DOCSLIB.ORG

Characterizing Risks Posed by Petroleum Contaminated Sites: Implementation of the MADEP VPH/EPH Approach October 31, 2002 Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Characterizing Risks Posed by Petroleum Contaminated Sites: Implementation of the MADEP VPH/EPH Approach October 31, 2002 Policy COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500 JANE M. SWIFT BOB DURAND Governor Secretary LAUREN A. LISS Commissioner Characterizing Risks Posed by Petroleum Contaminated Sites: Implementation of the MADEP VPH/EPH Approach FINAL POLICY October 31, 2002 Policy #WSC-02-411 This Policy provides guidance for parties conducting response actions under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) on the use and application of the Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons (VPH) and Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) methods to characterize risks posed by releases of petroleum products to the environment. This Policy updates and replaces draft documents that were issued on October 31, 1997 and June 2001. Parties who are currently using criteria and guidance contained in the June 2001 draft document may do so until May 1, 2003. A summary of significant changes between these earlier drafts and this Final Policy is provided in Appendix 6. The information contained in this document is intended solely as guidance. This Policy does not create any substantive or procedural rights, and is not enforceable by any party in any administrative proceeding with the Commonwealth. This Policy provides recommendations and guidance on approaches the Department considers acceptable for meeting the performance standards set forth in the MCP and discussed in this document. These performance standards include, but are not limited to, the Response Action Performance Standards of section 310 CMR 40.0191 of the MCP. Parties using this guidance should be aware that there may be other acceptable alternatives for achieving and documenting compliance with the general regulatory requirements and performance standards of the MCP, including those of 310 CMR 40.0191. The regulatory citations in this document should not be relied upon as a complete list of the applicable regulatory requirements. This Policy and further information on the development and application of the aliphatic/aromatic hydrocarbon evaluative technique employed by the Department, referred to as the “VPH/EPH” approach, may be obtained at http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwsc/vph_eph.htm 10/31/02 Signature on Original Date Deirdre C. Menoyo Assistant Commissioner Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup This information is available in alternate format. Call Aprel McCabe, ADA Coordinator at 1 DEP on the World Wide Web: http://www.mass.gov/dep Printed on Recycled Paper Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope ……..............................................................................................................… 1 1.3 Applicability ................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.1 Site Closure on or after October 31, 1997 ……………………………………………… 2 1.3.2 Site Closure Prior to October 31, 1997 …………………………………………………. 2 2.0 SUMMARY OF THE VPH/EPH APPROACH ............................................................................................. 2 2.1 The Concept .................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Hydrocarbon Fractions of Interest ................................................................................................ 3 2.3 Relationship of VPH/EPH to TPH and Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) ................................... 4 2.4 Additional Research and Data Needs ............................................................................................ 5 3.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Gas Chromatography .................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 MADEP Analytical Methodologies .............................................................................................. 6 3.2.1 Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons (VPH) ....................................................................... 7 3.2.2 Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) .................................................................. 8 3.2.3 Air-Phase Petroleum Hydrocarbons (APH) .................................................................... 8 3.3 VPH/EPH Target Analytes ............................................................................................................. 9 3.4 Sampling Procedures and Requirements for the VPH/EPH Methods ........................................... 9 3.5 Modifications of the VPH/EPH Methods ........................................................................................ 10 3.6 Data Quality and Report Content .................................................................................................. 11 3.7 Other Hydrocarbon Testing Methods ……………………………………………………………. 13 3.7.1 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons ………………………………………………………… 13 3.7.2 Environmental Forensic Techniques …………………………………………………… 14 3.8 Analytical Screening Techniques .................................................................................................. 15 3.8.1 Principles of Operation, Biases, and Calibration ............................................................. 17 3.8.2 Recommended Approach ................................................................................................. 17 3.9 Drinking Water Testing Methods ..................................................................................................... 18 4.0 CLEANUP STANDARDS ........................................................................................................................... 18 4.1 Exposure Point Concentrations ......................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 Groundwater EPCs ............................................................................................................ 19 4.1.2 Soil EPCs ............................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.3 Indoor Air EPCs ................................................................................................................. 20 4.2 Method 1 Cleanup Standards ......................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Using Method 1 VPH/EPH Fractional Standards ............................................................ 21 4.2.2 Target Analytes ................................................................................................................ 22 4.2.2.1 Petroleum Product Additives.............................................................................. 22 4.2.2.2 Petroleum Product Additives as Target Analytes …………………………….. 23 4.2.2.3 Ethanol …………………………………………………………………………. 23 4.2.2.4 Additional Petroleum Additives ………………………………………………. 24 4.2.3 Hydrocarbon Fractions of Interest ................................................................................... 25 4.2.4 Limitations on the Use of Method 1 Cleanup Standards ................................................. 26 4.2.4.1 Hydrocarbons ...................................................................................................... 26 4.2.4.2 Additives ............................................................................................................ 26 4.2.4.3 Air-Phase Contamination .................................................................................... 26 4.2.5 Odors ............................................................................................................................... 26 4.3 Method 2 Risk Characterization .................................................................................................... 27 4.3.1 Using a Method 2 Approach to Demonstrate “No Impact” to Indoor Air ....................... 28 4.3.1.1 Level 1 - Soil Gas Screening ............................................................................. 29 4.3.1.2 Level 2 - Soil Gas Analysis ............................................................................... 30 Table of Contents (continued) 4.3.1.3 Level 3 - Indoor Air Analysis ............................................................................. 32 4.3.1.4 Use of Vapor Transport Models ………………………………………………. 33 4.3.1.5 Vertical Profiling of Groundwater Contaminants to Evaluate Vapor Transport .. 34 4.3.1.6 Response Actions at Sites with Indoor Air Impacts ........................................... 34 4.3.2 Using a Method 2 Approach to Evaluate Exceedences of GW -3 Method 1 Standards ..... 34 4.3.3 Using a Method 2 Approach to Evaluate Leaching .......................................................... 37 4.4 Method 3 Risk Characterization ..................................................................................................... 38 4.4.1 Requirements and Limitations of a Method 3 Characterization .......................................... 38 4.4.2 Impacts to Indoor Air ....................................................................................................... 39 4.4.3 Odors as a Significant
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Isobutylene Polymer Having Unsaturated Group and Preparation
    Europaisches Patentamt European Patent Office Office europeen des brevets (11) EP 0 452 875 B2 (12) NEW EUROPEAN PATENT SPECIFICATION (45) Date of publication and mention (51) |nt CI.6: C08F 10/10, C08F 2/42 of the opposition decision: 18.08.1999 Bulletin 1999/33 (45) Mention of the grant of the patent: 09.08.1995 Bulletin 1995/32 (21) Application number: 91106042.4 (22) Date of filing: 16.04.1991 (54) Isobutylene polymer having unsaturated group and preparation thereof Isobutylenpolymer mit ungesattigter Gruppe und seine Herstellung Polymere de I'isobutylene ayant un groupe insature et sa preparation (84) Designated Contracting States: (74) Representative: BE CH DE ES FR GB IT LI NL SE Hansen, Bernd, Dr. Dipl.-Chem. et al Hoffmann Eitle, (30) Priority: 16.04.1990 JP 10102990 Patent- und Rechtsanwalte, 29.11.1990 JP 33636490 Postfach 81 04 20 81904 Miinchen (DE) (43) Date of publication of application: 23.10.1991 Bulletin 1991/43 (56) References cited: EP-A- 0 265 053 EP-B- 0 322 241 (73) Proprietor: Kanegafuchi Chemical Industry Co., CA-A- 467 049 GB-A- 1 059 580 Ltd. US-A- 4 31 6 973 US-A- 4 327 201 Kita-ku Osaka-shi Osaka-fu (JP) US- A- 4 524 1 88 US-A- 4 758 63 1 US-A- 4 929 683 (72) Inventors: • Noda, Koji Remarks: Kobe-shi, Hyogo-ken (JP) The file contains technical information submitted • Fujisawa, Hiroshi after the application was filed and not included in this Kobe-shi, Hyogo-ken (JP) specification • Yonezawa, Kazuya Kobe-shi, Hyogo-ken (JP) CM DO 10 Is- 00 CM IO ^- o a.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Vulcanization Systems for Butyl Rubber and Halobutyl Rubber Manual
    Exxon™ butyl and halobutyl rubber Model vulcanization systems for butyl rubber and halobutyl rubber manual Country name(s) 2 - Model vulcanization systems for butyl rubber and halobutyl rubber manual Model vulcanization systems for butyl rubber and halobutyl rubber manual - 3 Abstract The vulcanization of isobutylene-co-isoprene rubber (IIR), brominated isobutylene-co-isoprene rubber (BIIR), chlorinated isobutylene-co-isoprene rubber (CIIR), and brominated isobutylene-co-para-methylstyrene elastomer (BIMSM) differs from that of general-purpose rubbers (GPR). Butyl rubber has approximately 2% unsaturation in the backbone. Halobutyl rubber (BIIR and CIIR) incorporates the butyl backbone with either bromine or chlorine, which significantly increases the chemical reactivity of the isoprenyl units located in the butyl backbone. Similarly, in BIMSM the bromine atom is bonded to the para-methylstyrene (PMS) group, thus affording the completely saturated polymer backbone a site of chemical reactivity. Utilization of the unique attributes of butyl rubber and halobutyl rubbers with their minimal backbone unsaturation and of BIMSM elastomers with no backbone unsaturation is found in many areas of industry. These properties are excellent vapor impermeation, resistance to heat degradation, and improved chemical resistance as compared to general-purpose rubbers. However, this low amount of reactivity requires special consideration to vulcanize these isobutylene-based polymers. The type of vulcanization system selected is a function of the composite structure in which it is used, and the cured product performance requirements. Therefore, vulcanization systems vary and may include an accelerator package along with resins, zinc oxide, zinc oxide and sulfur, and quinoid systems. This review will discuss the types and selection of appropriate vulcanization systems for isobutylene-based elastomers.
    [Show full text]
  • FID Vs PID: the Great Debate
    5/5/2017 FID vs PID: The Great Debate 2017 Geotechnical, GeoEnvironmental, and Geophysical Technology Transfer April 11, 2017 Raleigh, NC Why is it Important? As consultants, we are expected to produce data that is Reliable Repeatable Representative Defensible We can only meet these criteria if we understand the instruments we use and their limitations 1 5/5/2017 PID=Photo Ionization Detector Non-destructive to the sample Responds to functional groups Can operate in non-oxygen atmosphere Does not respond to methane Affected by high humidity FID=Flame Ionization Detector Destructive to the sample Responds to carbon chain length Must have oxygen to operate Responds to methane Not affected by high humidity 2 5/5/2017 Combination FID/PID TVA 1000B Main Concepts Ionization Energy Minimum amount of energy required to remove an electron from an atom or molecule in a gaseous state Response Factors The response factor is a calculated number provided by the instrument manufacturer for each compound, which is used to calculate the actual concentration of said compound in relation to the calibration gas. 3 5/5/2017 Ionization Energy Basis for FID/PID operations and measurement Measurements are in electron volts (eV) Ionization in a PID Energy source for ionization with PID is an ultraviolet light Three UV lamp energies are used: 9.5 eV, 10.6 eV, and 11.7 eV The higher the lamp energy, the greater the number of chemicals that can be detected. Detection range of 0.1 to 10,000 ppm 4 5/5/2017 Ionization in a FID Energy source for ionization
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Production, Import/Export, Use, and Disposal
    METHYL tert-BUTYL ETHER 163 4. PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL During the 1970s EPA moved to phase out leaded gasolines and to reduce the levels of air pollution from pre- or post-combustion vehicular emissions. This conversion to unleaded fuels tended to reduce the octane ratings. Additives such as benzene or toluene could increase octane levels, but these aromatic volatile organic compounds could lead to serious air pollution problems due to their known toxic properties. Various highly oxygenated blending agents, including several ethers and alcohols, can boost the octane of unleaded gasoline and, since they are less toxic, can mitigate many of the air pollution concerns. MTBE is one such product used in Reformulated Gasoline (RFG). Some states started requiring the seasonal use of RFGs in the 197Os, and this became a requirement for many parts of the country under provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act. This requirement led to a rapid expansion in the production and use of MTBE starting in the late 1980s. 4.1 PRODUCTION Typical production processes use feedstocks like isobutylene, often in combination with methanol, in adiabatic fixed reactors. The isobutylene and methanol react in the presence of ion-exchange resin catalysts at medium pressures and temperatures. Highly volatile by-products are removed through distillation, and methanol is reclaimed using water washing or molecular sieves. In a variant of this basic technology called reaction distillation, the catalysis and distillation steps take place simultaneously (Shanely 1990). There are numerous variants in these manufacturing processes, the details of which are protected under patents or license agreements (Lorenzetti 1994; Rhodes 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • Minimizing Isobutylene Emissions from Large Scale Tert-Butoxycarbonyl Deprotections
    Organic Process Research & Development 2005, 9, 39−44 Minimizing Isobutylene Emissions from Large Scale tert-Butoxycarbonyl Deprotections Eric L. Dias,* Kevin W. Hettenbach, and David J. am Ende Process Safety and Reaction Engineering Laboratory, Pfizer Global Research and DeVelopment, Eastern Point Road, Groton, Connecticut 06340 Abstract: with scavengers1,7,8 such as thiophenol1,7 to form an unre- Isobutylene off-gas amounts liberated during the methane- active byproduct, 3a; however, in an industrial setting, this sulfonic acid-catalyzed deprotection of N-BOC-pyrrolidine in can be prohibitive in terms of cost, worker exposure, and THF, methanol, ethanol, 2-propanol, toluene, and dichlo- added purification. romethane were measured using on-line gas-phase mass spec- In the absence of a powerful scavenger, 1 can be trapped troscopy. While one full equivalent of isobutylene was released in other manners. When trifluoroacetic acid is used, reaction as an off-gas when THF was used as the reaction solvent, with the conjugate base can form the tert-butyl trifluoroac- emissions were reduced by 65-95% in other solvents. In alcohol etate ester, 3b;6,7,8a,9 however this typically will not occur solvents, the corresponding alkyl tert-butyl ethers are formed with methanesulfonic or other nonnucleophilic strong acids. as byproducts of the reaction as expected. In dichloromethane It has also been noted that water and alcohols will encourage and toluene, oligomers of isobutylene can be formed under the formation of tert-butyl alcohol2a,11b or the corresponding alkyl reaction conditions. These results provided the basis for tert-butyl ethers, 3c,10,11 which may provide a practical developing an effective acid/toluene scrubber for isobutylene approach to reducing isobutylene emissions but will be that was successfully employed on the pilot plant scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformation of Phenanthrene by Mycobacterium Sp. ELW1 and the Formation of Toxic Metabolites
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Jill E. Schrlau for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Engineering presented on September 20, 2016. Title: Transformation of Phenanthrene by Mycobacterium sp. ELW1 and the Formation of Toxic Metabolites. Abstract approved: _____________________________________________________________________ Lewis Semprini Staci Simonich The ability of Mycobacterium sp. ELW1, a novel microbe capable of alkene oxidation, to co-metabolize phenanthrene (PHE) was studied. ELW1 was able to completely co-metabolize PHE, at different concentrations below its water solubility limit, in an aqueous environment. The alkene monooxygenases in ELW1, used to initiate oxidation of PHE, were effectively inhibited by 1-octyne despite some PHE transformation observed. PHE metabolites consisted of only hydroxyphenanthrenes (OHPHEs) with trans-9,10-dihydroxy-9,10-dihydrophenanthrene (trans-9,10-PHE), the primary product, comprising more than 90% of the total metabolites formed in both PHE-exposed cells and 1-octyne controls. Mass balance was estimated by summing the zero-order formation rates of OHPHE metabolites and comparing these to the zero-order transformation rates PHE in PHE-exposed cells. The transformation rates of PHE and were in good agreement with the formation rates of the metabolites. PHE transformation followed first-order rates that, when normalized by biomass, were in the range of those estimated by the ratio of the Michaelis-Menten kinetic variables of maximum transformation rate (kmax) to the half-saturation constant (KS). Estimated values for kmax to KS obtained through both non-linear and linearization methods resulted in kmax/KS estimates that were a factor of ~3 lower compared to experimental values.
    [Show full text]
  • Correction Factors, Ionization Energies, and Calibration Characteristics for BW Rigrat Monitors
    Technical Note TN-106D 202005/TM Correction Factors, Ionization Energies, And Calibration Characteristics For BW RigRat Monitors Correction Factors & Ionization Energies* Photoionization Detector sensors (PIDs) can be used for the detection of a wide variety of gases that exhibit different responses. In general, any compound with ionization energy (IE) lower than that of the lamp photons can be measured.* The best way to calibrate a PID to different compounds is to use a standard of the gas of interest. However, correction factors have been determined that enable the user to quantify a large number of chemicals using only a single calibration gas, typically isobutylene. In our PIDs, correction factors can be used in one of three ways: 1. Calibrate the monitor with isobutylene in the usual fashion to read in isobutylene equivalents. Manually multiply the reading by the correction factor (CF) to obtain the concentration of the gas being measured. 2. Calibrate the unit with isobutylene in the usual fashion to read in isobutylene equivalents. Call up the correction factor from the instrument memory or download it from a personal computer and then call it up. The monitor will then read directly in units of the gas of interest. 3. Calibrate the unit with isobutylene, but input an equivalent, “corrected” span gas concentration when prompted for this value. The unit will then read directly in units of the gas of interest. * The term “ionization energy” is more scientifically correct and replaces the old term “ionization potential.” High-boiling (“heavy”) compounds may not vaporize enough to give a response even when their ionization energies are below the lamp photon energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Olefins from Biomass Intermediates: a Review
    catalysts Review Review OlefinsOlefins fromfrom BiomassBiomass Intermediates:Intermediates: AA ReviewReview 1 1,2, VasilikiVasiliki Zacharopoulou Zacharopoulou1 andand AngelikiAngeliki A.A. LemonidouLemonidou 1,2,** 1 Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, 1 Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Thessaloniki 54124, Greece; [email protected] 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece; [email protected] 2 Chemical Process Engineering Research Institute (CERTH/CPERI), P.O. Box 60361 Thermi, 2 Chemical Process Engineering Research Institute (CERTH/CPERI), P.O. Box 60361 Thermi, Thessaloniki 57001, Greece 57001 Thessaloniki, Greece * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +30‐2310‐996‐273 * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +30-2310-996-273 Received: 16 November 2017; Accepted: 19 December 2017; Published: Received: 16 November 2017; Accepted: 19 December 2017; Published: 23 December 2017 Abstract:Abstract: Over the last decade, increasing demand for olefinsolefins and theirtheir valuablevaluable productsproducts hashas promptedprompted researchresearch onon novelnovel processesprocesses andand technologiestechnologies forfor theirtheir selectiveselective production.production. As olefinsolefins are predominatelypredominately dependent on fossil resources, their production is limited by thethe finitefinite reservesreserves and the associated economic and environmental concerns.concerns. The need for alternative routes for
    [Show full text]
  • SAFETY DATA SHEET Flammable Gas Mixture: 1,2-Butadiene / 1,3-Butadiene / 2-Butene / Isobutylene
    SAFETY DATA SHEET Flammable Gas Mixture: 1,2-Butadiene / 1,3-Butadiene / 2-Butene / Isobutylene Section 1. Identification GHS product identifier : Flammable Gas Mixture: 1,2-Butadiene / 1,3-Butadiene / 2-Butene / Isobutylene Other means of : Not available. identification Product use : Synthetic/Analytical chemistry. SDS # : 020092 Supplier's details : Airgas USA, LLC and its affiliates 259 North Radnor-Chester Road Suite 100 Radnor, PA 19087-5283 1-610-687-5253 24-hour telephone : 1-866-734-3438 Section 2. Hazards identification OSHA/HCS status : This material is considered hazardous by the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200). Classification of the : FLAMMABLE GASES - Category 1 substance or mixture GASES UNDER PRESSURE - Compressed gas ACUTE TOXICITY (inhalation) - Category 4 GERM CELL MUTAGENICITY - Category 1B CARCINOGENICITY - Category 1 GHS label elements Hazard pictograms : Signal word : Danger Hazard statements : Extremely flammable gas. Contains gas under pressure; may explode if heated. May form explosive mixtures in Air. May displace oxygen and cause rapid suffocation. Harmful if inhaled. May cause genetic defects. May cause cancer. Precautionary statements General : Read and follow all Safety Data Sheets (SDS’S) before use. Read label before use. Keep out of reach of children. If medical advice is needed, have product container or label at hand. Close valve after each use and when empty. Use equipment rated for cylinder pressure. Do not open valve until connected to equipment prepared for use. Use a back flow preventative device in the piping. Use only equipment of compatible materials of construction. Approach suspected leak area with caution. Prevention : Obtain special instructions before use.
    [Show full text]
  • Sids Initial Assessment Profile
    SIAM 19, 19-22 October 2004 NL/ICCA SIDS INITIAL ASSESSMENT PROFILE 106-98-9 1-Butene CAS No. 107-01-7 2-Butene 590-18-1 cis-2-Butene and 624-64-6 trans-2-Butene 115-11-7 Isobutylene (2-Methylpropene) Chemical Name 25167-67-3 Butene, mixed isomers 106 -98-9 CH2=CH-CH2-CH3 107-01-7 CH3-CH=CH-CH3 (contains cis- and trans- forms) CAS Numbers 590-18-1 CH3-CH=CH-CH3 (cis- form) with 624-64-6 CH3-CH=CH-CH3 (trans- form) Structural Formula 115-11-7 CH2=C(-CH3)2 25167-67-3 Contains all butene structures above SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS OF THE SIAR Category/Analogue Rationale (if appropriate) The Butenes Category includes six CAS numbers that are similar from a process and toxicology perspective. Each substance within this category is a C4 olefin or contains a mixture of selected C4 olefins that are produced from a reaction and/or separation activity in an olefins chemical plant. Four CAS numbers describe different C4 isomers, each is a hydrocarbon with the same chemical formula and one double bond between two carbon atoms. Two CAS numbers describe mixtures of C4 olefins that contain either two or all four different isomers. The six substances share relatively similar physico-chemical properties, which suggests that their environmental fate will be similar. The chemicals are expected to have similar kinetic properties because of similar physical-chemical properties. No specific target organ was identified and no or minimal changes in body weight were found at the highest dose only for all the butenes.
    [Show full text]
  • Factorization Methods Applied to Characterize The
    ORIGINAL PAPER International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 2016;29(1):15 – 39 http://dx.doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00509 FACTORIZATION METHODS APPLIED TO CHARACTERIZE THE SOURCES OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN MONTREAL, QUEBEC EUGENIUSZ PORADA1 and TERMEH KOUSHA2 1 University of Québec at Outaouais, Gatineau, Canada Department of Computer Science 2 Ottawa University, Ottawa, Canada Department of Mathematics and Statistics Abstract Objectives: The study objective was to assemble emission characteristics of the sources of the ambient volatile organic com- pounds (VOCs) and to elaborate methods of organizing them into the sources’ chemical profiles. Material and Methods: The UNMIX – sensor modeling method from the U.S. Environment Protection Agency (EPA) – was used to process the VOC concentration data acquired over the years 2000–2009 for 175 VOC species in 4 air quality monitoring stations in Montreal, Quebec. Results: The method enabled to assess VOC emissions from the typically distributed sources exist- ing in urban environment and VOC occurrences characterizing the local, or point-like, sources. The distributed sources were inextricably associated with hydrocarbons from exhaust, heavier hydrocarbons from contaminated urban soil, fugi- tive evaporations of gasoline and liquefied petroleum gases (LPG), leakage from the industrial and commercial use of solvents, and the inert, ozone depleting gases permeating urban atmosphere. The sources’ profiles were charted involv- ing 60–120 VOC species per source. Spatial distribution of the sources was examined. Conclusions: The UNMIX applica- tion and the source profiling methods, by building robust chemical profiles of VOC sources, provided information that can be used to assign the measured VOC emissions to physical sources.
    [Show full text]
  • US2801271.Pdf
    N- 2,801,271 United States Patent Office Patented July 30, 1957 2 separate an overhead fraction consisting predominantly of para-Xylene and a bottoms fraction comprising ter tiary-butyl-meta-xylene, tertiary-butyl-ethylbenzene, and 2,801,271 tertiary-butyl-ortho-xylene. The bottoms fraction is then XYLENE SEPARATION PROCESS contacted with a catalytic cracking catalyst at a tem perature above about 600 F. and it is found that the ter Maurice J. Schlatter, El Cerrito, Calify assignor to Cali tiary-butyl group is quite selectively cracked from the fornia Research Corporation, San Francisco, Calif., a tertiary-butyl xylenes and tertiary-butyl-ethylbenzene to corporation of Delaware - produce predominantly isobutene and the xylenes. The Application March 17, 1951, Serial No. 216,244 0 isobutene is separated from the reaction product of the cracking step and returned to the alkylation step together 9 Claims. (CI. 260-674) with further quantities of the crude xylene feed. The contact of the bottoms fraction of the alkylation reaction product with the cracking catalyst is desirably This invention relates to an integrated process for re 15 accomplished simply by feeding this bottoms fraction to covering individual xylene isomers from crude Xylenes gether with a usual cracking charge stock to a catalytic and producing a blended high octane gasoline containing cracking Zone. For example, this fraction may be fed the undesired xylene isomers. to a catalytic cracking Zone together with a straight run Crude xylene fractions are produced in commercial gas oil boiling in the range about 400 to 850 F. In the quantities by hydroforming naphthenic petroleum distill 20 cracking Zone both the alkylation bottoms fraction and lates and by fractionating the liquid product produced the gas oil are contacted with a cracking catalyst, for ex during the coking of coal.
    [Show full text]