 99b
199 6
1 997
1998
1 999
2000
200]
2002
2003
- j * - - -- .. - ..
T Ac c ep t a n c e
Current Ye
ReiUoij In
1.304E
2. 609E
3 . 91 5E
5 .217E
6 . b 3 ''' F
7 . fi 2 6 F,
9.13 0 E
1.043E
1 . 1 7 4 F.
1. 304 t;
1 . i3.bF
1 . u 9 6 E
1 . S26E
1 . 9b 7 F
2. 08 7 E
3.21 ?E
2 . 348E
2 . 4 7 S E
2 . G09E
2. 739F
2 . B 7 0 E
3.000F
3 , 0 0 0 E
3. 00 OE
5 , 00 OIK
3. OOOF
3, OOOE
3 . OOOE
3. OOOE
-j j j p [ j p
- . 0 0 0 E
3 . 0 n 0 K
3 . OOOE
3 . OOOF.
3. OOOE
3. OOOE
3 . OOOE
', . OOOK
3. OOOE
3. OOOF
3 . OOOE
3. OOOF
3. OOOE
3. OOOK
-
Ra te Requ i red
ar to closure
Place (My)
+ 0 4
i04
+ 04
f 04
+ 0 4
, 04
+ 0 4
i Ob
+ 0b
i 05
4-1 ib
4 0 5
+ 05
* 0 5
+ 0lb
* 0 5'
+ 0 b
< 0 5
+ 05
* 0 5
t-Olb
' 0 5
+ 0b
( 0 5
+- 0 b
+ 05
+ ()!,
i U O
+ ( ) b
» 0 b
* ( i b
+ 0 -t
+ 0 5
+ 0 5
+ 0b
i C1 5
+ ( ) b
+ 6I5
+ un
+ 0 5
+ 05.
t 0 5
+ 0b
+ 0 b
t 0 5
f r orn
Year : 0.00
Model Resul
1 , 1-Hichl
(My
1 . 17
2.28
} . 34
4 . 35
b \ 1
b . oy
7 . 0 9
K . 70
9.45
1 . 0 1
1 . OS
1.1.4
1.20
1 . 2 6
1 . 32
1 . 3 /
1.42
1.47
1.51
1 . b 6
1 . 60
1 . 64
1 . 5 6
1.48
1.41
1 .34
] , ^"7
I . 2 1
1 . 15
1 . 10
1 . 0 '1
9. 95
9.47
9 . i J 0
8.56
ii . 1 b
7 . -',7
7 . 0 i
6. 6V
6. 34
6. 03
b . 7 4
5.46
Mcj /year
ts
/ VI )
2E-06
6E-06
OE1- 1 ) b
4E-06
3E- 0 6
/] £_ f) £
9E-06
bE-06
2E-06
3E Ob
4K-05
8E-05
9E-05
VF.-ilS
3E- 05
bE-Ob
5 E O1 3
3E-U5
8 E- 0 b
2'E-Ob
3E-OS
2F-(ib
1E-05
bE-Ob
3E-OS
4F-Ob
8E-05
7E-05
OE-Ob
7E-05
61'',- 06
1 E- 0 6
9E-06
9E- 0 6
1 E-06
4 E- 0 6
6 E- 06
6E-06
4 E-06
BE- 0 6
9E-06
4 E- 0 6
4 K- 0 6
(HAr/ViOC)
(Cubic
2 . 90
5 . 66
B . ^9
1.08
1 . 31
1 -it
1. 96
"-' 1 K
2. 34
S ''S
2 . 68
2.84
2. 99
3.14
3.28
3.41
3 . 53
3 . 63
5 . 7 6
3 . B 7
'' . 97
4 . 07
3.87
3 . 08
3.50
3 . 33
3. 17
3 . 01
2.86
- _
2.59
, .' . 4 b
2 . 34
2.12
2 . 02
1 . 93
1 .74
1 . 65
1.57
1.49
1 . 42
1 . 35
Krni soi on Rate
bE-04
9E-04
BE-04
OE-03
BE- 0' 5
4K-03
4E-03
' p _ n '^
4 E 0' 3
<; ) p _ i :, ^
8K-03
7E-03
9 E {"' 5
3F-O5
i E 0) 5'
lE-i)i
5 E ''} 3
4E-OI5
6E-03
3F-03
4E-03
1 F.-03
3 E 0! 3
4E-05
4E-03
3E-03
6E-!J3
9E-03
Q|7_{ ; -,
_
u E - i j 5
9K-03
9 £ » Q 3
4F-03
3E-03
^;F^-03
5E-03
OE-03
!iF-03
4E-03
[.; F.-03,
5E-05
5K-03
continued
D-ll
-------
A Case Study
Table D3.1,1-Dichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
_' 1
_"1 1
_ 1
1 F-
I- 4
D-12
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D3.1,1-Dichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
I " E-
t-
1E-
b-
jr-
. 1 ! t-
r . h-
4 . 1 -
. _ n~
1 . r- r
1 C- '
it:-' r
T - -
r-
. 11 iL-
. 'It -
1 r-
.. . h-
r _
r-
4T-
1 r-
i r-
_i
.- H-
4 r-
D-13
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D3.1,1-Dichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
: -1 i (Mg)
" r-
_ it-
i E-
41 _
r-
L-
IF ii"
it- '
IF n =
h-
_. ' E-
. , L-
l. ,-t-
L
it*
D-14
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D4. Chlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
Lo : 1"?0,00 nv'"3 / Mg **** ~ i I t 1 *~
I: : O.OriOC! 1 x'yr ***** ij.se II -
NMOC : 2380,00 ppmv -'» + ** I i -, 1
Methane : 7)8.0000 % volume
Cuibou Dioxi'le : 4kl.u'JUU \ volume
Air Pollutant : Chlorobenzene (HAl'/VOC!
Moleon'iar Wr - 112,96 Concentrat ion -
Umdiiii type : Cu-rii-po^al
YeuL Opened : 1953 CmioiiL Yeai : 2003 O'louuie Yeai : 2003
Capacity : 300000 Mg
Avca._i'.|e AccepUuice Ri
. 60 ii
.481
. 360
. ''' 4 h
. 135
. ( '! 5: 1
. 932
. B 3 fi
.748
.505
.431
. 3 62
.295
. 172
.11!)
. 0 6 0
. Oi09
. 595
. 127
3
en
E-
E-
E-
E-
E
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
|7 _
p~
E-
F-
E~
F-
E~
F-
F-
E
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
E-
!>_
E-
E-
E-
E-
!',-
E-
E-
!',-
\
i
Oh
Ob
05
Oh
05
OS
0 4
0 ''
1)4
0 4
i ) i
(j 4
0 4
04
04
( -j ~.
ij 4
04
04
04
0 4
04
04
d -I
04
0 4
04
04
04
0 4
04
04
04
04
0 4
0 4
04
0 4
0'4
0 4
04
05
0 5
u 5'
'IS
^ _
1 .
1 .
1.
2 .
2 .
3 .
3 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
C5
u
h .
5 .
5- .
4
4 .
4 .
,?
" t
2,
,-> .
2 .
2 .
2 .
1 ,
1 .
.E
. 97
. 7'3
. 13
, 4 7
. SO
, 11
, 4 0
, 68
. 95
,20
.44
. 67
, 1 0
, 30
, 4 8
, 66
, B3
, 00
, 15
. 30
,43
. b 7
. 04
. 7 9
. 56
, 33
, 12
, 92
, 7 3
, 55
. 3','
,21
. (.1!-.
, 90
. 7 6
. 63
, 5 0
. 38
, 2 6
. 1 5
,04
. 95
, B 5
mission Kate
in/yr )
6E-03
n E - n 8
6 E - 0 2
BE-IO:
3E-02
:3E->'0:
8 E Oc
SE-02
4F.-02
6E-02
9P_l ; ;;
8E-02
7E-02
4 E-* ) <:
2E-02
9 E-0 2
8 E - CJ 2
B E-< )2'
M p _ f ) "'
3 E 0* 2
1 1 F, - { ) ../
9E-02
1E-02
9E-02
1 E-02
b E - 0 2
IE- 0) 2
9E-02
7 E-02
6 E - 0 2
4 E-02
2E-02
9E-02
4 E Oi "'
7E-02
8E-02
7 E-0 2
7E-< . '
3E-02
1 E-02
5 E-02
9 E-0 2
9E-02
OE-02
4K-02
continued
D-15
-------
A Case Study
Table D4. Chlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
_ >i
1 E-
1-E-
1..E-
1. 859E-03
1. «i82E-03
1 . 6UOE-U3'
1, 322E-03
1.448E-U3
] . 31 0"-(j3
1. j-U'S-03
1.186E-03
1.123K-03
1 . O'i'^E-U'3
1. 020E-03
9. "706K-04
D-16
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D4. Chlorobenzene
i Re i
i
_ ~
'
_
-
-
i
^
_
_
_
!
_ i
_1 _
_1
i *
_l
__ i
1
1 )
11
_lli
1 ]
_-l
_] J
1
i j
I'll'/
2118
2119
2120
2 1 2 1
2122
2123
2 12 <1
vlvb
2126
,:127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
21 33
2134
213b
2136
2137
2138
Emission Rate from Year
-_ ~'i :_- (Mg)
. :L 1
r-^ '
1 L> '
. i - 1
E*
' 1-
E '
F-t-
E.I "
i u I
Et-
. i " j- ~
"4-
t I
t I
E^
'-i
i j> -
" +
r l r
r, ' "
!> '
i i "
. i > c
i -f
E -t-
^ i
2 +
t i i
-
- < r
Ei-
f
r j i
1 L '
1 I f-
1 - i 0
. l :> =
. ** *
" 4-
J . t 1
i 2-1-
. ' £,
? -r
1 E+ c
T4 '
. L ' r
!" i
1 ' 'r, '
!^
' ^ "
"4-
E i c
"+ -
1^ ( ! "
2+ '
E4-
+
E»
^4-1
] ^ 1
r^
Pi *-
1959 to 2202 (continued)
(Mg/yr) {Cut
~ t - ' 5 .
. - r- 4 .
_ . j. 1 E- - 4 .
.41-- 4 .
1. 1_E- 4.
1 , - r - > 3 .
l.^'^E- i 3.
i . r- > 3. .
1. 'L- 3.
1 i u _ "-;
l . E- 2.
.'41- 2 .
' . i r E- 2 ,
. 1 J >"_ 1 .
- ."_"F- " 1 .
- . It- " 1.
i r- i i ,
!(-'" 1 .
M r E- " 1 .
'.HI-"1 1 .
. . i r E- " 1 .
. j i H-- " 1.
" . L- 1 .
. r ' L - 1 .
. _ < E- 1 .
. i - 1- - n 1 .
1 . " -E- "" 1 .
I . c L- ri
a. - T- 'i.
i ,1 t- 8 ,
_lL- 8.
. " - ih- "7 .
, c i ' E- " 7 .
"."?-' 7 .
T- b .
. '|- it- i" 6.
_. ' r- 6.
L- " 5 .
_ 'E-
r [ r _ - " iz,
r - b .
t- "
. i r-
. 1 L-
i. -j t- J .
1 . - -E- "7
i . r-
l.i" 'E- "
i .u -,r-
i r t - '
1 . '- E- 3.
1. _E- " 2.
] ! ! - - ;: .
:._I_E- 2.
1.1 i r- 2.
1 . I_ r.- ^ 2.
1 .in r-
1 .t _ F- 2.
ic m/yr)
OG7E-04
a20E-04
r, g 5 E-0 4
3ril K-04
149E-04
940E-04
754E-04
S71 E-04
397E-04
"- '< 1 L'_ fj ^
073E-04
78 1E-04
64bF-H4
51GE-04
394E-04
V77E-U4
1 66K-04
060E-04
960E-04
8.34E-04
773E-04
687E-04
h04E-Oii
52GE-04
4ri2K-i")4
381 E-0 4
314E-04
2bOE-04
189E-04
131E-04
0721.; -04
023E-04
7 TIE- Ob
2b7E-Ob
805E-Ob
376E-Ob
967K-05
579E-OS
209E-05
ObBE-Ob
D23E-05
2 Ob E-0 b
902E-OS
614E-Ob
341E-05
OiiOE-Ob
832E-05
b«7E-(ib
373E-05
lb9E-Ob
95GE-05
763E-02
580E-05
40bE-Ob
',' ~-i, Q p _ |"5 n.
OOlE-Ob
931E-05
708K-Ob
(35 2 E-0?
k > -J p! _. | } K
400t:-05
;>[? "j, p ( 'iK
I'/ IE- Ob
D-17
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D4. Chlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
_ i
r_
D-18
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D5. Benzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 19D3 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 2003
J
Ave rarje t
Year
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
19G3
1 964
19G5
1966
1 967
1968
1969
] 97 0
1971
1972
1 973
1974
197b
1976
1977
1978
1 97 9
1 98 0
1 9B 1
1982
1983
1 98 4
1 9'ib
1 96 u
1 987
1988
1989
1990
] 99]
1992
1 993
1994
1 99b
1996
1 997
1998
1 999
2000
200]
2002
2003
-
\c c ep tan c e K a
Current Year
ReiUoe
1 .
2 .
3 .
5 .
7
9 .
1.
i
1.
1 .
I .
1,
1 .
1 .
2 .
v .
2 .
In PI
304E+0
609EiO
91 5E+0
21.7 Et 0
S.V-2E + 0
fi 2 6 E i 0
130E+0
043E«0
1 '<' ;! F + 0
3 0 4 E i 0
43bE+0
bbSEt 0
G96E+0
o 2 6 E * 0
9b7E-HJ
087E- 0
21 <'E+0
348E«0
478E+0
609E+0
to Closur
ace (Kg)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
b
b
5
3
b
b
5
'b
s
s
C
d from
Model Re
t
su
Ke
(K
.5
1
,-,
q
]_
2. 95
4
'j
6
8
9
1
T
I
i
1
1
1
1
1.
1
1
. B
0
. 1
. 0
-|
.2
. 3
. 4
.4
2
3
7
5
7
2
1
0
8
Mg/ycar
ts
r.ene (HAIV
/ VI )
b E- 0 4
7E-04
OE-04
3E-04
4E-04
4K-04
7E-04
4E-03
r-; p _ i1! -'
3E-03
b E- u 3
2K-03
5 E- 0 3
. 5 64 E- 03
. 6
7
. 8
. 9
. 9
4
i
4
n
b
2.739E+Ob 7.02
2 .
3 .
j
3.
3 .
3:',
-i ,
3 .
j
3 .
j .
7 .
3 .
3 _
3 .
3,
8 7 0 E < 0
OOOEtO
0 0 0 E ( 0
I'M II IF+O
OOOE+O
i ] ' j I1 ) TT + ' I
L-
0 0 0 E i 0
onoE+0
OOOE»0
i j CM' j r 4- { i
OOUE+0
OOOE+O
O'OOE+0
OOOE+O
nnnt;) o
OOOE+O
UOOE + iJ
i Ji )0 E+ 1
O'OOE+0
OOOE+O
OOOEtO
0(iOE+0
OOOE+O
S
S
5
S
c
i.
5
h
5
u
n
5
b
c.
b
b
E.
!>
5
S
b
2
2
X
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
S
7
7
. -|
. 0
Q
. 8
i *n
. b
.4
. 4
.1
. 1
0
B
.4
7
lo'
^
5
q
s
0
2
6
n
0
7
3
1
1
3
(j J7- ()3
IE- 0' ~i
9E- 0 3
4E-03
6E- 0 3
4 E- 0 3
OE-03
3 E- 0 3
3E-03
OE-03
1 E- 0 3
8E-03
9F-03
4E-03
3F-03
6E-03
3E-03
4E-03
fiK-03
5 E- 0 3
bE-03
9E-03
4E-03
3E-03
1 K-04
6E-04
3R-04
2E-04
2F-04
IE- 04
3.000^(0!"! 7.068K-04
vex.') Kmi s
(Cubic
4 . 66
9. 10
1 . 33
1 . 73
2.11
7' . 4 7
2 . 82
3. 15
"^ m A hj
4 . 04
4.31
4 . 5 7
4.61
b . 04
5.26
b . 47
b- . 67
b . 8 6
6 i7 4
6.31
6 . 36
3 ion Rate-
4
1
V
III/
E
E
E-
yi)
02
02
01
4E-01
b
9
E-
K-
4E-
3
6
5
4
6
b
b
b
b
0
6. b3b
6.21
b . 91
5 . 62
i. -_M .
5 . 09
4 . B 4
4 . 60
A '' p
4 . 16
3. 96
7.77
7
c
0
1
1
E-
F-
E
K-
E-
p
F-
E-
E-
E
E-
E-
F-
y _
F,-
E-
P
E-
P-
P--
F-
E
F
E-
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
1)1
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
0 1
01
4 K-0 1
1
E-
;-; _ HjK/p-
3.41
3.24
3 . 08
"J Ci
.' . 6b
2. 52
b
7
3
*7
! . _
F-
E-
K-
E-
F,-
E-
',: . 40 4 F-
2 . ^3
2 . 1 7
7
rl
E-
₯.-
01
01
01
01
0 1
0 1
01
01
01
01
01
01
continued
D-19
-------
A Case Study
Table D5. Benzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
_' 1
L- i
i-- 4
_ 1
r-
D-20
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D5. Benzene Emission
4 Refuci?
3.
_ ~ ~ 3 .
3 .
Rate
In P
00
00
00
00
OE'
1 ) E -r
OE»
0 K t
from Year
lace (Mg)
0 5
( ) b
0 r-
05
_ " 3.000E+05
1 3 .
5 .
3 .
^ ' .
~ 3 .
5 ,
3 .
3 .
00
00
0 0
00
00
0 0
00
oo
00
|)F,+
OEt
OE +
OE'
o i-: t
OE+
OK+
OE +
l)F,+
OE'
- .' i 3.0QOE'
_ ^ 1 3 ,
< 3 .
" 3 .
^ 3 .
r 7 _
^ ' b .
1 b .
5 .
"
i _
i 7
- 1 3 .
3 .
^ 3 .
L ^
1 ^
_ - 3 ,
1 1
_ ^ _ x 3
3 .
_ _ 3 .
_ _ 1 l 3 .
1 ' u 3 .
3 .
_ L . 3 .
_1 3 .
1 3 .
^ ' _ i 3 .
1 1
^ 3 .
i i 3 .
1 ! 7
1 _ " 3 .
7
7
^ ^ ' 3 .
_ _ 1 3 ,
. j ,
5 .
ii 3 .
l '
_ 1 « 3 .
0 0
0 0
00
00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
on
00
13 IJ
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
00
00
0 0
oo
0 0
0 0
U (j
oo
00
oO
00
b 0
00
00
0 0
00
00
00
00
(Hi
on
00
00
00
00
0 0
00
00
CIO
i; i ( ]
OE +
05
05
Ob
05
0 5
0 ~:
f) r,
!JC'
0 ' )
05
05
Ob
1959 to 2202
l
i
l
i
l
i
i
i
l
i
l
i
l
i
(continued)
{Mcf / yr ) ^ n1 * ,
. 33
. 3 5
. 7 4
. bb
. 58
. 4 3
.36
. 2 0
.1"
. i 1
, 0 "6
. o o
1 E- 0 5
/F,- ob
S E- 0 5
"/. V- 0 5
IE- 05
4E-05
IE- 05
IE-Ob
b E- 0 5
I E-05
1E-05
4 E,- 0 5
OE-05
BE-Ob
r ^ ,
_
.
«
. "E
. i 2
r
i
i H
p
4
r
_
-
-
-
-
-i
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9.591E-OG _. -_-
9
8
. 12
, 07
0 K ' 0 5 B . 2 3
OE+
OF.-f-
OE!
0 E '
UE +
l"! K, '
OE +
0 K *-
OE +
OEt
OE +
OE'
b E +
0 K, l
OE-^
f 5 1£ f.
OE-f
o E '
OE +
0 K, *
OE +
OE '
OF.-t-
0 E '
UE +
OEi
UE +
OE +
OE +
fi j£ f
UF.+
0 E '
OE +
OE+-
OF.-i-
OF i
OF.-t-
OE'
OE +
OE +
OF.+
OE +
OP'
0 E '
OF.+
0 C!
OS
OS
0 ^
\] S
0 ri
fl ^
nfi
0 "''
0 D
Ob
05
i iS
0 r'i
05
i j b
( ) h
05
i j b
Ob
05
0 b
Ob
05
05
05
05
05
Ob
05
Ob
ij Jj)
Ob
05
03
05
i j 5
1 15
Ob
f) 5
r.i 5
05
0 5
OS
7
7
6
5
C,
r,
5
r,
4
4
,1
4
3
3
7
2
2'.
'^
Z
2
2
1
i
1
1
1
1
T
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
3
8
-: S
.46
. 75
,40
. 11
.81
. 2u
.00
. 7 t;,
'0
. 0 9
.89
. "i 0
.55
J r^
1 9
. 0 '.
. 0 S
. f,1
. 4 8
. 36
'"' ^
. 14
, 0 T
. 84
. 7 h
. Oft
. b S
. S 0
. 4 3
";, f,
. >.9
» li' 3
.17
.11
. U b
313-06
8E-OG
b K- 0 6
2E-OG
S>F.-Ot>
5E-OG
9E-OG
9E-US
b E- 0 b
7 E- 0 G
4E-OG
7 E- 0 6
3E-OG
0 E- 0 6
'}£ ( | ^
'"i E- 0 b
9E-OG
9E-OG
BE-Ob
6E-06
3E-06
7 K,- 0 6
9E-OG
8E-OG
4E-Ob
6E-06
bE-Ob
0 E- 0 6
OE-OG
bE-OG
6E-013
2E-OG
3E-06
' E- 0 b
bE-OG
8 E- 0 G
4F.-OS
bE-OG
OE-Ob
5E-06
4E-06
7E-06
3 1\- 06
. 0 HE- 0 G
. 6 1
. 1 4
. 70
6E-07
7E-07
1 E-07
. . r
1L
-, 1 -
E
1P
- -
L
f
' -1 t.
i
' . * _ L
. iih.
a P
4 1 r
r
1 . i
. . j. j_t
"
i . L
< J -r,
'.IE
1 p
. -4^
*- .-.
JC
. ^^L
- L
r i
- . - iP
. 1^
j_ ^
^
1 r
. 4 ' "
-
' '" , "
. L
1 I
. 1 E
~
E
^ . L
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
;-
_
-
-
-
-
_
_
1
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_^
-
-L
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
4
i
a
i
a
-1
J
1
-,
i
4
t
i
1
i
1
I
1
1
1
T
i
4
- 4
continued
D-21
-------
A Case Study
Table D5. Benzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
Year Refuse In Place (Mg }
2146
214"?
2 \ 4 (j
2149
2150
2151
21 b 2
2153
213.1
2155
21b6
2157
2158
7 1 h 9
2160
2 1 6 1
21G2
2163
2 \ 64
2165
7 1 6 6
21 6V
2 ! 68
2169
2170
2 1 1 !
2172
2172
2174
2 1 7 5
2 1 7 6
2177
2178
2 1 7 9
2180
21(51
2 1 8 2
2183
2 IB 4
2185
2 1 !! 6
2187
21SO
2189
2190
2191
2192
" 1 G ^
2194
219b
21. 9fi
2197
2198
2199
2200
2,201
2202
3. OOOE-05
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOE+Ob
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 . 00 OKi 05
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOF+OS
3. 000 K ( 05
3 . OUOE+ub
3 . 000 Ef 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 , 0 0 0 K i 0 5
3 . OOOE+05
3. OOOF.-t-Ob
3 . OOOLi 05
3 . OOOK + ufi
3. OOOEi 05
3 . nnnE+ns
: . 0 0 0 K i 0 5
3. 000 E+ 05
:', . OOOE-Kih
3 . uuOE+05
5 . i'nlO K+Or-t
3 . OOOEi-05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . noOKi 05
3. 000 E+ 05
3 riTifJ^ * OS
3 . uOOE+Ub
5 . nonF:+05
3 . OOOBt 05
3 . OOOF.+ Ob
3.000t;f05
3 . (i!)()R + ()b
3 . 0 0 0 b! 1 0 5
3, OOUE-^Ub
3 . 0 0 0 j.; i 0 5
3 . 000 Ei- 05
3 . OOOP+Ub
3 . iiniiE-His
3. !iO()R+()b
3 . OOOLi 05
3 . OOUE-4- Ob
3 . 000 Hi 05
3. OOOE+05
j.OOOEiOO
3 . UUUE-H'jb
3 . 000 M + 05
3 . OOOEi-05
3 MUfsF-H'lb
3 . 000 K * 05
3 . OOOF.+ Ob
3 . OOOE< 05
3 iHKIE+dS
^ . i l(i(.l r>l.i':i
3.000Ei05
3 . OOOE+Ob
(concluded)
(Mg/yr!
5 .54SE-07
5.277E-07
b .020E-07
4 . 77bE-07
4 .542K-07
a , 321E-07
4 .11 i>E-07
3.909ii-07
3. 719E-07
3.537E-07
3 . 365E-07
'i . 70 1 K-07
3.045E-07
. : . B 96E-07
2.755E-07
/ . 621 K-07
2 . 453E-07
2 . 3 ',' IE- 07'
2 .25faK-07
2.14t3E-07
7 .041 F-07
1.941E-07
1 .84 7 K-07
1 . 757E-07
1 . 6 7 IE- 07
1 .5S9K-07
1 .512E-07
1 . 438E-07
1 . 7f>8E-07
1 . 30j K-07
1.238E-07
1 . 17BE-07
1 . 120E-07
1 .065E-07
1.013E-07
9. 64 IE- 00
9. '170K-08
8.723E-08
B .29BE-OB
7 . 8 93E-I IK
7 .!,OBE-OB
7.142E-08
62/94E-00
6 . 4 62K-08
6.147E-08
5 . 8 4 1 H- 0 8
b .562E-08
r, ;.> q 1 <.;_ ,-, r;
5 . 033E-08
4 . 787E-OB
4 . 554K-08
t .333E-OB
4 .121E-08
3 . 9VUE-06
3. 7;>fiK-DB
3.547E-08
3 . 374 E- OB
' J - r /
-- -4
. _ It- I
_ -- 4
_- a
- 4
1 ]
i " ~ i
"-4
. i
_- 1
. r _- 1
2- 4
<
t . " * -
1 -^_
. J <" -
.
- _ -1 -_ t
_
^4
1 ~
,
"-
- r
2- c
_ , ' -
-^
E-
_
- 2- -i
. 'I
_- r
4 "- "
. t -i " ».
("-
> _L J- "* ~ r
~"_ U
-
' - r
J"-
^_ L
] - -
. i
__- "
i ,. _
--
_. i_E- L
_
^ . " I ~- "
"
,
-- -
.
^ _
_,- _
~- r
^-
D-22
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D6. Chloroethane
Source: H: \
i ~"
i :
T'
! r-r i- :
i 1 >
-1.1 j. L 1- -
r l | , .
Landfill ty
Year Opened
<~';if >,{<" 1 1 y :
Average Ace
Cu
Yen! Re
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
19G3
1 964
19G5
1966
1 967
1968
1969
] 97 0
1971
1972
1 973
1974
197b
1976
1977
1978
1 97 9
1 98 0
1 9B 1
1982
1983
1 98 4
1 9iib
1 96 o
1 987
1988
1989
1990
] 99]
1992
1 993
1994
1 99b
1996
1 997
1998
1 999
2000
200]
2002
9003
Emission Rate from
30 0 0 \ 0 30177- 1 , 0 0 0 \
, ( ., .
/,,*.! , ^
|I ' ' - * ' t _
I- :
- : 1 > -t- i . -
4 r
pe : Co-L'isDosal
: 1953 Current
3fini7i)U Mr;
ept.eiFu. K, nnnt;) ns
3. DOOK+Oh
j . UOOE + iJb
', . !.H)UE+u:i
3 . OOOE+05
3. OOUE+iib
3 . OOOEt 05
3. OOOK+ub
3. OOOE+Ub
3 . 0 0 0 1: t n 3
Year 1959 to 2202
030177-1 . 002 \SOMMER-1
->i Select ion "*
3 -s ~'Ct ion >*****
I J« 51 elect ion i-4-J-
1 i ~
1 h i )C )
i - it ion - 0.
Landfill Parameter c
Year : 2003 Closure
I t^l.j I 1 !../S!l
ure Year : 0.00 Mg/ye
Model Results
Chloroe-hane
(Kq/yi )
2 . 0 9 3 E- 0 4
4 .084E-04
b . 97SJE-04
7 . 779E-04
9. 493E-04
! . 1 12E-03
1 .267E-03
1.415E-03
1 . bbbE-03
1 . 689E-03
1 . 8 1 b E- u 3
1 . 936K-03
2. 05 IE- 03
2. 1GOE-03
2 .264E-03
2 . 363E-03
2 . 4 b 7 E- 0 ':',
3.547 E 0 3
2 . &7VE-03
2.71 3E-03
7 . 790E-03
2 . 863E-03
2.933E-03
2.790E-03
2 . fcvb 4 E- 0 3
2 . 524E-03
2.401F-03
2.284E-03
3.173E-03
2 . 067E-03
1 . 366E-03
I . R7fiE-f"i1
! .779K-03
1 .692E-03
1 .&09E-03
1 . 5 3 IE- 03
1 .4S6E-03
1 . 38bE-0 j
i . "', { B !'.- 0 i
1 .253E-03
1 .1 92F.-03
1. 134E-03
I .07'JE-03
1 . 026E-03
9.769.K-04
\ S 1 3M E ffj WO R T H . p RM
*»
408000 ppmV
Year: 2003
ar
(HA!'/VfX7) Kmission Kate
(Cubic :n/yi )
1 . 799E-02
1 . 522E-01
2 . i27E-01
2. 399E-01
3 . 537E-01
4 . 1 45K-0 1
4 . 722E-01
b .272E-01
b . 79bE-01
6 , 292E 0 1
6 . ' ^ b E 0 1
7.21 5 !"' 0 'i
7. 643E-01
8 . 050E-01
B . 43BE-in
8.806E-01
9. lb^E-01
9. 490E-01
9.807E-01
1 . 011E + 00
1 . 040F. + 00
i . 067E»00
1 .093F. + 00
1. . 039E<00
Q Q Q p p _ M 1
9. 406E-01
K. 947E-01
S.511E-01
3 . ( 1 9 b E - ! ! 1
7 .701E-01
/ '^''' "j p {"i 1
62968E-01
6. 628K-0]
6. 305E-01
b . gy/p-in
5 . 7Q5E-01
b . 427F,-'.n
b. 1G3E-01
4 . 671E-01
4 . 443F.-01
4 . 226E-01
4 . 020E-01
3. 834E-01
3. 638K-01
continued
D-23
-------
A Case Study
Table D6. Chloroethane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
I I a
II-
1 1 Ij
II"
11 =
II '
1
1
1 -
j -
1 1
! '
1 1
] '
1
1 '
_
~
_!
~
-
'
!
-
i
~
-
a
4
1_
1
4 4
r
-i
4~
i -
'
r ^
<-
' 4
r
r -
'
r <
_
i
r
^
-
1,
9
" ^
3 . 000 bi< 05
3. OOOE+Ob
3. OOOEi 05
5 . 000m 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOF+05
3. OOOEi 05
3. i')0(iF.+ ()5
3 . OOOEi 05
3 . i n i ( i K < ( i i
3 . OOOE+05
-. . 000 E+05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . 0 0 0 tl < 0 5
3 . OOOEi 05
'i niKSE + Ob
3 . OH OK' 05
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOE+05
3 0 Ol 0 F 1 0 5
3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 5
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 . 000 K) 05
3 . OOOE+05
! . IHHIK-HIM
3 . OOOE+05
[")(");"; |.' t f|3
3 . H no E + j I 3
3 . OOOEi 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
5 . OOOflt 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOEi 05
3 . OOOF+Ob
3 . OOOti- 05
3. UOOE+Ob
3 . 000 Kt 05
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOEi 05
5. UOOF+03
3 . OOOE" 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 . OOOE" 05
3 . 000 E+ 0 5
3. OOOE+05
3 . OOOE+03
3. OOOEi 05
3. OOOF+05
3. OOOE i 05
3 . UOOE+Ob
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOF.+O!)
3 . OOOEi 05
3 . U 00 E+05
3. 000 bi' 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
3. OOOE+05
3 . OOOK+05
3. OOOE+05
3 . OOUE+05
3 . 0 0 0 E < 0 5
3. 00b
3 . OOOE+05
3 . nooK+03
3 . OOOE+05
3. OOOF+03
3. OOOEi 05
5; . OOOE+05
3 . u 0 0 E+ 0 b
3 . 000 Hi 05
9
!-;
8
7
7
G
6
G
5
c
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
->
3
3
-
'-,
2
V
1
1
1
.L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
9
8
i!
8
7
"7
6
6
6
13
s
5
r
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
V
.28GE-04
. SJ33E-04
. 402E-04
. 9'J2K-04
. G 0 2 E- 0 4
.233E-U4
.S79E-04
.543K-04
.224E-04
. 92! K-04
. G32E-04
. 35 7 K-04
. 096E-04
.B4BE-04
. bllE-04
.386E-04
j '/ '' P f ! 4
. 969K-04
.775E-04
.391E-04
. 4 1 G E- 0 4
.249E-04
. 091E-U4
. 940K-04
. 7 97 E- 04
. 660K-04
.531E-04
.407 E- 0 4
. 290E-04
.178E-04
. U72E-04
. 971 K-04
. S75E-04
. 763E-04
. 696E-04
.61 4 £-04
. b 3bE-04
. 460K-04
. 3S9E-04
. 321E-04
.257E-04
.195E-04
. 13VE-U4
. 082E-04
. 029E-04
. 7S7E-05
.31 OE-05
. 850E-05
. 434B-OS
.013E-05
. 622E-Ob
-|=, OF' 05
.B97R-05
. 5 60 E- 05
.240E-03
.936E-05
. 64 7E-Ob
.371E-05
. ] rt 9 K- 0 5
. 860E-05
. ^33p;_(jS
. 398E-05
. ] K3E-05
. 979E-03
.785 i-;- 0 5
. 60 OE-05
.43:)E-«ib
.258E-05
.O'ME-03
.948 E 0 b
. 804K-05
-
»' " _
I u _
. i~ - -
S-
.
_ . i E
^ . j '_-
i - -
_ .
' . f > -
' . - E-
> "-
- . ~1 --
^ . i _ -t n-
u ^_
. -," '- -
"E-
,
1 I7_
0. . ' »i~
.
: . _L-
1. 1 1
i
^_i
'. 1 r-
. -
. -,4 - -
. ) i E-
. i i . -
f "_
' ! ^-~
. _ i-
. ,-.
. ' '" E-
. <_ r-
- . i
... J^-
- . _ --
^ t^~
iE-
. i E-
1"-
^~
,-_
- . ' i^
^-
~ n ~
. '
. i " -
.
1 ~
_ . 1 -» 2
_S-i
4 -
; . i' s-
i _ "_
' . 1 H--
' . ' )--
. -- E-
" -
. 1 r-
^ . i ' ~-
z.-
-> "
j
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
^
i
:
i
^
A
ii
i
r
_
_
_
^
_
^
_
i-
_
_
_
^
_
D-24
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D6. Chloroethane Emission Rate from Year
. . Re-fuse In Place (Mg)
1 3.000E+05
3.000E<05
3. OOOE+Ob
_ 3 . OOOE+05
3.000E+05
b. OOOE+Ob
3. 000 KI Ob
3. OOOE + Ob
3.000E-05
4 3 . 00 OK i 05
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOEi Ob
_ - 3.UOOE+05
3. OOOEi 05
3,OOOE+ub
3. OOOE+Ob
3, OOOEi 05
b . i iOOE + i 0~i
4 j, . OOOE+Ob
_ ^ 3.000Et05
3. OOOEi 05
_' 3 . OOOE + Ob
"J. . o n o E i o b
3 . 000 E+- Ob
i 3 , 0 Q 0 E ' 0 5
3 . OOOF+Ob
_i _ 3. OOOE+Ob
_ I , 3,OOOE'05
14 3. OOOE + Ob
3. OOOE< 05
'.',. OOOF+Ob
3. OOOEi 05
1 3. 000 E. OS
3. OOOE+Ob
-1 3 , 0 0 0 E i 0 5
M 3.00«)F + Ob
1 1 ">, 00 01-' - fib
1 3. OOOF+Ob
1 J 3. OOOF + Ob
i i '' 0 0 0 E i Ob
il 3. OOOF+Ob
_ 1 3.000EiOb
"I 3. OOOF+Ob
_ i ' ' 3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 5
L^ 3.000EfOb
3. OOOF+ub
1 _ 3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 b
' 3. OOOF+Ob
_ 1 _ 1 3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 b
1 3. OOOF+Ob
i 3. OOOF+Ob
i _ 3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 b
3. OOOF+Ob
J 3. 000 E< 05
3. OOOF+Ob
1 ' 3 . 0 0 0 E + 0 5
i b . ij ij (j E ) 0 ^
i 3. OOOF+Ob
_1 1 3. OOOE+05
1 3-OOOF+Ob
b 0 0 0 E + 0 b
3 < 000 E+Ob
1 3. OOOF+O.b
^1 3 . OOOE+05
i, 3. OOOF+Ob
lil 3, OOOE+05
i , 3. OOOE+Ob
1 3. OOOE+05
11 3, OOOE+05
1959 to 2202 (continued)
(Mg/yr)
2. 667E-05
3.537E-05
2.413E-05
2 . 29GE-05
:-. 104E-05
2 . 0 7 7 E- 0 5
1 . 976K-05
1 . 880E-Ob
1 . 78SE-05
1.701 K-Of>
1.618E-05
} , 539E-05
1.4b4E-Ob
1.392E-05
1 , 32bE-Ob
1 .260E-05
1.198E-05
1 . 140E-05
1.084E-05
j !)-;'' F 1 ) S
9. 8 12 E- 06
9. 334 E- 06
8 . B7yE-Ob
8.44 6E-06
8 . U 3 4 E- 0 6
"i , 642E-06
7.,::6'-iE-06
6.91bE-06
6.577E-06
6.2b7E-06
5 . 951E-06
b .661 F-06
5 . 385 E- 06
5 . 122E-06
4 .B73E-06
t, .655E-06
4 .409E-06
4. 19, IE-Ob
3.79bE-06
3 . 61 OE- 0 6
3.434E-06
3 .26SE-Q6
3 . 1 07E-06
2 . 95 5 E- 06
2 .811E-06
2. 67 4 E- 06
2 . 5 4 4 E- 0 6
.3.4.-: OR- 06
2. 302E-OG
2.DB3E-06
1. 9S1E-06
1 . B84E-06
1.793E-06
1 .703K-06
L.622E-06
1 . 5 '! 3 E- 0 6
1 . 4 6 B E- 0 6
1.396E-06
1 .32 BE- 06
1.263E-OG
i .202E-06
1 .1 43E-06
1 . 08 7 E- Ob
1 . Ob4E-06
9. 838 E- 07
9. bb8E-07
8 . 902E-07
S . 4 67E-07
(Cubic m/yr)
'. E-
^ r (»
E-
r t. ^ ]7_
. i
" i _
4E-
^_^j
,_ ,
-E-
< <--
. .
r . 1 »t -
E-
'. . i r E-
-. . ,1 £,-
^ ^ ~ _
. -,+SL-
. ~ 4E-
. ' t
. " t~
. ' E
] ~" v.
_! ''M!-
_ . i L
j"_
_ . ^ E-
. , .E-
1 r-
^ . ^ 1 t.
.11 "-
_ . i ~ ^
1 . < n -
1.1"-
1. t-
1 . i - "-
1 . " t-
1 . T- ,
1 ._i jr-
, i
1 .
1 .^1~IL-
1 . T "-
1.1 * r-
1. * L-
* . " F
- *
.. 1 -- J
.1 "- 1
f " -T
1
, _ , v-, £_ 1
t . 4T_ ,
1 F_ i
f t ^
. -. "-
"~ . J E '
* . 4 ^ 4
. ^ " E
^ _ ^ ~ j _ 4
^. . r1 -i
. r ^ E 1
4r - ,
. t t E- i
i »
. r E-
. 1r E-
8 . 0 b 4 E- 0 ~
D-25
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D6. Chloroethane Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
1< ""
1 -
1
{ 1
1 "
1 -_
1" -
J, **
1~'
1 ..
1 " ~
1" -
I '
1
LJ _
i
i - -
i- 1
l-r
1' '
1 -"
1
I " 1
1-
1 !
1
1 <.
1 iJ
!'"
i -i
1 "
3 . OOOtli 05
5 0 1 1 0 E -1- L! 5
-; , fi n (1 pp t f i '",
3 . OOOE+05
3 . 000 !;-»- 05
3 . 0 0 0 E + 0 5
3 . 000fc:< 05
'*; OhOE + nS
3. OOOtH 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . 000 HI 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOE< 05
3. OOOF+Oh
3. OQOH.I 05
3. OOOE+Ob
3 . onni-if 05
3 , OOOE+05
3 . 0 0 0 E ' 0 5
3. OOOF.+ Ub
3. 000 KI 05
3 , OOOE+Ob
3 . OOGE.I 05
3. OOOE+Ob
3. OOOE+05
3. OOOE+Ob
3. OOOtl' 05
3. OOOE+Ob
3. OOOE* 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 . OOOE+05
1 L
la 3.00()F,+ Ob 7..
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D7. Dichlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
l.o : 170.00 rn'\3 / Mq »»»-+ User Mode .Select-ion -"*»*
k : 0.0500 1/yr ***** Ucer Mode Selection *****
NMOO : 7:3<>0.oO pprnv ***>* User Mode fleleof.iom **"*
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
Air i/ollutant : Uichlorobenzene [VOC/HAl for 1,4 isorner)
Molecular Wt - 147,0'") Concentration - 0.428:300 pp:
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 1958 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 20
Capacity : 3000Liu My
Average Acceptance Kate Required from
Current Year to Closure Year : 0.00 Mg/year
1960 2.609Ef04
1961 3.913E+04
1962 5.217E'04
1963 ft. b22E"t-04
1 9 6 4 7 . fi 2 6 [; t 0 4
1565 9.130E+04
196G 1.043Ei05
1 967' 1 . 1 74E + 0"b
1968 1.704t7<05
1969 1.43bE+Ob
1 970 1 . b'Sbi-:. 03
1971 1.69GE+05
1972 1.8 2 G E * 0 5
1 9 74 2.0 8 7 E <0 b
19'/h L'.l'l'/E + Ub
1976 2.348EiOb
1 978
1 979
1980
1 98!
1982
1983
1S84
1 9Bb
158 6
] 98 7
1988
1989
1990
1 991
1992
1 993
1994
1 99b
1 997
1998
1 999
2000
7001
continued
D-27
-------
A Case Study
Table D7. Dichlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
I ' 1
II-
1 1 ,J
II"
11 =
1!
1
1 '
1 -
j '
1 1
! '
1'
1
1 '
"
2 .
~
_,
~
-
'
!
-
i
,~
-
a
4
!_
1
ii
r
» i
4~
i -
'
r ^
1-
' 4
r -
1 ,
r -
'
r <
, 1
3
3
3
3
3
7
3
5
5
7
.'i
3
3
3
7
3
3
^
3
7
3
.-
3
3
3
3
3
3
?,
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
7
3
3
3
7
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF.+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. 000m 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOF+05
. OOOEi 05
. oouF.+ os
. OOOEi 05
. i H i ( i K I n >
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. o o o t: i o 5
. 0 0 0 E * 0 5
[ Mir!E + 05
. OfifiK' 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
0 0 0 F I 0 5
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. UUOE+Ub
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. niHlK+U:.-'
. OOOE+05
000 K * 05
. 1 h"MJ E + 1 1 3
. OOOEi 05
. 000 E +03
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+03
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
.OOOEi 05
. ulHJF.+Ob
. OOOE" 05
. UUOE+Ub
. 000 E" 05
. 000 E+05
.OOOE+05
. OOOF, + Ob
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF+05
. 000k: < 05
. UUOE+Ub
. OOOE+05
. OOOR+03
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF+05
. OOOE1 (V3
. OOOE+03
. OOOE+05
2 .223E-03
P. 1 1 3E-03
2 . 0 1 2 E- 0 3
1 . 91 4K-03
1 .820E-03
1 . 737E-03
1 . G47E-03
1 .567E-03
1 . 490E-03
1.418 K- 0 3
1. 349E-03
t .283K-05
1 .1 61E-03
1.104E-03
l.OSOE-03
9. 391E-04
9.503K-04
9.040E-04
o .399E-04
8 . i 6 OE-0 4
7.781E-04
"i . 4U1E-U4
7 . n 4 OK- 04
G. G97E-04
6. 370K-04
b. ObOE-04
5 . 7 6 4 E- 0 4
5 . 4U3E-04
5 . 216E-04
4 . 9G1E-04
4.71 9K-04
4 . 4S9E-04
4 .27 OE-0 4
4 .OS7E-04
3. 864E-04
3. 675E-04
5 . 4 96K-04
3. 32GE-04
3. 1G3E-04
3. 009E-04
2 . S62E-04
2 . 7 v 3 E- u 4
2 . 590E-04
2. 404E-04
2. 344E-04
.-' . 2 2 9 E- 04
2 . 120E-04
7. 01 7E-04
1.913E-04
i . 835E-04
1 . 73GE-04
I . 65 1E-04
1.571E-04
1 .494E-04
1.421E-04
I . 3H7.E-U4
1 .28GE-04
. ' ~>_-
^ L t"-
" i
« 1
^. "£- '
1
_. i '12- i
1
i *~ \
i. 1
- 1
^ "_
t ^ - I
. . ~ i n- ~
i U
. " 1 - - 1
_ . ' -E- :
1 . - i> "- i
-" ^_ T
a. . " _- ^
^ . j _ "- 1 1
. r ' - 1
: . r" E- '
^ * ~
i
1 ^ !
.' ( r -
.1 J_-
. M--
" . . ~-
. ' 1. - _
i . -i "-
| . * ^ ^ ^
i.i I- _
.
DE-
' . 1" J-- _
- . '
~ ^~ ^
- . ^' 2-
.^ ±,-
^ . i^~
E-
. i 4i "-
. i
. ' <"-
^ . i
_ . *- i- i_
E-
i '-
_. - --
. - a"-
. _ ^- i.
_ _ i E
_ . Ii 'E-i
6.714 K-
continued
D-28
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D7. Dichlorobenzene
i Rcfuc
' ~ ~ 5
i i 3
.. ' n ~ 3
i 5
_ i " 3
i 3
3
i 3
._' 3
i ^ 5
3
i 3
_ 1 3
i 3
i 3
- ' 3
_| " 3
1 '-4 3
i *r ^
3
3
i i 3
_ | r ~J 3
1 1 1 :;
_ 1 1 1 3
LI "
1 1 1 1 3
In '=:
'us 3
li " 3
_ ' i 3
In' 3
_,11 3
_ ' i ' 3
1 1 3
_ll 3
_il 1 3
I 1 5
_ i 1 u 3
_11 3
^1] 3
_li i 3
1_ 3
1 3
I-- 3
i 3
1 j 3
_1_ 3
!_' 3
1 3
1 3
1 < 3,
1 3
_ -L 3
_1 3
1 3
_]_->! I,
1 - 3;
i -i
1 3
: 1 3
1 < 3
1 I 3
1 , ' 3
' I 3
1 3
-1-4J 3
I + ~ 3
Emission Rate from Year
o In Place [Mg)
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+O!)
. OOOEi 05
. I'JfXiE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. 1"! 0 0 E 1 0 b
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. o o o t: ' o 5
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OH OK' 05
. OOOE+05
. 00(!E + Ob
0 f"i 0 E I 0 5
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. UOOE+Ub
. 000 Hi 05
. OOOE+05
. IHKIK-HIM
. OOOE+05
. n o f i E i o 5
. 1 n'H)E+i IS
. OOOEi 05
. II 1 1 ( 1 E + 1 i b
. 000 fit 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOE- 05
. OOOE+Ob
. onnKi 05
. OOOE+05
.OOOEi 05
. I ,l)(jp_i(IS
. 0 0 0 E " 0 5
. OOOE+Ob
. 000 EI 05
. 000 E+05
.OOOE+05
. nouE+ob
. OOOEi 05
. (JOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. UOOE+ub
.OOOE+05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. UOUE+Ob
. OOOEi 03
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOUE+ub
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Ob
. UOOE+Ob
. noOK+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+Ob
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOE+Ob
. u 0 0 E+ 0 b
. no OKI 05
1959 to 2202 (continued)
('_! ' ' , , '
~E- r i -
_ u ^
. ^ r*~ ^ . i ~~
t * -- r
j P, c c c 7 «.
j -< _
E- L E-
-i.' r- ' .
. . ^~
i--
. r 1 r- r , . ;.-
~ -
. c ' E- r
lr-
_ r _
. i ' E- , . ^ -
V- r __ __
_ .' '"b- ' . i"E-
. 4 . J "-
r_ r ~_
t- ' . r --
. i_i I- " -i E-
-- i
._)?;- . . E-
"^ i 1 ». c ' -
f. _ _
T_ , " ' -_
. 4 ^ L- r
j _ _
r ._ r , "_
. _" E- "
, ^- ,i ^~
. 1 *"- L " . 1 * -
. . j. t E- r . . ± i.-
" _- ' E-
I U !- r , - -
" . ~ r E- _E-
~E-
+E- .-'-"-
. ^-. E- ^ . i ^~
_ E- ^ iE-
. -1 -i ^- . ^L i t,-
E- j- 1 E-
i . ~ _E- I . E-
'.4- . - -
. ^ i^~ . ^~
. i 4T-
. r .!- i -. 1 J -
_ - t- i-
i . " "E- " . _r E-
. t' -
. c 1 _ E- .
"- > . "^~
a _ 1 1 {- ~
-1 " ~ L~
if- . i_S-
r 4 ' - ~ -, -
. ' E- E-
1 i - ,
. ^- , . i ^-
"~- - , ^*-
E- - L-
_ ^ _
. r i - . " --
"-
.
. 1 r- ^ -_
. _ t- i _-
<
-------
A Case Study
Table D7. Dichlorobenzene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
-'E-
r-<
E-
r-
"- 4
. i ~ L-
D-30
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D8. Methylene
Source-:
Chloride Emission
H:\3000\030177'l.
Rate from Year 1 959 to 2202
0 0 0 X 0 3 0 1 7 7 1 . 0 0 2 \ SOMMER- 1 X 30MERSWORTH . P RM
ModtH PaianuM >.:r :;
i ^
I : . r
T
T - r ~ ,
1 1
x 1 1
I 1
5 . i ,
f 1- " ' '
: r . i u
t- :
i- -u- : 1 -1 i -
4
r-, , _ i **v**
, j ^ , r , ,, . . , . ,
II ~ ' I- i I-,
-
1 j -
il rr i"
-' - ,1- - 296000 ppmV
Landfill Parameter,
Landf 11 1
type : Co-L'i-spos
Year Opened : 1958 Cur
27-jpac it y
Ave r -T'"!^
: j 0 0 'JO u M'j
C u r rent Year to
al
rent Year : 1:003 Closure Year: 2003
e>r|u i r ed f r Oh'i
0"lo.-;uro Year : 0.00 Mg/year
Model He suits
Youi
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
1963
1 964
1965
1966
1 967
1968
1969
1 97 0
1971
1972
1 9723
1974
1 9V b
1976
1 97 '/
1978
1979
1960
] 9B j
1982
19S3
1 98 4
1 9Bb
1 98 u
1 987
1988
1989
1990
I 99!
1992
] 999;
1994
1 99b
1996
1 997
1998
1 999
2000
2001
2002
2005
RC-IU;JO In flaoi.'
1 . 304E+04
2. 60 9K« 04
3. 913E+U4
5 .217t:> 04
b. 5vvE-t-u4
7 . 826Kt 04
9. 130E*04
1. 04 3E' 05
1 . ] 74E+Ob
1. 304E) 05
1 £ 4 b E+ ' 7"^
1 . 565Kt 05
1 . IJ96E+05
1. 826Et 05
1 _ % VF. + OS
2 . 0 8 7 E i 0 5
7 . 71 .'E+Ub
2. 348K-05
2 - 4 7 B E + 0 3
2 . 6 0 9 E + 0 5
'/:.. 739E+Ob
2 . 8 7 0 E t 0 5
3. OOOE+Ob
3. OOOE« 05
3 . uuOE + 0'3
3 . 000 E* 05
3 . OODF.+ Oh
3. OOOEi 05
3. l)OOE+Ob
3.000EMJ5
3, uODE+Ob
3 . 000 E+05
3. 000r>03
9.000E-r05
3. OUOF.-rOb
3. OOOE* 05
3. OOUE+Ob
3. OOOE^Ob
3 _ OOQK+05
3 . 0 O1 Oi E -* 0 5'
3. O'OOE-t-05
3 . OOOE: 05
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 , uOOE+Ub
3. nont'.i 05
Mef.hylene 'O'l^l o r i c ^ i i
(Mg) (Ky/yi) ( 1 .
1.594E-04 .cl r.-
3. 109E-04 . i_r.-
4.bblE-04 1 _
5 . 92 3K-04 ' . ~ t-
7.V78E-04 - Z-
8. 4 6 9 K- 04 ">-
9.G49E-04 _." _i-
1.077E-03 . t,-
1 . 1B4E-03
1.286E-03 . « L-
1 . 382E-U3 1 Z-
1 . 4 74 K- 05 , 1 ~ '--
1.5G2E-03 . _ t-
i . (34 5 E- 03 . i r t-
T 7 - /i p_ s r- r
1.799E-03 . lt-
1.0 /IE- 03
1.939E-03 r., L-
2.004E-03 L i Z-
2. Ub5E-03 r . ."1-
3 . 1 24E-03 . 1 "-
2.180E-03 .i~^h-
2.233E-03
2 .124 E- 03 i . 1 i,-
7.UiOE-u3 L E-
1 .922E-03 L . E-
1 .B7IJE-03 . 1
1 . 7 39E-03 . i_ z-
1.6b4E-03 ». F-
1.D77E-03 ,. 1L-
1 . 4 97E-03 - E-
1 . 424E-03 . E-
I . 35.4K-03 4| -
1.288E-03 . i-
1 .32;bE-03
1.166E-03 . L-
1 . 1 09E-03 . 1 T-
1.0bbE-03 _ -_-
\ _ OO^K-0.1 ->
9.544 E~ 04 . ~° i E~
9.07BE-04 . F-
8.C3GE-04 ^. "" Z-
i! . 21. 4E-04
7.814E-04 _ _1_E-
7.433K-04 ] 14--
1 ^.e
L
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
continued
D-31
-------
A Case Study
Table D8. Methylene Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
- i
i
11. - _
1 E-
continued
D-32
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D8. Methylene Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
(Mg)
2Q75
7076
2077
2i77ft
-i 0 7 9
2080
208 1
708 7
2083
2 OK 4
2083
20;36
2 0 8 7
2(188
2039
2090
?7i92
2 0 9 3
2094
209S
2 0' 9 6
2 0 9 '
9093
2099
; i o o
2 1 0 1
2102
2 1 0 3
2104
7 1 n s
2106
2107
2 1 0 8
7109
2110
/111
2112
2113
2114
31 1 b
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2 1 2 3
2124
21jib
212G
2127
21/8
2129
2 1 3 U
2131
2132
2133
2134
2 1 3 b
2136
31 37
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2 1 4 3
2144
',' \ ts, r,
l i i
r+ '
i
i i- i
^+
" +
E l
i -
l
in
L-1-' r
+
. Er4*
""'-'-
^E. i
? l
w" 4-
i
E+
- -\
. i E 1
IL ' "
r-i-
l > i
E4-
i +
E +
E i r
L4-
. L i r
E +
1 r
E+
t i
"^ u
Ll r
_~
1 - r
t4- "
El
^
E+
t i "
E +
t-1 ""
l "f -
L l
r ,
M
E *-
£ + "
r+ l
^ 1
"T '-
L
1 EJ
E4-
1 T r
E+ -
"> -
, i
r ^
ii E-1-
,+
E^ n
f-r
E i
l r-r "
EJ-
f- l
1 ,
1,
1
1 .
1 ,
1 .
1 .
1.
1 ,
1,
1 ,
1 ,
1 ,
1,
;-^
9.
8 ,
8 ,
7
1 .
«>.
r, .
5 .
-> .
b .
4 .
4 .
4 .
4 .
3 .
9. .
7' .
3 ,
8 .
1 ,
^
2 .
2 .
2.
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
i
1 .
1 .
1.
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
9.
9.
8 .
8 .
7 :
7
(j .
6:
. 031E-05
. 93/E-(!b
.638E-05
, 7 48K-09
. GG3E-05
. 9H2E-09
. 90 5E-0 5
. 431 E-7)b
. 361E-05
. 299E-09
.232E-05
, 1 72E-09
. 115E-05
. 060E-09
. 009E-05
. 9 4 3 j/ i !' 6
. I/SE-UO
. 68 OK- 36
. 257E-OG
. B li 4 F.- ( i 6
. 471E-OG
, 107E-06
. /buE-Ufo
.431 E- 0 6
.117E-OG
. 81 9E-06
. 935E-OG
. 269E-06
. 008E-OG
.764E-06
. b77E-OG
, 31 1 K-Oh
. 100E-OG
, 900E-OG
.71 OE-06
. 329E-06
. 3b7E-U6
. 1 93t:,-96
, 0 3 8 E- 0 G
. 889E-OG
. 749E-3'H
, 614E-06
.48 /E-u6
. 366E-06
. 2biJE-Uu
,141 E- 0 G
. 036E-06
, 937E-OG
. B47E-06
.753E-06
. G67E-U6
. 58GE-OG
. 8:)8E-06
. 435E-OG
. 3&hF.-i)6
.298E-06
. 23bE-u6
, 175E-OG
. 1217E-D6
. 063E-OG
.011 E-i)t,
. G18E-0"
. 1 49F.-OV
. 7U3E-U7
.278 E- 0 7
,879 E-07
. 491 E-07
. 12 5 E-07
. 77 8 E-07
. 447E-U7
. 1 33K-07
5.
b ,
9 .
4 .
4 ,
4 .
4.
4 ,
3.
-; .
^ i
3 .
2 ,
2.
2.
2 .
1.
1 .
1,
1 .
1,
1.
1.
1,
1.
1 .
1,
1,
1 ,
9 ,
9.
9.
8,
7 ,
7 ,
6,
G .
G .
b.
5,
b .
4 ,
4 .
4 ,
4 .
4 ,
3..
3 .
3 ,
3 ,
3.
3 ,
2 .
v .
x .
2,
'.-': ,
2,
I .
1.
1 .
, 749E-03
. 469E-93
, 202E-03
. 948K-03
, 707E-03
. 477E-03
, 2r:>9E-03
.OblE-03
, 854E-03
. 666K-03
, 4 8 7 E- 03
. 3! 7K-03
, 155E-03
, OI)]E-i)3
, 855E-03
, 71 6E-03
. 9B3E-U3
. 497h;-f)3
, 337E-03
, 2/3E-03
, 119E-03
, 012E-03
. 914E-03
. 8 7' OK- 03
, 732E-03
. 64 7 i:;- 03
. r:n]7E-03
, 490E-03
. 418E-U3
.349E-03
.283E-U3
. 290^-03
, lylE-03
, 104E-03
. (ibSiE-03
, 991E-04
. bu3E-U4
. O4nfc:-ri4
, 599E-04
. 180E-04
. 7!il E-04
. 401E-04
. U4UE-U4
. 697E-04
. 37 UE-U4
, OGOE-04
. '/o4E-()4
, 483E-04
./] 6E-04
. 961E-04
. 719E-U4
, 4 89E-04
. 97iiE-(!4
. 062E-04
. 864E-04
, 675E-04
. 496E-04
, 32GE-04
. 1 63K-04
, 009E-04
. !iti/E-04
. 723E-04
. h9UE-04
, 464E-04
. 343i::-04
, 229E-04
. 120E-04
, 017E-04
. 91 9E-04
, 82bE-u4
. 7 J, hK-04
D-33
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D8. Methylene Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
.1 Refuse In Place [Mg} [Mg/yr] ' 1 i -E / _?i
I i '
i «*
_i i
i -t
r
1 ! -
1'
T
^ L *
! '
_lr>
lr
_lr
T <
-1
^ i
L _
_!"]
].
_ 1 i-
~ A '
-i
1 1 '
_1 n
! " '
_ J_
_ i
_!' *>
l"
_1 '
i ~ ~
1"
_1 ' i
1
_,!- -
_1 _
i
_i- 1
L ""
1 |
_ 1
_1 '
_1 *
_1
1 1
1 '
I
1 -4
i
_1 *
1-
1
^1 - '
ii
i ^
2202
5
^
3
3
3
3
3
-
5
l
5
3
3
-J
"<;
1
*)
1
3
3
3
1
-i
3
;s
~?
J
3
3
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
,H
3
"',
"'
3
-^
'}
. OOQK.I 05
. OOOE+05
. OC'OKi 05
. on OKI 05
. OOOE+05
. OOdF.+ O1.!
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. 00(;F,+OS
. OOOE« 05
. 1 1 1 1 ( i K H i >
. OOOE+05
. nnoR+ori
. OOOE405
. 000 F, + 05
. 0 0 0 E < 0 5
. 0 0 0 hi i- 0 5
111 if !E+(lS
. 0 0 0 K < 0 5
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Ei 05
. 0 0 0 tl * 0 5
. OOUE+U5
. 000 K.) 05
. OOOE+05
. 1 1 1 H i K+ U ::>
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 K i 0 5
. OTIC !E+i 15
. 000 1;* 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 tH 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOKi 05
_ ()(i()F+[ih
. OOOtlf 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 K i 05
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOF.+05
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Ei 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
, OOOF. + 05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF.+ 05
. OOOE.05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. i J 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOE+05
5
s~.
r.(
r.
,1
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D9. Toluene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
Mu(i.;l Par arm: I. Hi;;
-i 1 .r- -1 t-inn "*
I . »-,*»*»>
i - r J- -i- t-ion **4
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year -Opened : 1958 Current Year :
CapaciLy : 300000 My
Average Acceptance Hate Required from
Current Year to Closure Year
. T
F-
D-35
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D9. Toluene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
,r Refuse In Place (Mg) (Mq./yrj
-n"
I M ! ~
_' "0
I I I ~
_ l 1 1 ~
_ '1
1 1 '
_! 1
i ! -
_ '1 "
i ! '
_ il n
> ] '
n}
_ il '
j j
1 !
_')_
!
_ !
_ l
1 1 "*
_ ! l
I ) 1
_M
j
(
~n -
_| t
3
3
-;
7
/i
3
3
3
j
-^
3
3
^
5
3
3
3
.-
3
.3
3
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
,3
3
7
^
3-
^.
3
3
3
3;
5
3
3
3
3
5
3;
3
3
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOUE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF.+ Ob
. OOOEi 05
. 0 0 OKI 0 3
. OOOE+05
. ODOR +05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE< 05
. OOOEi 05
[ MKSE+Ob
. 00 OK' 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
0 0 0 F l 0 5
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOE+Ub
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. o o n t; i o 5
. 0 0 0 E * 0 5
. OOOE +03
. 000 K< 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOF.+Ob
. OOOE- 05
. OOOE+Ob
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
.OOOEi 05
. UOOF+Ob
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. OOOi E+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. 0()OF,+ 05
.OOOEi 05
. UOOE+Ob
. OOOE+05
. OOOR+03
. OOOEi 05
. ijOOF.+ Ob
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+Ob
.OOOE+05
. OOOK+05
. OOOE+05
. OOUE+Ob
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOOF.-f-Ob
. OOOE+05
. OOOK-t-0'i
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+03
.OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Ob
. U 0 0 E+ 0 5
. 000 Ki 05
4
i(
_3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
!_
1
1
1
i
1
\
1
q
9
8
8
3
7
b
G
G
b
S
~t
*-\
4
'1
4
4
^
3
3
3
3
7
2
V
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
. 381E-0 3
1 i- n p_ ; | 'j,
. 964E-03
.771 K- 0 .7
. 587E-03
. 41/T-03
.246E-03
.UH7E-03
. '9 5 7 E~ 0 5
. 794K-0 3
. 657R-03
.5713K-05
.404E-03
.2C7E-03
.17GE-03
.070E-03
. 9b9E-03
.877K-03
. 781E-03
. 694F-03
. 6 1 2 E- 0 7
. 4 b 0 E- 'j 3
. 5;-:7K-03
3 / (3\ E 0 7
.255K-07
. 194E-03
i i i3 }.' f j i
. OBOE- 03
. 028E-03
. 776E-04
. 799K-04
. S46E-04
.414E-04
.004E-04
.613E-04
. /4^E-04
. 889H-04
.553E-04
. 233E-04
. 929E-(t4
. 640E-04
. 3i:,bE-04
. 103E-04
. '8 3 b E- ij 4
. G18E-04
.393E-04
.176E-04
. 975E-04
. 781E-04
. 396E-04
.421E-04
.2:b4E-()4
. OD5E-04
.944E-04
. 801E-04
. 664E-04
.534E-04
. 41 j K-04
. 3:93 E- 04
.liilF.-iM
. 075E-04
. 974E-04
.877E-04
. 7firiE-04
. 699E-04
.61 tiE-04
.537E-04
.4 67E-04
. 3 S 1 E- 'J 4
. 525K-04
'1 r /
^.11
< ^
^ . i ^
t , - -
E-
t
i~-
. l "-
.
i -
1_-
-
. 1 E~
. i
.
. T n-
^_
,
E-
. K "
_-
-
E-
-
--
^ , _
t^ (
.
_
-
-
| ^~
.
* . " ^
'_-
~
1. 1 E-
.1 ~ ~-
. '
. t n~
^ - i E-
^^~
j. 2-
.1(2-
.
. ^~
-
'. !, - ~
-i~
. i_ E-
.
" - _
.
. f "
u _ L-
. 1 S-
-
. > 17>
. ' -
. ' J^-
u "-
r.-
-. i
--
1 '-
--
*^-
_ E-
" -
l
1
i
1
l
l
1
l
1
^
1
i
1
1
1
i
,
1
1
i
i
1
l
1
l
1
1
i
1
A
1
_
_
_
_
~
D-36
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
fable D9. Toluene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
Year Refuse In Place (Mg) (Mg/yr) i ul i - ' _'- i
c 3 . n n o E <
3. UIKJF.+
5 . o n n K <
3 . 01 ) i. i F, +
3 . t)()MF,+
3. 000t:«
3 . OOOK+
3. OOOE+
3.ooot:»
_ 3.000E*
3. 00 OKi
5.000E+
' -, 3.UOOE+
J . ij U U E l
3 . 0 0 0 E '
' 5 . 0 n 0 K t
i 3 . OOOE+
\ 5.000K+
1 3 , 0 Li 0 E +
' l 5 . 0 0 OK)
.1 3.000Ei
1 i 3.000E+
_ll 3.UOOE+
1 ] 5 . 0 n 0 K i
_1 1 3 . OOOE+
11" "' , 0 0 0 E i
11- 3 . i)()()F.+
_Jl 3.000Kt
_11 j.OOOEt
_H 3.IIUUE +
1 3 . OOOE+-
1^ 3.000E'
l :-, .OOOE+
i > 3.ooot:'
05 -- 1 . - j-- l
Ob . r- 4 . i -~-
03 ^ . ^ -L- 1 . '~»i-
05 . " - 4 . -
05 ' . =- I . i r_
03 . , '- . 1 --
05 . ] ' - - . - _
05 ". "E- r ' . i E-
!):; i . "- 1.1-"-
05 . * *t " - - - - _
13 P - l^t--
05 .ll-i- - 1 . ~ i E- _
03 . 1 i JL- ' ..!,-
|V3 .<>-- | , _
05 . 1 i- r . r E-
u3 r- . E-
Ub i E- . E-
n 3 j » - -1 -
Oh ."-* . '"-
05 '.--_£-" . 1_E- i
05 . _ L- " ._":.-
05 ' . r_ - .1^-1
1 3 . OOOE + ti;i . "- . ("-
_1_ 3.0uOE<05 . IE- . " ~-
l ' 3 . OOOF,+ Of5 . u "- .
1 1 3.000E<05 -. ,' c.- _. l' L- "
_1 _ "5.0UUE+Ub . ' -- I-
_1 - 3 . OOOE+05 L- E-
1 -
D-37
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D9. Toluene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
Horn : - 1 i iMg)
-^ , . ' nt 1 1"
i j. . 1 1 ur 1 1
^j. , L i I"
4 1 1 If II
^lr . ' iiiE-rii
1 1 i .n r»' i
_' -_ . i I'E'n'
' l . "if - i
1 . i HL n
' i i n 1 r 1 I
^lr . i UE-H"
J i i n -n
"= .' HIF_-II =
1 .11 I'PVi
1 i' iL i n
_ . ' i'E 'i
n IIE-II
i i i h n
; i ' .in IE- i'
, . n r- i
_ ' i . i i >r 11 =
_j. " _ . ' "it, ''"
i i nE-ii
i it-
. ' nr> i
i i ii -i i
_ 1 " . ' i i£>' i"
. i HE. i '~
-j. J ' iin-n
i ~ . ' "L 'i
_ ' I I r ~
! i i i ii
.ii IF-n
_ ' . 1 1< n E ' ' ~
. i i r-n-
_i . . ' ' it 1 1"
_ _ i n iE- 1 1
n MI n"
1 1 . nt- '"
_ 1"L . i uF ii"
1 .11 nr-ii-
_ . '' ' 'h. 11"
,i ii[>'i
_ ' . n 'i L
~ j. 'i iE*i i "
1 .11 i£~i i "
1 . . i up* 11-
^ ! . i | in '
1 4 .iiilF7-ii"
1 . . 1 'iL 1
i i IE- i
1"" . i [|E-n"
. i i if ~«
L ' "IF ir
i .in IF-I1 i
(concluded)
ir i'- > ;
,CL- .
. ^ r -
. ^ 1E-
.1 1 I--
^.DI E-
. ' I -
_ . " E- '
.' E- i
. 1_ E- <
t- i
.. 1 E- .
i -
. IE- .
r-
. , a
483K-04
-U1E-04
342E-04
277R-04
214E-04
lbbE-04
099E-04
U4;iE-04
942E-05
4h7E-Ob
99GE-OS
hb7'R-Oh
140E-05
74 3E-U':»
3G5E-05
OOSR-Oli
6G4E-05
339E_i)i,
D-38
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D10. Trichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
]- : 0.0500 1/yr ***** user Mode Selection *****
Methane i 58,0000 I volume
Carbon Dioxide : 42.0000 % vuinrn~
Air l'-oliutant : Trichloroethene (KAIVVOC)
Molecular Wt - 131.38 Concent rat i 0:1 - 0.n!4280 pprnV
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 1558 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 2003
- - *- - -
Aver a
Year
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
1963
1 9 'o 4
1 965
19G6
1 967'
1968
1969
1 970
1971
1572
1 973
1974
197b
1976
1977
1978
1 97 9
I960
1 9B 1
1982
1983
1 984
1 93b
1986
1 9C!7
1 98 8
19S9
1990
1 991
1992
1 993
1994
i 99b
199 6
1 99~
1993
1 999
~ -'
:rje Acceptance Hate i
Current Year to
Rofu;jo In Plaoe
1 . 304E+04
2. 609E'04
3 . 9 1 3 E + LI 4
b.217E<04
0. 500E-M04
7 . SObEt H4
9. 130E+04
1 . 0 4 3 E i 0 5
1 . 1 74E+03
1.30 4 E 0 5
1 . 4 3bE-n3b
1 . 5i35K< 05
1 . 696E+05
1 . S 2 6 E < 0 5
1 . 9b7E+Ob
2 . 0 S 7 E i 0 5
i . cr/E+Ob
2. 348E< 05
2 , 478E+05
2 . 601 9E+05
2.739E+iib
2 . 8 7 0 E < 0 5
3 . (J('iOF-f ()b
3 . 0 0 C< E * 0) 3
3 . OUOE-Klb
J . Ll L) Ll E+ 0 a
3 . ( HiOE-f- Ob
3 . 0 0 0 E i 0 5
3 . i lOOE-r Ob
7 LI Q o t; * fi s
3 . LHJUE-r- Lib
3 . OOOE+05
5 . OuOE-t-Ob
3. OOOE+05
3 . UOOF-rOb
3. OOOEs 05
3. OOOE+Ob
3 . OOOE+Lib
3 . N 00 !:-- 05
3 . 0 LI 0 E + Ll 5
3. OOOE-.-03
ClO'T.ure Year : 0.00 Mg/
Model Results
.rr|r,h,
(Mj) (Mq/yi)
1 . 492 E-0
2 . 9 1 1 E- 0
4 . a 6sJE-fJ
b . 5 4 4 E- 0
6 . 7 Gb E 0
7 . 937K-0
9 . r, 3 ; E- 0
1 . 00 8 E-0
1 . 1 OBE-i)
1 . 2 0 3 E- 0
i . il 94 E-0
1 . 380K-0
1.462E-0
1 . 5 4 0 E- 0
1 .61 4E-0
1.68 4 E-0
1.7blR-L!
1.815E-0
I .B76E-0
" O "1 "^ p _ p,
! .9B8E-0
2.040E-0
7 . 1190E-0
1.9S8E-0
1 . 8 91E-IJ
1 . 799E-0
1 . VUE-0
1 . 62 8 E-0
1 . h4[!E-l'i
1 . 4 7 3 E- 0
1 . 4 U 1 E- (J
1 . 333E-0
1 ,76fiK-0
1 .206E-0
1 . 14 7 E-0
1.091E-0
1 . 03fiE-0
9. 873E-U
9 M '^ q l |.;_ Q
S . 933E-0
3 .497E-0
year
]-^r!t- (MAp j f- [ h F'.-t
i ! ' !
c " _ i
5 . ~ ^
b "_- 1
5 . '1 - i_
b 1 E-
5 i <« "
5 . r E- i_
4 r . 1 - '_
4 "- i
4 E- i
4 - i
4 r 2- i_
4 . 1 2- i_
4
4 . ' ^_-
4 -_- _
4 . _:.-
4 - -?.- _
4 . r l
4
4 .",-_
4 . -"-
4 . - _
4 _-- '
4 .l-i
4 _ . "" ~-
A ~~
4 . _- i_
4 _ E- i
4 _- i
4
4 " - -
4
4 1 .
4
b S-
1M-
5 1 . " E-
b '
continued
D-39
-------
A Case Study
Table D10. Trichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
_' 1
4"-
_ 1
D-40
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D10. Trichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
i i i
i- ->-
r+
i f i
_. i
1.1- E-
1.1 iiE-
41-7
4f-
E+
[ " i
D-41
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D10. Trichloroethene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
i Refuse In Place (Mg) [Mg/yrj ' ' i rn /_>.
,1 1
i ~
_1 1
i
r
1
_!'
1
"| '
_lr
1 r
^lr
i <
1
_1
L _
( j
1
_ 1 l
_ X
i
1
_ J
! "
_ l
i' ^
i
_i
i -
l"
_i i
i
_,!- -
_1
i- <
_i "
1 i
_ 1
-]
-1 t
1
~L 1
1
I
1 4
i
_1
1
1
^1
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
7'
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
^
3
5
;
3
;s
*>
J
j<
3
1
1
3
3
I
3
-;;
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
. 000 E < 05
. OOOF+Oh
. OOOEi 05
. on OKI 05
. OOOE+05
. OOUF.+ 05
. 000 Ei 05
. noc;F,+ob
. OOOEi 05
. n n o K i o 5
. OOOE+05
. 00 ("![% + 05
. OOOE+05
. OUOF,+ 05
. 0 0 0 E i 0 5
. OOQEi-05
111 KIE+OS
. 0 0 0 K < 0 5
.OOOE+05
. OOOE+03
. OOOEi 05
. 0 0 0 tl * 0 5
. UOUE+U3
. 000 KI 05
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 E+ 0 5
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. nnoE+i i3
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+03
. 000 Ki 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+Oh
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+03
. onnKi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE) 05
. ()i)()F>05
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOUE+Ob
. OOOEi 05
. OOUF+Ob
.OOOEi 05
. OOOE+03
. OOOE+05
. OUOE-Ki!)
. OOOEi 05
5
b
4
4
,.]
4
,'!
:;
^
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
i
i
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
9
9
9
8
8
1
l
7
i-,
ri
5
5
5
4
,-J
4
4
ti
8
.4GOE-08 i. -
. 1 94F-IJB '. i- "- i
. 94 IE-OS <. » _;,-
.700H-08 .1
. 471E-08 - . 2 IE- ~,
.;:33E-!i[!
. 045E-08 . n E-
. (HtiF,-(Hi . - "- i
. t,bUE-08 i . . - c.-
. 4 8 2 K- 0 8
. 812E-08 . . > 1 "- .
.150K-08 .1
. 997E-08 L . " 1E-
. BI>! F.-Clfi . ' "- i
.712E-08
.579E-08 ,. -.-
. 434E-08 < . " E-
. 334K-08 , . " -- i
. 220E-08 . ! i E- i
. i -| 2E-08 . i "-
.009E-08 . i " i ^ - "
. 911E-08 .,>"?-
. BiOE-08 . _i I-
. 789K-08 . i * --
.C45E-08 . 1 ^- "
. 5 6 4 K- i'i 8
. 488E-08 _ . _ --
. 116E-08 ^. :-.
. 347E-08 _ . - -E-' i
.281E-08 . 4 )--
.218E-08 _._
. ] 59K-08 . -- ,
. 102E-08 . '"--
.049E-08 ' . 'j i^-
. 975E-09 ' . "-i
.489E-09 . ."- L- -
. 026E-OS _ . i ' -~_-
.586K-09 i." -- '
.1G7E-09 1. rE-
.7G9E-09 1. -- '
.390E-09 n . ' "-
.029E-09 ^.^ i JL-
ni"' '/E-H'4 j. J "- i
. 360E-09 ' . i 4;.-
f 1^ T] p i V4 ' ^ 1
.755E-09 ' . ' E- i
. 475E-09 ' . i i ' -
.208E-09 '. ' L- "
. 9S4F.-H9 '.
. 712E-09 . ^--~
. 482E-09 . _u_i- l
.2G4E-09 . i_E- "
.Ob6E-()9 . . ' - i
.858E-09 ". " -- "
3.491E-0'
D-42
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D11. Vinyl Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
l,o : nn.i'iO nv' 3 / Mg -«»»* il=er Mode He] e<-'ti r.m '
k : 0.0500 1/yr **'*» User Mode Selection * * * * *
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
O^jbwii P i u>; i de : 43.0-HM) % yuhnne
Air rdiutant : Vinyl Chloride (HAIVVOC)
Moder:ular Wt (32.30 Concent rat i o;i
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 1958 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 2003
Capacity : 3UOUOO Hq
Averaqe Ar:ceptan<"e Kate Required from
Current Year to, Closure Yc-ar : 0.00 Mq/v>e.ar
.4 J"-
1 E-
continued
D-43
-------
A Case Study
Table D11. Vinyl Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
'1 r
_ 1
_ 1
E- 4
F- 1
4- r- 4
D-44
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D11. Vinyl Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
< i
i
-i
i f
-ii
-n
i
i ,
3 . 0 u 0 E < 0 5
3 . iiOOF + 03
3 . 0 0 0 E« 0 3
3 . 0 0 0 K t 0 5
3. I.H.HIF. + U!'
3 . 0 0 0 E * 0 5
5 . i )()t iR+03
3 . 0 0 0 E * 0 5
5 . 03i0Hi 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOK-H"i5
3 . OOOE+05
3 . ('n )OF.+():;
3 . OOOE» 05
3,OOOE< 05
3 , nijuE+u3
3 . 0 0 o K i C) 5
3 . OOOE+05
3.uOOE+u3
3 . 0 U 0 E ' 0 5
3 . IJJJUE+ Lib
5 . 0 fj 0 K * i"15
3.OOOE+ 05
5 . f]OOK+05
3.OOOE+05
3 . OOOE* 05
3.OOOE+Ub
3 , 0 Li 0 E + U 3
5 . OOOK) Of,
3.OOOEi05
3.OOOE+Os
3. o n n K i n 3
3 . 0 0 0 E < 0 5
'.4
1 I
c --
D-45
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D11. Vinyl Chloride Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
.5 .
3 ,
, OOOEi 05
. OOOE+03
, OOOEi 05
. on OKI 05
, OOOE+05
, OOUE+05
, OOOEi 05
, noc;F,+o3
, OOOEi 05
. 0 0 0 K i 0 5
, OOOE+05
1 ^ ""* 4
} < ] * 44
4 ' »- - 1
1. E- . _- 1
_ 1
_ i
3 . 0 0 0 E< 0 D
3 . OOQEi-05
3,UUGE+05
3 . I j 0 0 K < 0 5
3.OOOE+05
3. 00
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D12. m,p-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
],o : IT). 00 rn''?. / Mg -»*** User Mode .Selection »»**»
k : 0.0500 1/yr ***** User Mode Selection *****
MMOC : 7300.00 pprnv ****' !Jsftr Mode f!e. I er;t i on J-*"-1
Methane : 58.0000 4 volume
O^ibon Dioxide : 47.00GO % volume
Air i'ollutant : m,p-Xylene (HAL'/VOC)
Mo-leoular Wt - lftri.17 07->nnent rat i on - ,".'.140000 pprnV
Landfill type : Co-Disposal
Year Opened : 1958 Current Year : 2003 Closure Year: 2C03
Capacity : 300000 Mq
Averaqe Acceptance Kate Required from
Current Year to Closure Year : 0.00 Mg/ycar
Your
1 95 9
1960
1961
1962
1963
1 964
1 965
1966
1 967
1968
1969
1 97 0
1971
1 97 2
1 973
197-1
197 b
1976
1977'
1 978
1. 97 9
1980
1 9B 1
1982
1983
1 98 4
1 931,
1 98 6
1 98 7
1988
19B9
1990
Reiuuc
1.
2 .
3 .
5 .
6.
7 .
9.
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1 .
1.
1.
] .
2 .
2 .
2 .
2 .
2 .
2 .
3.
3 .
7
3.
3.
3 .
3 .
In Plar.v (My!
30^E+04
609t;< 04
913E+04
21~i;<04
322E+04
fi7bK< 04
130E+04
04 3 Ei 05
1 74F+Ob
30'lt:' 05
43bE+Os
565K) 05
696E+05
826Ef 05
9h7F,+ Ob
08"t:< 05
217E+03
34 BE' 05
478E+OS
609E+05
739F7+9Jb
670Ei 05
OOOR+OS
OOOhH05
OOOE+03
OOOE+05
OOOF.-f 0!)
OOOEi 05
OOOF.+ 0-.
ooo t;* 05
OOOE+Ob
OOOE+05
Model Results
11,5- _ r ^ i - r i ^te
Li i',1, ( 1 1
' . c s ^ "l
_ - 1
. 1L '2- 2
. ~ ' it- . _ -
. 1 ' - - _ +
i. t- 4
' . L> IE- . " ~-
t,- _
* . u r- "
- . i ' L-
E- u - I*
. i c- - . - 4 - I
."" E-"_ . i^E-
' . i ' E- . __E 0
. <- nT-
h- _ . . j. 'i i
_ . : ^.E- . -.112-1
_.!£,-_ 4 . 7±. i
_.__E- L.^--jE*
_ . ' ' E- . i_2-
. 4 ' -
^ . i ^ L ^ . ^
. '
. 1 1 L.-
_._£-_ ^
_ . 1" JE- i . ' E*
. ) r- . ' ' -
1. "" E-
" - ' ~"~
. . 7 j-_- , . 'r ' i
. ' 2 _ -a 2 f
1 . "" r- . r - E-
E- _
continued
D-47
-------
A Case Study
Table D12. m,p-Xylene Emission Rate from Year
Her" : - 1 i (Mg)
.il . i nt 11 =
i - . 1 1 n ir 1 1
_i II C. U"
in" i i n u
_ .in iEf i ir
i .n r~n
_ 1 .' iE>"'
1 . i inf -ii-
L_ . i HL n
_ 1 1 . ' UE-H"
1 ' i i -n
1 . i "H. 11 =
1 .,, , r-rii
i . "it n
_ ij. < . i n't .n
n ME-II
i I i i i ) ii
. i IIIE-M'
. 11 r- i
_ _ 1 . ' ' 'E n"
~ ^r _ . "iL ""
i IF.-H
i i i IF i
-i_ .11 'E-' i"
I U -II
. ' IE-II-
~ ' .111^1
i iiC-n
J . ' " t '
_ 4 t 1 1 1 F ~
1 1 II II
. 1 1 F-ll
_l ~ .Hut11"
. i i iF-'i-
1 - < . lit.""
_ a 1 II E- 1 1
-, 1 1 i !( 1 1
. i HE- "
. i i l E i' ~
.11 iip-i -
_| 1 .until"
_ 4 1 HE-"
_ -i~ . I' n L, '
_i j ii lE-t-i
i ' ' . j HE-"'
i i- . i up- 11-
_ ' i .lit"
. i ur-ii-
. ' ' t '
1 1 ME-"
. i iMt-.ll"
.11 IMF -r"
c _ . ' "IF 11'
1- . 1 II I--II-1
i . "It n ,
_ 1 111 lE-rll
_ i ' . i ii E-""
1 1 |l -H I"
i .n ME-"
l 4 . i i n If -l l~
_ll ."It""
1 H If * 1
l nlj>n
ii i 1 1 1 - r
. 1 1 1 l ^ 1 1 c
.1 1 lf^ 1 1
. i i iF ii
.11 i iF-H i-
1959 to 2202 (continued)
u c > :
it-
4r-
~.^ _t-
, (. _
> . ' "_E-
r
~E-
r-
| -i--
. ' 1E-
-) n -
- . < E- ~
j.i ir-
i h-
t-
1E-
- . ! h-
F-
. i i r-
--
t-
r-
- !-
_. 11 IE-
i _
^ . i 1E-
.
E-
t-
E-
i h-
. ' t-
L-
* . 4 4r-
, . - t-
_ . -"- E-
1 . 1 u E-
. 1 i E-
1 r-
L
.. 4U- -
'. L-
F- -
. 1 "E-
F- ^
t- ,
i r-
t-
t-
E-
F-
F-
F-
. 1_ }-
a . 1E-
E-
. J 1 1 - -,
. + noK-t"!i
94bE-01
705E-01
47SE-U1
2D7E-01
ObOE-Ul
8r>?K-OI
66'lE-Ol
4K-01
715E-01
582E-01
4H6E-01
336E-01
222E-01
114E-01
U11E-01
913E-01
820K-01
731E-01
iS4CiF,-()l
566E-01
49UE-01
417E-01
340E-01
- _E- 1
r- 1
.1 it- 1
Ii 'E- 1
-r E_ .
, l - ,
'E-
i i r
r 1 t- _
1 1 r-
E-
1 M
| "E-
, H^r_
i E __
i i- j-_
D-48
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D12. m,p-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
Jl
-1-4
I -
I "
! t<4
i ->r
1 1
\ 1 1
In
LI
11 1 1
In
i u f
li "
n
in*
11
1 1 '
i l
il
il i
i 1
lib
11
1]
li i
1_
1
i--
i
1 j
i_
1_|
1
1
i i
1
_L
1
3 . OH OK' Ob
3. OOOE+05
3. 00(!E + 0!)
3 0 f"i 0 F i 0 5
3 . u 0 0 1; i 0 5
3 . UUOE+Ub
3 . 000 Hi 05
3 . OOOE+05
; . IHKIK+UM
3. OOOE+05
: . n n n t; < o 5
'^ . 1 n"! U E + 1 1 3
3 . OOOEi 05
':; . n i j ( i E + ( ) -i
5 . 000 fit 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOEi 05
3. OOOF+Ob
3 . OOOtl- 05
3. UOOE+Ub
3 . OOfiKi 05
3. OOOE+05
3 .OOOEi 05
5. ulHJF.+Ob
3 . 0 0 0 E " U 5
3 . UUOE+Ub
3 . UUOEi 05
3 . OUO E+|J5
3. OOOE+05
3 . nnuE+ob
3. OOOEi 05
3.
-------
A Case Study
Table D12. m,p-Xylene Emission
i Refuse
,11 3.
1 *4 3 .
_ 1 1 3 .
1 33 .
r ^
1 3.
_!' 3 .
1
_ 1 J 3 .
! 5 .
-lr 3.
1 r 5 .
1 r 3 .
I ' 3 .
1 3.
_1 3 .
-L "'>
- t 3 3 ,
1 3 ,
_ I > 3.
^ _L 3 .
i 3 .
1 ' 3-; .
3.
1 " 3 .
3 .
-I 3.
13 u '-
i 3 .
_1 3 .
I - -^
1" B .
_ 1 ' 3 .
1 3.
_,!- - 3.
_ 1 3 .
i- < 3 .
_ i *" 3 .
1 | 3 .
~ 1 3 .
_ 1 3 .
-it 3.
- 1 3 .
i 1 3 .
1
1 3.
1 4 3 .
i 3 .
^ 1 3< .
1 3 .
i 3 .
-i 3.
i 3. .
_ ' - 3 .
3 .
Rate from Year
In Place (Mg)
OOOEi 05
OUOF.+Ob
OOOEi 05
on OKI 05
OOOE+05
OOC)E+Oh
OOOEi 05
nociE+os
OOOEi 05
0 0 0 K i 0 5
OOOE+05
on OF;* 05
OOOE+05
OUOF>05
0 0 0 E i 0 5
OOOEi-05
111 KIE+OS
0 0 0 K < 0 5
OOOE+05
OOOE+05
OOOEi 05
0 0 0 E i 0 5
UOUE+U5
000 KI 05
OOOE+05
0 0 0 K+ 0 5
OOOE+05
OOOEi 05
nnriE+i IS
OOOEi 05
000 E +03
0 0 0 K i 0 5
OOOE+05
OOOEt 05
OOOE+Oh
OOOEi 05
OOOE+05
000 KI 05
OOOE+05
OOOEi 05
<)iJ(]F+Ob
OOOE' 05
UOUE+05
OOOEi 05
OOOE+05
OOOE+05
00(JF>Ob
OOOEi 05
<>OUF,+ Ob
OOOEi 05
OOOE+03
OOOE+05
00(1 E+0!)
OOOEi 05
UOCiE+Ob
OOOEi 05
LIOOE + 05
1 959 to 2202
G
6
5
r,
5
!i
,'!
4
'1
4
4
3
3
3
j.
2
2
V
2
1
i
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
9
9
ii
8
y
7
G
6
G
h
'-j
5
4
4
,3
'i
4
(concluded)
[Mg/yrj
. Cl 3E-06
.3'9(iE-(!6
. 983E-06
. 6 92 K- 06
. 4 14 E- Ob
. 150E-06
. 899E-06
. 660E~()6
. 433E-OG
. 2 1 b K- 0 «
. 011E-06
.81 5K-06
. 629E-06
.493:E-(I6
. 264E-OC
.124E-06
. 97IE-06
. G 8 9 E 0 b
. !,;//F.-06
. 433E-OG
. 314E-06
. jL U 1 E- 0 1.
. 094K-0«3
. 992E-06
. 3 95 K- 06
. 802E-06
. 714E-06
. b 3 IE- Ob
. 551E-06
. 476E-U6
. 4 0 4 K- 0 6
^ ^ c, P A ^
.270E-OG
.30BE-06
. 149E-00
. 0 9 3 E- U <:»
. 0 4 0 E- 0
. 891E-07
. 4 08 E- 07
. 949E-07
. 513E-07
. 048E-07
. 703E-07
. 3 2 7' E- 07
. 970E-07
. OOE-U7
. 307E-07
. 999E-(>7
. 706E-07
. 428E-07
. 1 G 3 E- 0 7
. 912E-U7
. G72E-07
.444E-07
.227E-07
. 021E-07
' ' L r, , '.
~~-
t J"-
^ . ^~
i -
. > :>
.
. ( --
. k -
i -
- t
- i
t, ^
. 1 E- 1
. T -_ 1
. , _- 1
rii- 1
^ I
- -t
' . E-
^- 4
^- 1
^ 1 ~
~i * 2-
-, -,
. ' -- 1
- j
r_ |
- - 1
2-' 3
.r i - 4
_- >
- 4
1
. ~j i
"- J
:- 1
2-4
« - 4
_ . _ 2-1
""- I
"- 4
*. 1
12- u
. 1 !- 4
u i"- 4
-- !
- 4
. 1_ _- 1
1 "-4
- ,
_- |
1 . - - I
i ^1 - _ _,
_ . " ~- 1
1 . ^- "
~ _ r
2-
D-50
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D13. o-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202
l.o : nO.OO nv'3 / m »*** User Mod.? .Selection **-»*~
k : 0.0500 1/yr * * *' * User Mode- Selection *****
NMOC : 7386.f!0 ppmv *»* * * User Mode :T~ I eot i on "-1'**
Methane : 58.0000 % volume
Air Tollutant : O-Xylene (HAP/VOC)
Molecular Wr - 106.17 I'onoent rat ion - 0.7777000 nnmV
Land
Year
Cap a
Aye r
Y e,j i
1959
1960
1961
1962
1 9 6 3'
1 964
1 965
1 966
1 9 6 <
1968
1969
1 970
i 97 1
1 972
1 973
1974
1 93' b
1976
1 977
1 97S
1 9';' 9
1930
1 981
1962
1983
1984
1 980
1966
1 9B7
1968
1989
1990
i 99 L
1992
1 993
1994
1 9 9 3'
1 9 9 6
1 997
1 998
1 999
2000
700 3
2 0 U 2
7003
fill type : Co-Dispo
Opened : 1958 Cu
city : 3UOUUU My
age Acceptance Rate
Current Year to
Rcluae In Place
1 . 304E+04
2 . 609E» 04
3 . 913E+U4
5 ,217Ei 04
6. 322E+04
7 . 87SK< 04
9.130E+04
1. 043EfOb
1 . 174E4-Ob
i. 30-1 E» 05
1 . 43bE+Ob
I . 565K) 05
1 , 6 9 6 E 4" 0 5>
1 . 6 " 6 E i 0 5
1 . 9S7F,+ Ob
2. 087E< 05
13 . vl7E+Ob
2. 348E<05
E . 478E+05
2 . 609E+05
;:. 739F>Ob
2 . 8 ~ 0 E 0 5
3. oOnF.+ Oh
3. OOOE' 05
"i linllP+llh
3 . OOOE4-05
3 . OOOF.T-Ob
3.000E»05
3 . OOOF.+ Ob
3 . OOOE< 05
3. UUOE+Ub
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOp, 4- 05
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOF+Oh
3 . 0 0 0 E 4 0 2
3' . 000!E4- Ob
3 . OOOE+Ob
3 . f 1 0 0 E4- Ti 5
3 . OOOE+05
3 . OOOF.4-05
3 . 0 0 0 E * 0 5
:.'.. OOOF.-cOh
: 1 1 ] t \ p 4. | | '
3.00 0 H ( 0 5
Landfill Pa
sal
rrent Year : 2003
Reqiii red from
Closure Year : 0
Model Re
r,
(My )
0
1
1
2
^
*;
3
4
4
4
b
M
C.
t"
6
0
7
7
a.
8
a
s
~i
7
D
U
6
6
s
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
7
7
r amor or .3
Closure Year: 2C03
.00 Mg/ycar
suits
-Kyiene (HAI'/Vi.K. I) i i .e
(My/yj.) I i i
.07 g £-04 . - £_
.186E-03 . - i
. 7 56E-03 E-
.259E-07 .11 -
.757E-03 _ __-
.7317K-03 1
.680E-03 . "-
.106 E-03 i. ^- .
.b!6E-03
. 90 3 E-03 , . i 1 _
.i;7i;E-03 _ 1 -E
.673K-03 ,
Cf c, ;." F _ 0 ^ ^ ^- ]
-7 Tf_ ,", -1
.b7bE-03
.862E-03 ' . rr ,
.13bE-u3 i 1 _T
.3 95 E-03
.64EE-03 _""(-
.877E-03 . E- i
. 1 Ollv-03 1 .
.314E-03 L
.hl6F,-o:j, 1 . - "*
.101E-03 1.
.7U6E-03 - _« I
. 330E-03 1 . E-
_ 97 :>ir_i } } s^^
. ,', ~ ;- p_ f ; -i, i . c,
.309E-03
. 001E-03 . . r -
.7UBE-O3 _ 24
.430E-03 ._ E-
.J65K-03 1"
. 913E-03 ' . il E*
.674E-03 1 . u r ~
.446E-03
.739E-03
.U23E-013 1 i-
. !! /. 6 K- 0 3
. (; 4 ;) F,- 0 7
. 4fl..;F,-0.3 . "- ^
.295E-03 . r ~- '
.133R-03 "- 1
Q Q f j p _ j i "i u K _ 1
. 8 3 5 K- 0 3 , 1 - - i
continued
D-51
-------
A Case Study
Table D13. o-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
1 =.-
D-52
continued
-------
Somersworth, NH
Table D13. o-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (continued)
(Mg)
E+
i i
E+
t i
i i
£ +
E-
I 1 41"-
l.r 1E-
l.i E-
i. j r-
1 . 1 E-
1 _ E-
1 -\-
l.lc E-
1.1 _E-
i. j r-
. ~ Ih-
- " L-
. ' E-
r-
E-
i ' -E-
2Q75
7(7/6
2077
"'078
~L (j 7 9
20BO
20B 1
7 Oil 7
2083
2084
2089
20136
2 0 8 7
2dB8
2039
2090
2 u 9 1
37192
2 0 9 3
2094
209S
2 01 9 6
2097
i i i
r +
1
i i- i
L +
" +
E I
i u
I
i "in
L-1-' r
+
E*
^ 4-
^!1 '
.' _ i
w" 4-
" 1
E+
""M
. i E I
IL
E4-
" . " 1LE- L
E- '
" . i E- r
i- v-
. 1 1 E- c
. i r-
L . "" E- L
1 . - - E-
c . i <_E- c
4 > -h- r
« . -< E- c
4 ,' I - r
1._'1E- c
i.i- r-
- . n E- r
E-
^ i r-
I h- r
.1 i-E- c
< r-
1 r- c
L- r
r-
i.
i ,
i.
i .
i.
i .
i.
i ,
i.
i .
i,
1 .
9,
9.
8 .
8.
7 ,
7 .
7 ,
b,
G ,
o .
9 ,
, 75 4 t>
. bf,8E-
,[j87E-
. ri] OK-
, 43GE-
, 3>3bE-
, 299E-
, 236E-
, 17GE-
. 1 1 8K-
. 06 4 E-
. 01 2K-
, G2GE-
, 1 97E-
, 710t:-
,28GE-
.881E-
. 497E-
, 131E-
, 783E-
, 453E-
2138E-
. 839E-
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
0) 2
03
0,3
03
03
n 3
0 3
03
0 3
0 3
0 3
E
I ZJ
1 r-
E+
i " +
'- 1E-
- r-
E-
r-
E- i
1 !-'
i E- i
r-
" * "* E i
L E-
»- E-
F-
D-53
continued
-------
A Case Study
Table D13. o-Xylene Emission Rate from Year 1959 to 2202 (concluded)
i Refuse In Place (Mg) (Mg/yr)
,1 1
i a
_li
i -t
^ir
1
21'
I1
_i i
I
_lr
1 <-
^lr
i <
i
^
L _
!
( i
1
_ 1 i
_1
i
|
j
! "
_ 1
_1 -i
1
_1
1
1"
_1 1
1
_1-^
_1 -
1 " '
_ J. ""
1 i
_ i
_1
-1 1
_1
1 1
1
i
1 4
i
_1
1
-]
^1 '
1
__','
ii_
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
-;
3
."i
3
3
3
-
'3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
J
*
3
3
..3
3
J
5
3
-;
}
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
o
3.
3
3
. OOOE< 05
. OOUF.-t-Ob
. OOOEi 05
. on OKI 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOR+05
. OOOE< 05
. 0 0 0 K < 0 5
. OOOE+05
. onor;+05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 E < 0 5
, o 0 n v, r 0 5
1 II iHF+OS
. 0 0 0 K < 0 5
. OOOE+05
. OOOE-MJ!)
. 000 EI 05
. 0 0 0 tl * 0 5
. LiOUE + Ub
. HOOKi 05
. OOOE+05
. 0 0 0 K+ 0 5
. OOOE+05
. OOOEi 05
. I'KHIE+i ^5
. 000 Es 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Hi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOEs 05
. OOOE+Oh
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. 00 OEi 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Ei 05
. OOOF.+03
. OOOE' 05
. OOOE+05
. 000 Ei 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE+05
, OOUE+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOUE+05
. OOOE<05
. OOUE+05
. OOOE+05
. 00(1 E+05
. OOOEi 05
. OOOE+05
. OOOE* 05
. OOOE+05
2 .225E-06
3.11 6R-06
2 .01 3E-06
1 . 91 5K-Ob
1.822E-Ob
1 .V33R-06
1 . G 4 8 E- 0 fa
1 .56BK-06
1 . 491E-OG
1.41 9K-Ori
1. 349E-06
I .XS4K-06
1 .221E-06
1 .1 61E-II6
1.105E-OC
i . o 5 1 E- n 6
,. 0,-.,E_,..,
'."' h- 17
J t _ ~"
.
r_ "
, "" i r
.4 i' I-
-. r
IE- "
1 . ^ -4 -i ^
i . i F-
, i H ~
. J E-
J . r-
-T . ~ " ~
' . 1 ~~
1 . ^ L-
J. ,4"-
. ' i ' *_,- ^
E
4 - ~
. _ - E- "
. j i - r- -
1 " r-
_ . i 1 h-
_. _-E-
_ . _ L~
. J > E-
r f-
.
_ . 1 i-
. " T- ;
. '_ !_-
i-
_ - -,._ -
.
. r " _ E- "
I . - * ""
., l-> t-
.
' ' t r, / '.
- 1
"-4
. ^~ i
* - -t
. _' E- 1
4 - 4
E- i
.
. " _- 1
- 1
r i
. 1
i - <
- - i
"- i
- i
u _
r_ "i
_ _,
E-
1 . "- ^
. r "- 1
.
E- -4
- ,
. i :?- 1
1 H -t 4
^- 1
'- 1
_J 2-1 t
- 4
4_- a
4 - 4
. ' "' - 1
^ . ! ^~
'. J' - -
_ ^ *- _ r
_ E
j
" . r E- '
" . j. "- n
. ' i"-
. t i *-- r
E- '
'- r
?- t
. ' E- c
- u
.
i . 1 " "~
i-
. 1 I-- c
. _, - -
- _ r
^_ w
. _^_-
*_- -
D-54
-------
Somersworth, NH
Appendix E
SCREEN3 Model Runs
E-l
-------
A Case Study
Sommersworth UNITY.OUT
*** SCREENS MODEL RUN ***
>*** VERSION DATED 96043 ***
Somersworth Regional Landfill
SIMPLE TERRAIN INPUTS:
SOURCE TYPE
EMISSION RATE (G/(S-M**2)) =
SOURCE HEIGHT (M)
LENGTH OF LARGER SIDE (M)
LENGTH OF SMALLER SIDE (M) =
RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M)
URBAN/RURAL OPTION
03/05/03
09:48:26
AREA
0.561170E-05
0.0000
540.0000
330.0000
0.0000
RURAL
THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) MIXING HEIGHT OPTION WAS SELECTED.
THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) ANEMOMETER HEIGHT OF 10.0 METERS WAS ENTERED.
MODEL ESTIMATES DIRECTION TO MAX CONCENTRATION
BUOY. FLUX = 0.000 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 0.000 M**4/S**2,
*»** FULL METEOROLOGY ***
-* *************-A-**********-* ********
*** SCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES ***
*** TERRAIN HEIGHT
DIST CONC
(M) (UG/M**3)
1.
100.
200.
300.
400.
500.
600.
700.
800.
900.
1000.
1100.
1200.
1300.
1400.
1500.
1600.
1700.
1800.
1900.
2000.
2100.
2200.
2300.
2400.
2500.
2600.
2700.
2800.
842.4
907.1
964.5
1014.
483.7
363.7
300.9
259.9
230.5
208.6
191.6
177.9
166.4
156.6
148.1
140.5
133.8
127.7
122.2
117.2
112.8
108.7
105.1
101.8
98.67
95.71
93.03
90.43
87.94
5T ST 5T Vf K W 57 V
OF 0.
STAB
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
3T V* Vf VK V! 3T K
M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES ***
UlOM USTK MIX HT PLUME MAX DIR
CM/S) CM/S) CM) HT CM) CDEG)
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
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
1.0 10000.0
Page 1
E-2
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
30.
30.
29.
28.
31.
30.
30.
29.
29.
28.
27.
27.
26.
25.
24.
24.
23.
22.
21.
19.
19.
17.
14.
14.
11.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-------
Somersworth, NH
Sommersworth UNITY.
2900.
3000.
3500.
4000.
4500.
5000.
5500.
6000.
6500.
7000.
7500.
8000.
8500.
9000.
9500.
10000.
15000.
20000.
25000.
30000.
40000.
50000.
85
83
73
65
58
52
47
43
39
36
33
31
28
27
25
23
14
10
7.
6.
4.
3.
.58
.33
.60
.40
.44
.50
.44
.10
.37
.13
.41
.01
.92
.03
.34
.85
.49
.34
945
401
617
580
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
10000.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OUT
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:
315. 1020. 6 1.0 1.0 10000.0 0.00 31.
*** SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS rt'v*
***************************************
CALCULATION
PROCEDURE
SIMPLE TERRAIN
MAX CONC
(UG/M**3)
DIST TO
MAX (M)
TERRAIN
HT (M)
1020.
315.
0.
Page 2
E-3
------- |