Document 65OKkExD3k8JLn6GXyng1V5Ko
1991 Air Toxics Monitoring Report
NT
CJt *'H C~-
James M. Hazlett II Air Toxics Laboratory Program Manager
L'~f T'
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Office of Management & Finance / Technical Services Division
March 1. 1992
DO 178705 CONFTDFNTTAl
1991 Air Toxics Monitoring Report
I. INTRODUCTION
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) has
conducted an ambient monitoring program for airborne toxic compounds
since 1984.
The program began by operating a single continuous
monitoring station located near the Louisiana State Capitol. When first
placed in operation, this site was the only monitoring station in the
country capable of providing round-the-clock monitoring of Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOC's). In April of 1991 a second continuous
monitoring station was installed at a site near Baker Louisiana.
The LDEQ also operates six Toxic Air Monitoring Sites (TAMS) located
at several areas around the Greater Baton Rouge area. These samplers are
at the Baton Rouge Capitol Site, LSU, Baker, Port Allen, Geismar, and at
the Capitol Regional Office.
Each sampler operates once a weejt
collecting an 8 to 10 hour sample onto a Tenax-GR sample cartridge. The
Tenax-GR cartridges are later transported to the Air Toxics Laboratory
for Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectroscopy analysis. In December 1991, two'"\
canister samplers also began operation at the Capitol and Baker sites.
These samplers are programmed to collect a 24 hour sample once every six !
days.
--
Plans for expansion call for the addition of two continuous monitoring sites to be at Geismar and Lake Charles Louisiana. These sites should be ready to begin monitoring around April 1, 1992. These sites plus the two existing sites will be upgraded to provide expanded analytical data on ozone precursors. Additionally several additional TAMS and Canister samplers will be deployed in the other regions of the state including New Orleans, Lake Charles, Lafayette, Monroe, and Shreveport.
II. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
The sampling and analytical equipment used in the continuous monitoring system consists of a XonTech Model 930 Organic Vapor Concentrator, a Shimadzu Gas Chromatograph, and a Spectra Physics Winner/386 Chromatograph Workstation. The XonTech concentrator contains two Tenax-GR/Carboxen-569 traps (12" length x 1/8" O.D.). These traps alternate between sample collection and sample injection. This type of combination sorbent trap provides excellent recovery for the C2 to C12 hydrocarbons. Samples are collected hourly over a 57 minute period at a flow rate of 10 CC/min for a total sample volume of about 0.57 liters. The sample flow is maintained at a constant rate by a mass flow controller contained within the sample concentrator.
The TAMS samples are collected using Anderson VOTA Samplers which are maintained and operated by personnel of the LDEQ Office of Air
Quality and Radiation Protection. The samples are collected onto sorbent cartridges composed of a glass tube (5/8" O.D. x 7" long) packed with 3 grams of Tenax-GR. Each VOTA is fitted with a timer which operates the sampler weekly. Flowrates are measured using a built in rotameter. The
samplers are subjected to a flow audit once every three months to ensure accurate flow measurement.
Several sampling procedures are employed to ensure the accuracy of the data generated. Each set of sample cartridges which go into the
128706 OONFIDFNT TAi
field are accompanied by a field blank cartridge. Any amount of the target compounds found on this cartridge is subtracted from the amount found on the actual sample cartridges. Each sample set includes at least two parallel duplicate samples. Each sample cartridge is collected at a different flow rate to produce a total volume of about 5 and 10 liters respectively. The analytical results between these two cartridges must agree with 25% of each other. Backup cartridges are also utilized in at least 10% of the samples in to measure possible breakthrough. The backup cartridge must contain no more than 20% of the amounts of the target compounds found on the front tubes or be equivalent to the field blank cartridge. After sample collection, the cartridges are transported back to the Air Toxics Laboratory for analysis.
The evacuated canister samples are collected using XonTech Model 911A samplers. Before sample collection each canister is evacuated, filled with hydrocarbon free air. The canister is then blank analyzed to ensure there is no internal contamination. The canister is re-evacuated
and sent out to the sampling site. About 15 liters of ambient air are collected during a single 24 hour sampling period. As a result the canister is pressurized to about 20 psig. After sample collection is completed, the canisters are transported back to the laboratory for analysis.
III.
ANALYTICAL AND QA/QC METHODS
The production of high quality analytical data on a timely schedule and at a minimum cost is one of the goals of the LDEQ Air Toxics Monitoring Program. To provide data of high precision and accuracy a thorough quality control/quality assurance program has been devised and implemented for each of the monitoring programs.
Continuous Monitoring Stations
The Shimadzu gas chromatographs are currently fitted with a single megabore column (SPB-1 2.53 urn x 60 m x 0.53 O.D.) connected to Photo lonization/Flame Ionization Detectors in series. The Flame Ionization detector ( fid ) is used to detect selected alkane species while the Photo Ionization detector ( PID ) is used to detect aromatic compounds. Each detector is connected to a dual channel integrator which is part of the Chromatography Workstation. Raw chromatograms and analytical reports for each analysis are stored onto the hard disk of the workstation computer. A value for total hydrocarbons is computed by multiplying the total area of all peaks detected on the FID by the response factor of nhexane.
Periodically the data is collected from the workstation computer and transferred to the main laboratory computer for editing, QA/QC
procedures, and final storage in the laboratory database. The system is calibrated three times a week utilizing compressed gas cylinders containing known amounts of the compounds of interest. The calibrations are performed on a random basis to avoid any biasing of the overall data. Calibration standards for the continuous monitoring stations are purchased in the form of hydrocarbon mixtures contained in high.pressure gas cylinders. This calibration mixture is composed of each of the target compounds at a concentration of approximately 100 ppb. The mixture is analyzed by the supplier and certified to an accuracy of +/10%. Before acceptance, the calibration cylinder is analyzed against gravimetric standards prepared within the laboratory. All of the tested components must be within 10% of the listed concentrations. The
DO 178707 CONFTDFNTTAt
calibration gas is transferred into 6 liter summa polished canisters for use at each of the monitoring sites.
The analytical system is calibrated with this mixture a minimum of three times per week. An aliquot of the mixture is collected by the XonTech sampling system and diluted to the calibration concentration of about 10 ppb per component. This calibration sample is analyzed by the gas chromatograph system. Response factors & retention times are computed and these values are compared to the previous calibration analysis. If the responses are within 20% of the previous calibration then the data set is declared valid and stored onto the station database. In most cases the variation in response has been observed to be around 5%. Periodically the analytical system is challenged with a performance audit mixture containing low ppbv concentrations of several compounds.
Data capture for each monitoring station is computed by taking the
number of validated ambient samples collected at each station and
dividing by the number of hours of operation.
The laboratory has
established a goal of 85% data capture for each of the monitoring
stations. Since the monitoring
program began, the data capture
rate has improved greatly. The
reasons for this improvement were
the switch to the XonTech based
concentrator system and the
installation of higher quality gas
chromatographs in the fall of
1989.
The graph to the right
shows how the data capture rate at
the Capitol station has risen from
around 70% in 1987 to more than
90% in 1991. Since calibrations
and QA/QC samples account for
about 4% of the number of analyses
this means that the analytical
system currently has a down time
of only about 4%.
The Baker
station during its eight months of
operation had a data capture rate
of about 81%. Most of the lost
data occurred during June when the
station
experienced
several
temperature control problems due
to a faulty air conditioner. Since that problem has been corrected the
station is maintaining a 90% data capture rate.
TAMS SAMPLES
The TAMS sample cartridges are thermally desorbed using a Tekmar Model 5010 GLT Automatic Thermal Desorber. The desorbed samples are cryogenically focused to insure maximum chromatographic peak sharpness. The analytical instrumentation consists of a Hewlett Packard 5890 gas chromatograph coupled to a Hewlett Packard Mass Selective Detector. The analytical protocol followed for the analysis is EPA Method TO-1.
Each sample cartridge before analysis is spiked with a mixture containing a d6-benzene internal standard and a l-bromo-4-flourobenzene (BFB) surrogate. The percent BFB recovery is recorded after each
170 1 78708
OONF TOFNTTA
analysis.
The GC/MS tuning and mass standardization are performed according to the manufacturers instructions utilizing perflourotributylamine. A calibration standard is prepared by injecting a mixture of the target compounds into a static dilution bottle. Portions of this mixture are injected into the GC/MS system to generate a three point calibration curve. A fresh calibration curve is generated weekly and calibration checks are performed daily. Data acquisition is performed by operating the mass spectrometer in a full scan mode. The scan range is from 33 to 260 daltons.
Performance audits are periodically performed upon the analytical system. A performance audit canister containing low ppb levels of many of the target compounds is used to prepare a set of spiked sample cartridges.
CANISTER SAMPLES
The canisters are analyzed by both Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectroscopy (GC/MS) and by Gas Chromatography/Multiple Detector (GC/MD) .
The analytical instrumentation used for the GC/MS analysis include a
Tekmar 5010 Automatic Thermal Desorber and a Hewlett Packard 5890 Gas
Chromatograph coupled to a Hewlett Packard 5971 Mass Selective Detector.
The GC/MD analysis is performed using a XonTech 930 Organic Vapor
Concentrator coupled to a Hewlett Packard 5890 Gas Chromatograph fitted
with an Electron Capture/Flame Ionization Detector series.
The
analytical protocol is based on EPA Method TO-14.
A minimum of four analyses are performed on each canister. The canister is first analyzed by the GC/MS system which withdraws two sample aliquot for analysis. These duplicate analyses must agree within 30% for each other. Next duplicate analyses are performed by the GC/MD analytical system. Again these duplicate analyses must agree within a 30% margin of error. Analytical results from the GC/MS and the GC/MD are then compared and must show agreement within 30%.
The GC/MS tuning and mass standardization are performed according
to the manufacturers instructions utilizing perflourotributylamine. A calibration standard is prepared by injecting a mixture of the target compounds into a canister. Portions of this mixture are injected into the GC/MS system to generate a three point calibration curve. A fresh calibration curve is generated weekly and calibration checks are performed daily. Data acquisition is performed using selected ion monitoring for each of the target compounds.
The GC/MD analytical system is calibrated daily using compressed gas cylinders which contain low ppb concentrations of the target compounds. The detectors are calibrated using a single point calibration.
Spiked canisters are prepared periodically to challenge the analytical system.
no 1P8709 OONFIOFNITAI
IV. CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM DATA
CAPITOL SITE
CAPITOL SITE OPERATION TIME
SAMPLE TYPE
Ambient Samples Calibration Samples QA/QC Down Time
# of HOURS
8,066 234 12 448
% of OPERATION TIME
92.08 2.67 0.14 5.11
During the calendar year 1991 the monitoring station collected and analyzed a total of 8,066 validated ambient air samples. This figure represents a data capture rate of 92%. The table above provides a complete breakdown on the site operation during year.
The mean average level of total hydrocarbons measured during 1991 was 44.1 parts per billion by volume (PPBV) which is slightly greater than last years average of 40.1 ppb. The table below provides a set of descriptive statistics for the hydrocarbon species monitored during the year. None of the mean average concentrations exceeded the ambient air standards as defined by the Louisiana Air Toxics regulations. As in all of the previous years monitoring data, the median concentration
CAPITOL SITE STATISTICS
Compound
Propane Butane 2-methylbutane Pentane 2-methylpentane 3-methylpentane Hexane Methylcyclopentane --Benzene 2-methylhexane 2.2.4-trimethylpentane Heptane Methylcyclohexane Toluene Octane Ethylbenzene m+p xylene o xylene Cumene 1.2.4-trimethylbenzene Unknown R-H Total R-H
Mean
9.71 8.81 5.79 2.36 1.50 0.72 1.24 0,-5^ 0.9J~> 0.30 0.45 0.25 0.18 2.25 0.10 0.19 0.66 0.25 0.10 0.58
44/09;
Median
5.7 3.0 2.9 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.2 6.9 23.7
Maximum
404.0 1719.1
402.7 219.4
76.8 31.8 109.6 36.5 112.2 14.0 18.2 11.1 11.8 12574.3 10.6 122.7 295.5 87.0 10.5 20.9 682.4 13750.0
DO 1P8710 CONF TDFNTTAl
for each of the target compounds is lower than the mean average concentration.
As in past years the concentration levels observed are highly variable. During any given twenty-four hour period the range of measured concentrations can be very high. By sorting the ambient data into small groups based upon different meteorological or time parameters, some explanations for this variability can be seen.
Some of this variability can be explained by examining what affect the site location and the local meteorology have upon the analytical data. Due to the proximity of this monitoring site to several large
Concentrations versus Wind Direction
55 -I
50-
453
2 40-
35-
30-
25-
Aliphatic Compounds
A
II
M
I\
Legend -- Propane -- Butene ...... Hexane -- Octane
20-
15-
10-
5-
Wind Sector
industrial facilities, the one factor that can most dramatically
influence the concentrations of compounds is the wind direction. The
figure above illustrates how the average concentrations of several
aliphatic compounds vary with the wind direction. In preparing this
graph, the data for each compound was divided into small subsets
according to the prevailing wind direction at the time of sample
collection. Each subset encompasses a fifteen degree sector of the
compass. Mean averages were computed for each subset and all the points
were plotted upon the graph.
The graph shows that usually the
concentrations are somewhat higher when the wind is blowing from a
northerly direction. There are several petrochemical industries located
in this direction which routinely emit significant amounts of volatile
organic compounds. The plot for butane particularly show the influence
of an emission source located to the north-northwest. The aromatic compounds show in the graph below also show some increase in concentrations but to a much lesser degree.
The wind speed can also
affect the levels of volatile
organic compounds measured.
A
brisk breeze will help disperse
pollutants while stagnant wind
conditions will tend to trap
pollutants around their source.
The table to the right clearly
shows that a drop in wind speed is
usually accompanied by a rise in
volatile
organic
compound
concentration.
Another weather
phenomena which can greatly affect
the concentrations is rainfall.
During periods of steady rainfall,
the measured levels of VOC's will
drop a significant amount as the
compounds become trapped by the water droplets and fall to the ground.
Conversely during periods of heavy fog the concentrations of VOC's rise
as the suspended water droplets prevent the dispersion of these
compounds. In summation, changing weather patterns can result in very
large changes in the observed concentrations of the target compounds.
cqmf
TDFHTr4l
Since
meteorological
conditions show diurnal variations
it would be reasonable to assume
that the concentrations of
measured
volatile
organic
compounds
will
also
vary
diurnally. The diurnal profile
for the Capitol site, shown to the
right, was prepared by sorting the
data into subsets according to the
hour of sample collection. The
highest levels seem to occur
a"round 7 00"' am while the lowest
levels we're-found to occur around
3:00 pm.
There are several
reasons why this pattern tends to
hold true a majority of the time.
Since the site is located within an urban/industrial area, it is going
to be affected by daily vehicular traffic patterns. Vehicular traffic
in Baton Rouge is heaviest during the periods 6:00 to 8:00 am and from
4:00 to 6:00 pm. The morning high concentrations observed appear to be
connected to the morning "rush hour" traffic.
An increase in
concentrations was observed for the evening "rush hour" however the
levels do not fall afterwards as they do after the morning traffic rush.
Diurnal variations in meteorology will also affect the concentrations
measured since the mixing height will fluctuate during the day. At night
the mixing height is generally much lower which tends to keep pollutants
near the surface and thus concentrations go up. Once the sun comes up
and the mixing height expands upward, the pollutants are more easily
dispersed and thus concentration will go down. Another important reason
for the decrease in concentrations during the daylight hours is that many
of these compounds play a significant role in the photochemical reactions
between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen to form ozone. It has been
observed that the decrease in hydrocarbon concentrations during the mid
day is much greater on sunny days than it is on cloudy days when ozone
formation is reduced.
In conclusion, during any one day many factors can influence the
concentrations observed at this site.
Diurnal variations, wind
variations, photochemical reactions, traffic patterns, as well as
variations of local point source emissions all contribute to the
concentrations observed at any one time.
BAKER SITE
BAKER SITE OPERATION TIME
SAMPLE TYPE TIME
Ambient Samples Calibration Samples QA/QC Down Time
# of HOURS
4,797 156 8 943
% of OPERATION
81.25 2.64 0.14
15.97
00 128713 ^ONFrOFNTTA!
The continuous monitoring station at Baker was placed in operation
on April 30, 1991. The site is located on the grounds of the Louisiana
Training Institute, about two miles west of Baker and seven miles north-
northwest of downtown Baton Rouge. In spite of some problems with the
temperature control at the site, the equipment has performed very well
and the site nearly achieved the goal of 85% data capture. The
mean
BAKER SITE STATISTICS
Compound
Propane Butane 2-methylbutane Pentane 2-methylpentane 3-methylpentane Hexane Methylcyclopentane Benzene 2-methylhexane 2,2,4-trimethylpentane Heptane Methylcyclohexane Toluene Octane Ethylbenzene m+p xylene o xylene Cumene 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene Unknown R-H Total R-H
Mean
6.75 4.45 3.81 1.63 1.11 0.41 0.66 0.38 1.35 0.28 0.23 0.22 0.26 1.38 0.23 0.12 0.40 0.22 0.12 0.26 12.16 34.19
Median
3.4 1.9 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 9.3 21.3
Maximu^n
167.0, 240.0
97.5 68.6 51.0 20.6 36.0 20.4 45.5 18.6 10.5 29.4 25.9 34.9 10.2
9.8 11.1 10.0
9.7 9.3 291.5 1035.1
average level of total hydrocarbons measured during the eight months of operation was 34.2 parts per billion. This is about 22% lower than the average level measured at the Capitol site. The table above provides the descriptive statistics for the hydrocarbon species monitored while the site was in operation. As was seen at the Capitol site, none of the annual mean average concentrations exceeded the ambient air standards as set by the Louisiana Air Toxics regulations. All of the mean average concentrations measured were lower than the mean levels measured at the Capitol site except benzene which was about 35% higher. An examination of the median concentration for benzene { 0.6 ppbv ) however shows it is exactly the same as it is at the capitol site. Most of the other median concentrations are also very similar to the values recorded at the Capitol site. This indicates that the Baker site is much less affected by local point sources as is the Capitol site.
Do 178714
conftdfnttai
When a wind direction analysis of the aromatic species is performed, in can be seen that higher concentrations are measured when the wind is coming from the direction of Baton Rouge or Baker. Conversely the lower concentrations are measured when the wind is coming from a northerly direction. The aliphatic hydrocarbons show a very similar pattern with very low levels recorded when the wind is out of a northerly direction. Since there are no major industrial point sources to the north of this site, most of the hydrocarbons measured from the north wind sector are probably from mobile and naturally occurring biogenic sources.
A diurnal
analysis of the
Baker site appears
in the graph at the
right. It shows a
pattern which is
somewhat different
from the one seen at
the Capitol site.
The early morning
"rush hour" peak
occurs about one
hour earlier at
6:00am and it is not
as large as the peak
observed at the
Capitol site. The
pattern shows a
steady
buildup
during the nighttime
hours with a slight
peak at 6:00am
followed by a steady
decrease in the
measured concentrations. This indicates that most of the diurnal
variation is most likely caused by the local meteorology with only a
slight effect from traffic patterns.
In conclusion when comparing the data generated at the Baker site to the data generated at the Capitol site the biggest difference is the effect the local point sources have upon the measured concentrations. Capitol site is effected by several local point sources and vehicular traffic flow much more than the Baker site is. Both sites are affected
no 1?87]5 OONFTDFNTTAI
by the urban plume of hydrocarbons emanating from Baton Rouge. Both sites show increased concentrations during stagnant meteorological conditions. The Baker site probably measures more naturally occurring hydrocarbons.
The graph below shows a day of the week analysis of total hydrocarbon concentrations for both sites. In performing this analysis the data from each site was divided into subsets according to the day of the week the samples were collected. The mean average concentrations from each site are plotted upon the graph. As expected the Capitol site appears to show more variation in concentrations than does the Baker
Day of the Week Analysis
o
site.
Both sites measured the highest average concentrations on
Tuesdays. The lowest concentrations were found on Fridays at the Capitol
site and on Sundays at the Baker site.
00 1?S7l6 CONF T Of My 7A!
V. TAMS DATA
The operational strategy of TAMS program consisted of a weekly sampling event at each sampling station. These samplers were operated for an eight hour sampling period starting at midnight and ending at 8:00 am each sampling date. The goal of the program was to operate the samplers for 50 weeks during the year and obtain a data completeness of at least 80% at each of the sampling stations. This would provide about 40 to 50 valid samples from each site during the course of the year. Unfortunately, as seen in the Table below, none of the sampling stations
TAMS COMPLETENESS
SITE
BAKER
# SAMPLES
23
Completeness 46%
CAPITOL 34 68%
_ CRQ 34
68%
GEISMAR 28 56%
LSU 27
54%
PORT A. 25
50%
were able to meet this goal. There are several reasons for the poor data
completeness. There were frequent failures of the samplers to operate
properly due to blown circuit breakers, mechanical breakdown, poor
weather, and operator error.
Several samples were discarded due to
excessive contamination from field handling and dirty samplers.
Additionally, the field staff was often called upon to work other
projects which left the TAMS network unattended. Hopefully in the future
some of the problems will be adequately resolved and the data
completeness will improve.
During the first half of the year the GC/MS analytical system was calibrated for a total of twenty-three target compounds. In late June the target compound list was revised to include a total of thirty-two target compounds. Some of the compounds monitored during the first part of the year were dropped from the target list.
As expected, an analysis of the data from the various sites showed some similar and some very different patterns of volatile organic compounds present in the ambient air. The measured levels of benzene at the Baker, Geismar, and Port Allen sites were higher than the levels measured at the Capitol, LSU, and the Regional Office sites. The Geismar site had levels of methylene chloride, ethylbenzene and styrene which were higher than the amounts measured at any of the other sites. The Port Allen site had the highest measured levels of ethylene dichloride (1,2-dichloroethane) . All of the sites had about the same measured levels of Methyl Chloroform, trichloroethylene, and Carbon tetrachloride.
The orientation of each site to the local point sources as well as
the local meteorology are most likely responsible for the differences in
concentrations observed. The table above provides the mean average concentrations measured at each of the TAMS sites. A more detailed summary of the results from each site is listed in the appendix of this report.
DO 17R717 CONFTDFNTTAl
TAMS DATA COMPARISON MEAN AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS in PPBV
Compound
BAKER
Acrylonitrile *
0.01
Allyl Chloride *
N/D
Acetone **
3.27
1,1-dichloroethene **
N/D
Methylene Chloride **
0.03
Carbon disulfide **
N/D
t-1,2-dichloroethene ** N/D
1,1-dichloroethane **
N/D
2-Butanone **
4.44
c-1,2-dichloroethene ** N/D
Chloroform
0.04
-- 1,2-dichloroethane
0.11
Methyl Chloroform
0.23
Benzene
2.39
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.10
1,2-dichloropropane
N/D
Bromodichloromethane
N/D
Trichloroethylene
0.03
1-Heptene *
0.02
n-Heptane *
0.30
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** N/D
4-methyl-2-pentanone ** 0.01
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** N/D
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** N/D
Toluene
1.63
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.40
Dibromochloromethane ** N/D
Perchloroethylene
0.02
Chlorobenzene
0.01
Ethylbenzene
0.17
m-Xylene
0.50
p-Xylene
0.17
Bromoform
N/D
Styrene **
0.09
Tetrachloroethane **
N/D
o-Xylene
0.21
Cumene *
0.01
Bromobenzene *
N/D
CAPITOL
0.03 N/D
6.03 0.01 0.09 0.03 0.01 0.01 1.06
N/D 0.07 0.49
0.28 1.27 0.14
N/D N/D 0.02 N/D 0.41 N/D N/D N/D
N/D 1.87
0.00 0.00 0.01
N/D
0.08 N/D
0.26 0.68
0.22 N/D
0.14 N/D
0.34 0.02
N/D
CRO
0.07 N/D
3.28 0.01 0.38 0.12
N/D N/D 0.44 N/D 0.08 0.10 0.42 1.95 0.17
N/D N/D 0.02 N/D 0.32 N/D 0.01 N/D N/D 2.41
0.00 0.00 0.01
N/D
0.05 0.01
0.24 0.63 0.21
N/D
0.09 N/D
0.29 0.01
N/D
GEISMAR
0.02
N/D 4.91 0.01 0.83 0.03
N/D N/D
1.85 N/D
0.09 0.41
0.28 2.52 0.18
N/D N/D
0.01 N/D
0.18 N/D
0.01 N/D N/D
2.16 0.00 0.00 0.17
N/D
0.05 0.08
0.56 0.27
0.09 N/D
0.77 N/D
0.14 0.01
N/D
LSU 0.44
N/D 7.33
N/D 0.17
0.05 N/D N/D
3.30 N/D
0.06 0.16 0.23 1.67 0.11
N/D
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.27
N/D N/D N/D N/D 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.62 N/D 0.07
N/D 0.27 0.74
0.25 N/D
0.10 N/D
0.31 0.02
N/D
PORT A.
0.05 N/D
6.71 N/D
0.18 0.07
N/D 0.01 1.60
N/D 0.26 1.10 0.47
2.50 0.22
N/D N/D
0.02 0.03 1.00
N/D 0.06
N/D N/D
3.05 0.00 0.00 0.05
N/D
0.50
0.01 0.37
0.95
0.31 N/D
0.27 N/D
0.44 0.04
N/D
Note: The calibration mixture was changed on 6/19/91 * denotes compound measured from 1/1/91 thru 6/18/91 ** denotes compound measured from 6/19/91 thru 12/31/91 All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
no 1P8718 CONFTDFNTTAt
TAMS SITE COMPARISON
Legend Benzene Ethylbenzene EDO Cartoon tet
All samples analyzed were subjected to qualitative analysis utilizing a computer library search routine to identify each of the chromatographic peaks. In virtually all of the samples analyzed about 95% of the compounds detected were aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons. The pattern of hydrocarbons found in the ambient air is very similar to the classic profile of gasoline. This suggests that mobile sources as well as evaporative emissions are major sources of these compounds in the ambient air. During the warm weather months an increase in the amounts of natural hydrocarbons such as isoprene, and alpha & beta pinene has been observed.
Since the TAMS sites are less expensive to operate, it is desirable to determine if they can generate similar annual average concentrations as observed in the continuous monitoring stations. Since the Baker and Capitol sites have both sampling and analytical systems an easy comparison can be made. When a direct comparison of the data is first made it can be seen that the TAMS data generated at each site is about 20 to 40% higher than the continuous monitoring system data. The most likely cause of this difference is the sampling strategies used in ach of the systems.
Since the hourly concentration observed in the continuous monitoring sites vary diurnally, the eight hour sampling strategy used in the TAMS network will most likely produce a different annual average than a
00
CONFTDFNTTAI
Continuous Monitoring System Data
Averaoina Period # of Samples Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene m+p Xylene o Xylene
Averaoina Period # of Samples Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene m+p Xylene o Xylene
oo oo o
Baker Site 8 Hour Averages
0:00 - 7:00
8:00 - 15:00
1599
1552
2.3 0.7
2.1 0.8
0.1 0.1
0.6 0.2
0.2 0.2
Capitol Site 8 Hour Averages
8:00 - 15:00
2747
2547
1.2 0.8
1.8 1.1
0.2 0.1
0.7 0.4
0.3 0.2
16:00 - 23:00 1645 1.1 1.3 0.1 0.4 0.2
|
16:00 - 23:00 2769 i 0.9 1.5 0.2 0.7 0.3
sampling strategy based upon twenty-four one hour samples. The table above divides the continuous monitoring system data into annual averages for three 8 hour periods. The continuous monitoring system eight hour
averages from the period midnight to 8:00am are then compared in the graph below to the TAMS data which reflect that same sampling strategy.
TAMS versus Continuous Monitoring
0 - 8 am; 8 Hour Averages
Legend
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
imp Xylene
Site
DO 1287?0 CONFTDFNTTAl.
The graph shows that the eight hour annual average concentrations for Baker and Capitol sites are now very comparable to the averages generated by the TAMS samplers.
In conclusion,the TAMS samplers as they are currently operated, will generate annual average concentrations which are somewhat higher than the averages produced by a 24 hour automated gas chromatograph system. Since the TAMS samplers are already running at the low end of their flow range a switch to a twenty-four hour sampling schedule will be difficult to implement accurately.
DO 1, ?B7?1 OONFTDFNT TAl
VI. Canister Data
The canister samples were collected using XonTech Model 911A samplers operated by personnel from the LDEQ Office of Air Quality and Radiation Protection. The samplers were programmed to operate once a week for a twenty-four hour sampling period (midnight to midnight). The two canister samplers currently in operation are located at the Baker and the Capitol sites. Some addition canister samplers are planned to be put in operation at site locations still to be determined. Since the canister sampling and analysis system was only in operation during the last part of 1991 there were only a few samples collected at each site.
The canister samplers were put into operation in October of 1991. A total of 15 samples were collected at the Baker site while 14 samples were collected at the Capitol site. The analysis was performed using a Gas Chromatography/Multidetector system (GC/MD). Due to delays in acquiring the calibration cylinder containing the halogenated volatile organic compounds only the Flame Ionization Detector (FID) was calibrated. The samples were analyzed on the FID using the same calibration standard used in the continuous monitoring stations. Concentrations for total hydrocarbons as were calculated using the total
FID CANISTER DATA
Compound__________________ Propane Butane 2-methylbutane Pentane
2-methylpentane 3-methylpentane Hexane
Methylcyclopentane Benzene 2-methylhexane 2.2.4-trimethylpentane Heptane Methylcyclohexane Toluene Octane Ethylbenzene m+p Xylene o Xylene Cumene 1.2.4-trimethylbenzene Total RH (as Hexane) Total RH (as Methane)
Baker Mean 13.35 7.31 3.43
1.68 1.13 0.79
0.86 0.67
1.12 1.28 0.57
0.45 0.38 1.48 0.19 0.35
0.81 0.30 0.02 0.52
93.88 563.28
Capitol Mean 15.59 10.08 6.56 2.55
1.40 0.95 1.36
0.96 0.96 0.79 0.63 0.52
0.31 1.73 0.19 0.36
1.10 0.42 0.17
0.61 84.59 507.56
area of all the peaks in the chromatogram and dividing by the response factor for hexane. Total hydrocarbons as methane was calculated by multiplying the Total RH(hexane) concentration by a factor of six.
DO 1?87P? CONFTDFNT TAl
In December 1991 the GC/MS analysis system was placed in operation. A total of six samples from each site were analyzed by both the GC/MD and the GC/MS analytical systems. The GC/MS analysis system was calibrated with a 38 component target compound calibration standard with included some of the highly volatile organic compounds such as vinyl chloride. The table below shoe the results of those analyses.
GC/MS Canister Data
CANISTER DATA (6 Samples at each site)
CompoundMean Average Capitol Site
Freon-12
1.21
Chloromethane
1.41
Vinyl Chloride
1.26
Bromomethane
0.17
Chloroethane
0.05
Acetone
5.03
Freon-11
0.63
1.1- dichloroethene
0.00
Methylene Chloride
0.17
Carbon disulfide
0.37
t-1,2-dichloroethene
0.00
1.1- dichloroethane
0.01
2-Butanone
0.68
c-1,2-dichloroethene
0.00
Chloroform
0.08
1.2- dichloroethane
0.42
Methyl Chloroform
0.31
Benzene
0.85
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.14
1.2- dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane
0.02
Trichloroethylene
0.06
c-1,3-dichloropropene
0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone
0.06
t-1,3-dichloropropene
0.00
1.1.2- trichloroethane
0.02
Toluene
2.16
2-Hexanone
0.20
Dibromochloromethane
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.04
Chlorobenzene
0.01
Ethylbenzene
0.24
m-Xylene
0.68
p-Xylene
0.23
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene
0.11
Tetrachloroethane
0.01
o-Xylene
0.31
Mean Average Baker Site 1.76 1.63 0.34 0.05 0.06 6.50 0.58 0.01 0.18 0.28 0.01 0.01 1.34 0.01 0.05 0.24 0.28 0.84 0.15 0.01 0.00 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 1.57 0.84 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.17 0.46 0.46 0.00
0.23 0.23 0.18
DO 1?87?3 CONFIDFNT IA!
Since only a few samples were collected, a comparison of the data generated by the canister based system and the data generated by the automated gas chromatograph system would not produce totally conclusive results. However based on the few samples that were generated it appears that the two analytical systems agree with each other reasonably well.
00 c ONF
1?87?4 Tr)FNTTAl
APPENDIX
DO 1 79,77 5 OONFTDFNT TAI
1991 CAPITOL SITE MONTHLY SUMMARY
MONTH
JANUARY FEBRUARY
Samples
688
Ave. Ambient Temp.
9
Propane
11.9
Butane
9.9
2-Methylbutane
4.5
Pentane
2.0
2-methylpentane
1.2
3-Methylpentane
.6
Hexane
1.0
Methylcyclopentane .5
Benzene
1.2
2-methylhexane
.3
trimethylpentane
.6
Heptane
.3
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene
1.8
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.8
o Xylene
.3
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
1.2
Total RH
37.9
578 12
11.7 16.2
8.4 4.5 1.7
.9 1.4
.6
.9 .4 .5 .3 .2 1.2 .1 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3
56.5
MARCH
714 16
9.7 9.2 5.4 2.2 1.2
.7 1.4
.5 .9 .3 .6 .3 .2 1.4 .1 .2 .5 .2 .1 .3 43.8
APRIL
671 20
6.7 3.8 3.9 1.6 1.0
.6 1.0
.5 .8 .2 .4 .2 .1 1.3 .1 .2 .5 .2 .0 .3 31.6
MAY
681 23
5.4 2.7 2.8 1.3
.8 .5 .8 .3 .7 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.6 .1 .1 .5 .2 .0 .3 27.1
JUNE
502 26
14.1 3.4 M. 5 2.0 1.1 ' .6 1.0 .4 .8 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.3 .0 .1 .5 .3
, *o i .3 32.3
MONTH
JULY
Samples
723
Ave. Ambient Temp. 26
Propane
9.9
Butane
4.2
2-methylbutane
6.0
Pentane
2.6
2-methylpentane
1.4
3-methylpentane
.7
Hexane
1.1
Methylcyclopentane .5
Benzene
.9
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.4
Heptane
.2
Methylcyclohexane Toluene
.2 1.4
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.7
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.0
Trimethylbenzene
.4
Total RH
38.7
AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
698 26 10.7
4.5 6.2 2.6 1.4
.7
1.1 .6
1.4 .3 .4
.2 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .6 .2
.0 .3 40.7
693 23 7.5 9.2 6.7
1.6 1.9
.8 1.3
.6 .8 .4
.5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .7
.3 .6 1.3 48.7
727
19 7.7
9.8 6.5 1.2 1.9
.8 1.9
.8 .9 .4
.5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .7
.3 .1 1.7 47.2
672 12
11.8 9.7 7.1
2.8 2.2
.8 1.4
.8 1.1
.4 .4
.3 .2 1.2 .2 .2 .6 .2
.1 .3 45.4
692 15 11.1 23.0 7.7
4.0 2.3
.9
1.3 .7
1.0 .4 .5
.3 .2 1.8 .1 .2
.8 .3 .0
.3 58.3
Do
CONF
1 TfNTt
A(
1991 BAKER SITE MONTHLY SUMMARY
MONTH
Samples Ave . Ambient Temp. Propane Butane 2-Methylbutane Pentane 2-Methylpentane 3-Methylpentane Hexane Methylcyclohexane Benzene 2-Methylhexane Trimethylpentane Heptane Methylcyclohexane Toluene Octane Ethylbenzene m+p Xylene o Xylene Cumene Trimethylbenzene Total RH
APRIL
28 19 4.1 2.1 2.1 .8 1.0 .6 .6 .5 1.2 .5 .5 .5 .5 .8 .4 .3 .4 .3 .4 .2 27.8
MAY
360 24
3.2 2.4 2.4
.9 .7 .2 .4 .3 .8 .2 .2 .1 .1 1.4 .0 .1 .2 .3 .1 .1 27.5
JUNE
578 25
5.2 4.1 4.3 2.0 1.3
.5 .8 .4 1.6 .3 .3 .2 .3 1.4 .2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .2 40.1
MONTH
JULY
Samples
573
Ave . Ambient Temp. 27
Propane
5.5
Butane
3.2
2-Methylbutane
3.8
Pentane
1.8
2-Methylpentane
1.1
3-Methylpentane
.4
Hexane
.7
Methylcyclopentane .4
Benzene
1.4
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.3
Heptane
.2
Methylcyclohexane
.3
Toluene
1.5
Octane
.3
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.4
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.2
Trimethylbenzene
.2
Total RH
36.9
AUGUST
707 26
7.2 4.7 4.9 2.3 1.4
.5 .9 .5 1.7 .4 .2 .3 .4 1.7 .3 .1 .4 .2 .2 .2 42.6
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
612 22
5.2 2.9 3.3 1.2
.9 .3 .5
.3 1.4
.2 .2 .2 .2
1.3 .3 .1 .4
.2 .1 .2
26.3
653 19
8.3 5.9 4.3 1.8 1.3
.5 .7
.4
1.6 .4 .3 .3 .3
1.6 .3 .1 .5
.3 .1 .3 33.5
668 13
8.5
5.8 3.8 1.4
1.1 .4 .6
.3 1.0
.3 .2 .2 .2
1.2 .2
.1 .4 .2 .1 .5
30.0
617 14
9.0 5.6 3.1 1.3
.9 .4 .6
.3 1.0
.2 .2 .2 .2
1.1 .1 .1 .3 .2 .0 .3
33.9
00 1?87?7 ^onftdfnttai
1991 BAKER SITE DAY-OF-THE-WEEK SUMMARY
DAY_OF_WEEK
SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY
Samples
568
Propane
5.6
Butane
3.7
2-Methylbutane
3.1
Pentane
1.5
2-Methylpentane
.9
3-Methylpentane
.4
Hexane
.6
Methylcyclopentane .3
Benzene
1.3
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.2
Heptane
.2
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene
1.3
Octane
.3
Ethylbenzene
.1
m+p Xylene
.3
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.3
Total RH
30.5
636 6.3 4.7 3.5 1.4 1.0
.4 .6 .3 1.3 .3 .2 .2 .2 1.3 .2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .3 32.6
727
8.3 5.2 4.3 1.9 1.3
.5 .8 .5 1.6 .3 .3 .3 .3 1.6 .3 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3
38.6
744 6.9 4.5 4.2 1.7
1.2 .4 .7 .4
1.3 .3 .2 .2 .3
1.4 .2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .2
34.7
757
6.5 4.0 3.7 1.5 1.1
.4 .6 .3 1.2 .3 .2 .2 .2
1.3 .2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .2
32.5
703 7.0 4.8 4.1 1.8 1.2
.5 .7 .4 1.5 .3 .3 .3 .3 1.5 .2 .1 .4
.3 .1 .3 37.4
661 6.1 4.1 3.6 1.5 1.0
.4
.6 .3 1.2 .2 .2 .2 .2 1.3
.2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .3 32.0
1991 CAPITOL SITE DAY-OF-THE-WEEK ANALYSIS
DAY_OF_WEEK
SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY
Samples
1137
Propane
8.8
Butane
8.3
2-Methylbutane
6.0
Pentane
2.4
2-Methylpentane
1.4
3-Methylpentane
.7
Hexane
1.4
Methylcyclopentane .5
Benzene
.8
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.4
Heptane
.3
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene Octane
1.5 .1
Ethylbenzene m+p Xylene
.1 .5
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene Total RH
.5 40.0
1088 10.2
8.1
6.6 2.8 1.6
.8 1.4
.8
1.0 .4 .5 .3 .2
1.6 .1 .2 .7
.3 .1 .6 45.9
1175 11.3 12.4
6.4
2.9 1.7
.8 1.3
.7
1.1
.3 .5 .3 .2 1.7
.1 .2 .7
.3 .1 .6 49.6
1162 10.4
8.9 6.3 2.4
1.6 .8
1.3 .6
1.1 .3 .5 .3 .2
1.6 .1 .2 .7
.2
.1 .6 45.5
1150 9.5 7.0 4.9 2.1
1.3 .7
1.1 .5 .9 .3
.5 .2
.2 1.4
.1 .2
.6
.3 .1 .7
39.3
1123 8.8 6.7
4.4 1.6 1.3
.6 1.0
.5 .8 .2 .4 .2 .1 1.3 .1 .2
.6 .2 .1 .5
34.8
1228 9.1
10.0
5.9 2.4 1.6
.7 1.1
.6 1.0
.3 .4 .2 .2 1.4 .1 .1
.5 .2 .1 .5 41.3
DO 17B778 OONFTDFNTTAl
1991 BAKER SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS
HOUR
0
Samples
204
Propane
9.9
Butane
7.2
2-Methylbutane
5.4
Pentane
2.6
2-Methylpentane
1.9
3-Methylpentane
.7
Hexane
1.1
Methylcyclopentane .7
Benzene
2.4
2-Methylhexane
.5
Trimethylpentane
.3
Heptane
.4
Methylcyclohexane
.6
Toluene
2.2
Octane
.3
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.6
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.3
Total RH
50.6
1
202 11.3
7.2 5.3 2.6 1.7
.7 1.1
.7 2.5
.4 .3 .4 .6 2.2 .3 .1 .6 .2 .1 .3 50.3
2
205 11.3
6.4 4.9 2.4 1.7
.7 1.1
.7 2.5
.4 .3 .4 .5 2.1 .2 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3 48.0
3
199 11.4
6.2 4.9 2.3 1.5
.7 1.0
.6 2.3
.4 .3 .3 .5 1.9 .2 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3 46.5
4
197 11.7
6.3 4.8 2.2 1.5
.6 1.0
.6 2.1
.3 .2 .3 .5 1.8 .2 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3 46.2
5
197 12.0
6.0 4.8 2.3 1.5
.6 1.0
.6 2.2
.4 .3 .3 .5 2.0 .2 .1 .6 .2 .1 .2 46.3
6
199 12.9
6.8 5.1 2.6 1.8
.7 1.1
.7 2.5
.4 .4 .4 .6 2.5 .2 .2 .8 .3 .1 .3 52.8
7
196 11.3
5.5 4.6 2.2 1.4
.6 .9 .5 1.9 .4 .3 .3 .4 1.9 .2 .2 .6 .2 .1 .3 43.5
HOUR
8
Samples
193
Propane
9.1
Butane
4.9
2-Methylbutane
3.8
Pentane
1.6
2-Methylpentane
1.1
3-Methylpentane
.4
Hexane
.7
Methylcyclopentane .4
Benzene
1.2
2-Methylhexane
.2
Trimethylpentane
.3
Heptane
.2
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene
1.3
Octane
.2
Ethylbenzene
.1
m+p Xylene
.4
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.2
Total RH
35.7
9
180 5.0 3.8 3.4 1.1
.8 .3 .5 .3 .8 .2 .2 .1 .1 .9 .2 .1 .2 .2 .1 .2 29.1
10
182 4.1 3.2 3.0 1.0
.8 .3 .4 .2 .6 .2 .2 .1 .1 .8 .2 .1 .2 .2 .1 .3 24.7
11
192 3.5 2.7 2.7
.9 .7 .3 .5 .2 .6 .2 .2 .1 .1 .7 .3 .2 .2 .3 .1 .3 23.0
12
196 2.9 2.4 2.6
.8 .6 .2 .3 .2 .6 .2 .1 .1 .1 .7 .3 .1 .2 .2 .1 .3 21.0
13
196 2.5 2.1 2.4
.5 .5 .2 .2 .1 .5 .1 .1 .1 .0 .5 .3 .0 .1 .2 .1 .3 18.7
14
206 2.4 1.9 2.3
.6 .5 .2 .2 .1 .5 .1 .1 .1 .0 .6 .3 .0 .1 .2 .1 .2 18.4
15
207 2.4 1.8 2.3
.6 .5 .2 .3 .1 .5 .2 .1 .1 .0 .6 .2 .1 .2 .2 .1 .2 19.4
DO OONF
9 t^>FNTT A!
1991 BAKER SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS (CONT)
HOUR
16 17 18 19 20 21
Samples
206
Propane
2.7
Butane
2.3
2-Methylbutane
2.7
Pentane
.9
2-MethylPentane
.6
3-MethylPentane
.2
Hexane
.3
Methylcyclopentane .1
Benzene
.6
2-Methylhexane
.2
Trimethylpentane
.1
Heptane
.1
Methylcyclohexane
.0
Toluene
.8
Octane
.2
Ethylbenzene
.1
m+p Xylene
.2
o Xylene
.2
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.2
Total RH
22.1
205 2.9
2.4 2.7
1.0 .7
.3 .4 .2 .7 .2 .2
.1
.1 1.0
.2 .1 .3 .2 .1 .3 23.8
207 2.9 2.5 2.9 1.5
.8 .3 .4 .2 .8 .2 .2
.1 1.1
.2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .2 24.6
206 4.5 3.6
3.5 1.6
.9 .4 .5 .3 1.0 .3 .2 .1 .1 1.3
.2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .2 29.0
207
4.0 3.7
3.5 1.7 1.1
.4 .6 .3 1.0 .3 .3 .2 .2 1.3
.2 .1 .4 .2 .1 .3 29.8
202 5.2 5.4
4.3 1.7 1.2
.5 .6 .4 1.2
.3 .3 .2 .2 1.4
.2 .1
.5 .2 .1 .3 33.8
22
206 7.4 6.4 4.7 2.1 1.5
.6 .8 .5 1.6 .4 .3 .2 .3 1.7 .2 .2 .6 .2 .1 .3 41.0
23
206 8.2 6.3 4.9 2.1 1.4
.6 .9 .5 1.7 .4 .3 .3 .3 1.7 .2 .1 .5 .2 .1 .3 41.8
Oo
OO/VF
]2*730
tofnj
1991 CAPITOL SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS
HOUR
0
Samples
343
Propane
10.2
Butane
10.9
2-Methylbutane
6.6
Pentane
3.0
2-methylpentane
1.6
3-Methylpentane
.8
Hexane
1.6
Methylcyclopentane .7
Benzene
1.1
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.6
Heptane
.3
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene
1.8
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.8
o Xylene
.3
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.7
Total RH
49.6
1
344 10.5
9.7 5.7 2.3 1.4
.8 1.5
.6 1.0
.3 .6 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .7 46.0
2
343 11.3
9.0 6.3 3.0 1.6
.8 2.0
.7 1.2
.3 .5 .3 .2 2.2 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .7 50.4
3
345 12.4 14.5
7.8 3.2 1.8
.9 1.9
.8 1.4
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .7 .2 .1 .6 57.2
4
342 11.5 12.2
6.8 3.1 1.8
.9 1.8
.7 1.2
.3 .5 .3 .2 1.5 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .6 52.0
5
345 12.0 14.7
7.1 3.3 1.8
.9 1.7
.8 1.1
.3 .4 .3 .2 1.5 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .5 53.6
6
341 16.5 13.6
8.0 3.7 2.1 1.1 1.9
.8 1.2
.4 .6 .4 .3 2.0 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .6 63.0
7
344 29.2 14.2
8.1 3.9 2.1 1.1 2.0
.9 1.4
.5 .7 .4 .4 2.3 .2 .3 1.0 .5 .1 .7 75.3
HOUR
8
Sample
333
Propane
13.1
Butane
8.7
2-Methylbutane
7.7
Pentane
3.2
2-Methylpentane
2.1
3-Methylpentane
1.0
Hexane
1.7
Methylcyclopentane .9
Benzene
1.2
2-Methylhexane
.5
Trimethylpentane
.7
Heptane
.4
Methylcyclohexane
.3
Toluene
2.1
Octane
.2
Ethylbenzene
.3
m+p Xylene
.9
0 Xylene
.3
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.6
Total RH
55.6
9
280 8.7 8.9 6.2 2.2 1.6
.8 1.2
.7 1.0
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .6 .3 .1 .5 43.1
10
291 6.8 6.4 4,8 1.9 1.4
.6 .9 .5 .9 .2 .4 .2 .2 1.3 .1 .1 .5 .2 .1 .4 33.7
11
316 5.6 6.0 4.7 1.5 1.2
.5 .7 .4 .7 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.0 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .4 28.5
12
325 4.9 5.4 4.2 1.7 1.1
.4 .6 .3 .7 .2 .2 .1 .1 .9 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .4 26.5
13
330 4.6 5.4 4.4 1.4 1.0
.4 .6 .2 .6 .2 .2 .1 .1 .9 .1 .1 .2 .1 .1 .4 24.9
14
334 4.5 4.4 3.6 1.3
.9 .4 .5 .2 .6 .1 .2 .1 .1 .8 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .5 22.8
15
338 4.5 4.3 3.4 1.1
.9 .3 .4 .2 .6 .1 .2 .1 .1 .8 .0 .1 .3 .1 .1 .5 21.3
HO 178731 CONFIDFNTIAl
1991 CAPITOL SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS (CONT)
HOUR
16
Samples
346
Propane
4.8
Butane
3.9
2-Methylbutane
3.3
Pentane
1.2
2-Methylpentane
.9
3-Methylpentane
.4
Hexane
.6
Methylcyclopentane .2
Benzene
.7
2-Methylhexane
.2
Trimethylpentane
.3
Heptane
.1
Methylcyclohexane
.1
Toluene
.9
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.1
m+p Xylene
.4
o Xylene
.1
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.5
Total RH
23.0
17
349 5.9 5.1 4.2 1.6 1.1
.5 .7 .3 .7 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.1 .1 .1 .4 .2 .1 .5 27.1
18
347 7.1 7.2 5.5 2.4 1.4
.6 .9 .5 .9 .3 .4 .2 .1 1.3 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .6 35.8
19
349 8.1 8.2 5.6 2.0 1.5
.6 1.0
.5 1.0
.3 .4 .2 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .6 39.5
20
345 8.6 7.8 5.5 2.2 1.6
.7 1.2
.6 .9 .3 .5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .3 1.0 .3 .1 .7 42.2
21
345 9.4 9.2 6.2 2.2 1.7
.9 1.4
.7 1.0
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .7 45.6
22
343 9.9 10.1 6.2 2.5 1.7
.9 1.4
*7 1.1
.4 .6 .3 .2 1.8 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 i.7 47.8
23
345 11.7 10.5
6.7 2.7 1.7
.9 1.5
.7 1.2
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.8 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .7 48.6
DO 178732 OONFIDFNT T At
1991 CAPITOL SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS
HOUR
0
Samples
343
Propane
10.2
Butane
10.9
2-Methylbutane
6.6
Pentane
3.0
2-Methylpentane
1.6
3-Methylpentane
.8
Hexane
1.6
Methylcyclopentane .7
Benzene
1.1
2-Methylhexane
.3
Trimethylpentane
.6
Heptane
.3
Methylcyclohexane
.2
Toluene
1.8
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.2
m+p Xylene
.8
o Xylene
.3
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.7
Total RH
49.6
1
344 10.5
9.7 5.7 2.3 1.4
.8 1.5
.6 1.0
.3 .6 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .7 46.0
2
343 11.3
9.0 6.3 3.0 1.6
.8 2.0
.7 1.2
.3 .5 .3 .2 2.2 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .7 50.4
3
345 12.4 14.5
7.8 3.2 1.8
.9 1.9
.8 1.4
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .7 .2 .1 .6 57.2
4
342 11.5 12.2
6.8 3.1 1.8
.9 1.8
.7 1.2
.3 .5 .3 .2 1.5 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .6 52.0
5
345 12.0 14.7
7.1 3.3 1.8
.9 1.7
.8 1.1
.3 .4 .3 .2 1.5 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .5 53.6
6
341 16.5 13.6
8.0 3.7 2.1 1.1 1.9
.8 1.2
.4 .6 .4 .3 2.0 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .6 63.0
7
344 29.2 14.2
8.1 3.9 2.1 1.1 2.0
.9 1.4
.5 .7 .4 .4 2.3 .2 .3 1.0 .5 .1 .7 75.3
HOUR
8
Samples
333
Propane
13.1
Butane
8.7
2-Methylbutane
7.7
Pentane
3.2
2-Methylpentane
2.1
3-Methylpentane
1.0
Hexane
1.7
Methylcyclopentane .9
Benzene
1.2
2-Methylhexane
.5
Trimethylpentane
.7
Heptane
.4
Methylcyclohexane Toluene
.3 2.1
Octane
.2
Ethylbenzene
.3
m+p Xylene o Xylene Cumene
.9 .3 .1
Trimethylbenzene Total RH
.6 55.6
9
280 8.7 8.9 6.2 2.2 1.6
.8 1.2
.7 1.0
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .6 .3 .1 .5 43.1
10
291 6.8 6.4 4.8 1.9 1.4
.6 .9 .5 .9 .2 .4 .2 .2 1.3 .1 .1 .5 .2 .1 .4 33.7
11
316 5.6 6.0 4.7 1.5 1.2
.5 .7 .4 .7 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.0 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .4 28.5
12
325 4.9 5.4 4.2 1.7 1.1
.4 .6 .3 .7 .2 .2 .1 .1 .9 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .4 26.5
13
330 4.6 5.4 4.4 1.4 1.0
.4 .6 .2 .6 .2 .2 .1 .1 .9 .1 .1 .2 .1 .1 .4 24.9
14
334 4.5 4.4 3.6 1.3
.9 .4 .5 .2 .6 .1 .2 .1 .1 .8 .1 .1 .3 .1 .1 .5 22.8
15
338 4.5 4.3 3.4 1.1
.9 .3 .4 .2 .6 .1 .2 .1 .1 .8 .0 .1 .3 .1 .1 .5 21.3
0 1PB733 CONFIDFNt TA1
1991 CAPITOL SITE DIURNAL ANALYSIS (CONT)
HOUR
16
Samples
346
Propane
4.8
Butane
3.9
2-Methylbutane
3.3
Pentane
1.2
2-Methylpentane
.9
3-Methylpentane
.4
Hexane
.6
Methylcyclopentane .2
Benzene
.7
2-Methylhexane
.2
Trimethylpentane
.3
Heptane
.1
Methylcyclohexane
.1
Toluene
.9
Octane
.1
Ethylbenzene
.1
m+p Xylene
.4
o Xylene
.1
Cumene
.1
Trimethylbenzene
.5
Total RH
23.0
17
349 5.9 5.1 4.2 1.6 1.1
.5 .7 .3 .7 .2 .3 .1 .1 1.1 .1 .1 .4 .2 .1 .5 27.1
18
347 7.1 7.2 5.5 2.4 1.4
.6 .9 .5 .9 .3 .4 .2 .1 1.3 .1 .2 .6 .2 .1 .6 35.8
19
349 8.1 8.2 5.6 2.0 1.5
.6 1.0
.5 1.0
.3 .4 .2 .2 1.6 .1 .2 .7 .3 .1 .6 39.5
20
345 8.6 7.8 5.5 2.2 1.6
.7 1.2
.6 .9 .3 .5 .3 .2 1.6 .1 .3 1.0 .3 .1 .7 42.2
21
345 9.4 9.2 6.2 2.2 1.7
.9 1.4
.7 1.0
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.7 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .7 45.6
22
343 9.9 10.1 6.2 2.5 1.7
.9 1.4
.7 1.1
.4 .6 .3 .2 1.8 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .7 47.8
23
345 11.7 10.5
6.7 2.7 1.7
.9 1.5
.7 1.2
.4 .5 .3 .2 1.8 .1 .2 .8 .3 .1 .7 48.6
Oo CONp-
tT4,i
CAPITOL SITE TAMS DATA
Compound
Mean Averaoe
Acrylonitrile *
0.03
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
6.03
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.01
Methylene Chloride **
0.09
Carbon disulfide **
0.03
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.01
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.01
2-Butanone **
1.06
c-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.07
1,2-dichloroethane
0.49
Methyl Chloroform
0.28
Benzene
1.27
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.14
1,2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.00
Trichloroethylene
0.02
1-Heptene *
0.00
n-Heptane *
0.41
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.00
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
1.87
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.01
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.08
Chlorobenzene
0.00
Ethylbenzene
0.26
m-Xylene
0.68
p-Xylene
0.22
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.14
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.34
Cumene *
0.02
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.08 0.04
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
0.00 0.00
Maximum
0.41 0.00 25.00 0.07 0.64
0.13 0.12 0.11 3.16
0.05 0.48 5.22 0.77 4.96 0.35 0.01 0.04 0.21
0.08 1.12 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 8.44
0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.66 0.07
1.23 3.70 1.23
0.01 0.62 0.06 1.69
0.10 0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
DO 138735 CONFTDFNTTAl
BAKER SITE TAMS DATA
ComDound
Mean Averaae
Acrylonitrile *
0.01
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
3.27
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.00
Methylene Chloride **
0.03
Carbon disulfide **
0.04
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.00
2-Butanone **
4.44
c-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.04
1,2-dichloroethane
0.11
Methyl Chloroform
0.23
Benzene
2.39
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.10
1,2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.00
Trichloroethylene
0.03
1-Heptene *
0.02
n-Heptane *
0.30
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.01
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
1.63
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.40
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.02
Chlorobenzene
0.01
Ethylbenzene
0.17
m-Xylene
0.50
p-Xylene
0.17
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.09
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.21
Cumene *
0.01
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
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 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.04
0.01
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00
0.00
Maximum
0.06 0.00 15.80 0.01 0.35 0.16 0.00
0.00 20.16
0.00
0.19 0.61 2.20 8.17 0.21 0.04 0.00 0.52 0.14
0.80 0.03 0.27
0.04 0.01 5.59 0.00 0.00 2.70 0.00 0.07
0.03 0.55 1.65
0.55 0.00
0.26 0.03 0.88 0.05 0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
DO 1?8736
conftdfnttai.
GEISMAR SITE TAMS DATA
Coiroound
Mean Averaae
Acrylonitrile *
0.02
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
4.91
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.01
Methylene Chloride **
0.83
Carbon disulfide **
0.03
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.00
2-Butanone **
1.85
c-1,2-dichlorbethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.09
1,2-dichloroethane
0.41
Methyl Chloroform
0.28
Benzene
2.52
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.18
1,2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.00
Trichloroethylene
0.01
1-Heptene *
0.00
n-Heptane *
0.18
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.01
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
2.16
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.17
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.05
Chlorobenzene
0.08
Ethylbenzene
0.56
m-Xylene
0.27
p-Xylene
0.09
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.77
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.14
Cumene *
0.01
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
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 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.01 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maxim
0.12 0.00
23.28 0.08 6.58 0.12
0.00 0.02
22.25 0.02
0.31 1.81 1.07 13.56 0.46 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.57 0.00
0.03 0.00 0.00 13.77
0.00 0.00 2.41 0.00 0.29
0.53 9.13 0.71
0.24 0.00
6.09 0.01 0.41 0.06
0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
DO 178737 OONFTDFNTTAl
L S U SITE TAMS DATA
Compound
Mean Averaoe
Acrylonitrile *
0.44
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
7.33
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.00
Methylene Chloride **
0.17
Carbon disulfide **
0.05
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.00
2-Butanone **
3.30
c-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.06
1,2-dichloroethane
0.16
Methyl Chloroform
0.23
Benzene
1.67
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.11
1, 2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.01
Trichloroethylene
0.01
1-Heptene *
0.01
n-Heptane *
0.27
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.00
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
1.67
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.62
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.07
Chlorobenzene
0.00
Ethylbenzene
0.27
m-Xylene
0.74
p-Xylene
0.25
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.10
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.31
Cumene *
0.02
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02
0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.02
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00
Maxim
8.40
0.00 26.61
0.03 1.32 0.27
0.Q0 0.01 20.7.8
0.01 0.39 2.13 0.57
5.91 0.35 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.78 0.00 0.09 o.of) 0.02
8.06 0.04
0.00 3.15 0.00 0.63 0.04
1.18 3.73 1.24
0.00 0.70 0.03 1.57
0.08 0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
00 1P8738
confidfntiai
PORT ALLEN SITE TAMS DATA
CamDOund
Mean Averaoe
Acrylonitrile *
0.05
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
6.71
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.00
Methylene Chloride **
0.18
Carbon disulfide **
0.07
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.01
2-Butanone **
1.60
c-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.26
1,2-dichloroethane
1.10
Methyl Chloroform
0.47
Benzene
2.50
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.22
1,2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.00
Trichloroethylene
0.02
1-Heptene *
0.03
n-Heptane *
1.00
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.06
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
3.05
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.05
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.50
Chlorobenzene
0.01
Ethylbenzene
0.37
m-Xylene
0.95
p-Xylene
0.31
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.27
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.44
Cumene *
0.04
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
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 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.02
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05
0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02
0.00 0.00
Maxim
0.28
0.00 33.63
0.02 1.20 0.34 0.00 0.04 9.83 0.01 2.40 9.83 1.97 24.14
1.06 0.02 0.04 0.19 0.31 4.34 0.00 0.62
0.00 0.01 24.90 0.06 0.04 1.09 0.00 11.60 0.29
2.68 7.65 2.55
0.00 0.78 0.01 3.64 0.23 0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
00 1?8739 C0NFlOENTrAl
CAPITOL REGIONAL OFFICE SITE TAMS DATA
ComDOund
Mean Averacre
Acrylonitrile *
0.07
Allyl Chloride *
0.00
Acetone **
3.28
1,1-dichloroethene **
0.01
Methylene Chloride **
0.38
Carbon disulfide **
0.12
t-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
1,1-dichloroethane **
0.00
2-Butanone **
0.44
c-1,2-dichloroethene **
0.00
Chloroform
0.06
1,2-dichloroethane
0.10
Methyl Chloroform
0.42
Benzene
1.95
Carbon Tetrachloride
0.17
1,2-dichloropropane
0.00
Bromodichloromethane **
0.00
Trichloroethylene
0.02
1-Heptene *
0.00
n-Heptane *
0.32
c-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
4-methyl-2-pentanone **
0.01
t-1,3-dichloropropene ** 0.00
1,1,2-trichloroethane ** 0.00
Toluene
2.41
1,3-dichloropropane *
0.00
Ethylene Dibromide *
0.00
2-Hexanone **
0.01
Dibromochloromethane **
0.00
Perchloroethylene
0.05
Chlorobenzene
0.01
Ethylbenzene
0.24
m-Xylene
0.63
p-Xylene
0.21
Bromoform
0.00
Styrene **
0.09
Tetrachloroethane **
0.00
o-Xylene
0.29
Cumene *
0.01
Bromobenzene *
0.00
Minimum
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 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.07
0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00
Maximum
0.76 0.00
12.69 0.08 2.81 0.53 0.00 0.04 1.51 0.06 0.27
0.80 2.06 8.19 1.32 0.06 0.07
0.09 0.06 0.68 0.02 0.07
0.00 0.01 9.51 0.02 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.25 0.08
0.69 1.84
0.61 0.00
0.29 0.01 0.76 0.05 0.00
Note:
* denotes compound measured prior to 6/19/91 ** denotes compound measured after 6/19/91
All other compounds were measured during the entire year.
00 cnft ofnttai
DO 1 2 8 7 4 1
OONFTDFNTTA1
Frequency Distribution of Benzene Concentrations - Baker Site
Frequency Distribution of Benzene Concentrations - Capitol Site
o m to o> cn io oq
d dd d ^ ^
Cone. PPBV
i h i m-H h+i 111 h i i n i f 1111 h n m n wh
too
to
to to
cn to
04
in i--'
o ro to cn
CO OO CO O) o"> cn cn
178743
O O N P ID F N T T A I
Frequency Distribution of Total Hydrocarbon Concentrations - Capitol Site
Cone. PPBV