air quality modelin reporg t south kingstown .../harvey/mt-0066g.rpt table of contents section page...

AIR QUALITY MODELING REPORT ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL

SOUTH KINGSTOWN, RHODE ISLAND NOVEMBER 1992

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE

AIR QUALITY MODELING REPORT ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL

SOUTH KINGSTOWN, RHODE ISLAND NOVEMBER 1992

U.S. EPA Work Assignment No.: 3-694 Weston Work Order No.: 3347-33-01-4694

U.S. EPA Contract No.: 68-03-3482

Prepared by: Prepared for:

Roy F^Wjston, Inc. / REAC U.S. EPA / ERT

Thomas H. Pritchett Gregory MA Work Assignment Manager Subtask LeadeV

W. Scort Buiterfield Projec{_Manager

/HARVEY/MT-0066G.RPT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

LIST OF TABLES ii LIST OF FIGURES iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Site Background 1 1.2 Objective 1

2.0 METHODS 2

3.0 METEOROLOGICAL DATA 2

4.0 EMISSIONS DATA 3

5.0 RESULTS 3

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A WIND ROSE RESULTS APPENDIX B DISPERSION MODEL OUTPUT FOR WIND DIRECTIONS AT 10-DEGREE

INCREMENTS (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) APPENDIX C DISPERSION MODEL OUTPUT FOR WIND DIRECTIONS AT 22.5-DEGREE

INCREMENTS (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1Table 2Table 3Table 4

Table 5

Emission Rates for the Compounds of Concern, Summa Canister Analysis Volatile Organic Compound Concentrations, Summa Canister Analysis Maximum Predicted One-Hour Concentrations (ng/m3) of Volatile Organic Compounds Predicted Average Annual Concentrations (ng/m3) of Volatile Organic Compounds Using the

Regulatory Screening Procedure Predicted Average Annual Concentrations (ng/m3) of Volatile Organic Compounds Using the

Region Specific Meteorological Conditions

L r f ;


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Map

f1

li

/HARVEY/MT-0066G.RPT Hi

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report describes the dispersion modeling of area emissions from the solid waste section of the Rose Hill Regional Landfill Site in South Kingstown, Rhode Island. The report provides a brief background and describes the methods for obtaining emission estimates to be used in the dispersion model.

Two modeling approaches are used to describe the average annual downwind concentrations of the constituents of interest. These methods include the use of the Point, Area, and Line (PAL) dispersion model and are described in Sections 2 and 3.

1.1 Site Background

The Rose Hill Regional Landfill Site is located in South Kingstown, Rhode Island. The landfill site encompasses three areas containing sewage sludge, bulk waste, and solid waste. The landfill covers approximately 70 acres total 28 of which are used (113,312 square meters) for solid waste disposal.

i; The solid waste portion of the landfill opened in 1967 and received variable amounts of waste annually. The landfill was closed in 1982 at a capacity of approximately 150,000 tons (136,080 Megagrams [Mg]). During its operation, the landfill received both domestic and industrial wastes.

Figure 1 shows a site map of the solid waste portion of the landfill and the neighboring residences which are the focus of this study. The site is situated on the east side of Rose Hill Road and is bordered to the north and south by private residential property, and by the Saugatucket River to the east.

I!

Recently there has been concern about off-site migration of landfill gases. Of particular concern is the migration of combustible methane gas from the solid waste section of the landfill to neighboring residences. A related issue of concern is the emission and migration of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the solid waste section of the municipal landfill. This interest prompted a modeling study investigating the transport of landfill emissions. The Figure 1 map indicates the locations of 10 residences. These locations were used as receptors in this modeling study.

0 Landfill gas surveys of VOC concentrations at perimeter locations revealed elevated concentrations of benzene, toluene, and vinyl chloride, with trace amounts of other compounds. The measured VOC concentrations were used in models to estimate the emissions from the landfill.

i 1.2 Objective The objective of this modeling study was to determine the downwind dispersion of VOCs from the municipal solid waste landfill. The results of the emission modeling report were used in this study to obtain maximum hourly and annual concentrations at the downwind receptors. The results of this modeling study will be used to estimate downwind ambient impacts.

The compounds of concern for modeling purposes were identified as: vinyl chloride, trichloroethene, benzene, and toluene.


2.0 METHODS

The PAL dispersion model is used to estimate the air quality impact of gas-phase emissions on environments with simple terrain. The model provides hourly concentrations at those receptors of interest. It computes downwind concentrations using specific meteorological conditions, i.e., wind speed, wind direction, stability classification, and mixing height.

The PAL model is preferred over other Gaussian dispersion models because of its superior algorithms for handling vertical dispersion from area sources. In addition, the PAL model offers the convenience of having rectangular area sources of varying length and width dimensions, whereas other models limit the user to square sources which must be arranged to replicate the source's size and shape.

A major drawback with the PAL model is with the meteorological input section. The meteorological section requires the conditions for each hour to be keyed in instead of read in from user flies like other models. In addition, PAL will only allow for 24 different meteorological conditions with each model run. A year's worth of data would then require 365 model runs for each constituent. For these reasons, the model is only convenient as a screening tool (despite its superior algorithms).

The PAL model was selected to calculate simplified but realizable dispersion estimates. The information used to define the model run include:

• Source type = two area sources • Source height = 0 meters (m) • Source size = 56656 square meters (m2) each • Receptor locations = 10 neighboring homes (Figure 1)

The modeling for this project was set up to maximize the rectangular dimensions within the area such that the site was rotated 13.25° clockwise. Meteorological data was altered to compensate for this convention. The area was then represented by two large rectangular areas which accounted for the variation of emission rates from the northern and southern sections of the landfill.

The locations of the 10 closest residences were used as receptors in the model. All model runs were performed in rural mode for the meteorological data described in the following section.

3.0 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

This study used two methods of obtaining downwind concentrations, the regulatory approach and an investigative approach. Regulatory procedures require a selection of the worst of 33 possible meteorological combinations when performing a screening analysis. The worst possible meteorological condition is selected by running the model for all of the scenarios and using that which predicts the highest concentration for each receptor. This value reflects the maximum hourly concentration expected at each receptor. The maximum hourly value is then factored to provide concentrations over longer averaging periods (multiplied by 0.15 for 1 year).

The investigative approach used meteorological data obtained at Providence, RI, through the 19861991 period. Annual wind roses for the period were composed into a 6-year wind rose (Appendix A). The composite wind rose provides the percent occurrence of each wind speed and direction. The percent occurrence was used to factor the results for each of the receptors. The factored concentrations were summed to provide the annual average. Since percent occurrences of stability are not calculated by the wind rose program, the stability condition which produced the highest concentration at each receptor for each wind direction was used.

/HARVEY/MT-0066G.RPT 2

4.0 EMISSIONS DATA

Emission values provided in the Revised Emissions Modeling Report, November 1992, were used for this study. Emission rates for the modeling of each compound are defined in Table 1. The values in this table represent the upper confidence limit (95th percentile) of Summa canister results for each constituent. The values were convened into flux emissions to be used in the PAL model. The values were calculated using the following equation:

Flux ( ?& \ = jTfjl!lsv Afg_ 56656 m3.1536 x 107 —

t Where: Flux = the emission rate in micrograms per square meter per second (ug/nr-sec) Er - the emission rate in megagrams per year (Mg/yr) 1012 = micrograms to Megagrams (ug/Mg) conversion factor

L" 3.1536 x 10' = seconds to year (sec/year) conversion factor 56656 = area of half the landfill (in square metersfm2])

l; Actual values reported in the November 1992 Revised Emissions Modeling Report are presented in (I

Table 2. (The above equation may be used to convert the Table 2 values into those presented in Table 1.)

The emissions investigation suggested that the landfill was better represented as two sources since the emission rates varied noticeably from north to south. This accounts for the value of 56656 nr in the denominator of the equation.

Dividing the landfill in such a manner provides a more realizable description of the dispersion but requires pollutant specific model set up. Therefore, the results cannot be factored to obtain dispersion concentrations for different emission rates.

The PAL model predicts receptor concentrations in grams per cubic meter for emission rates given in grams. Since the emission values were so small, they were input as micrograms per square meter per second to retain significant digits. Therefore, the model calculates concentrations in micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), not in grams per cubic meter as written in the model output.

5.0 RESULTS

The output of all PAL model runs may be found in Appendices B and C (under separate cover). Appendix B (C) provides the model output information for wind directions at 10-degree (22.5-degree) increments. The output includes the predicted concentrations for each receptor, under the combinations of meteorological conditions specified in each record. The maximum 1-hour concentrations for each constituent of interest are provided in Table 3. The results indicate that Receptor 1 receives the maximum exposure of all constituents. The highest predicted concentration was for vinyl chloride at 190.4 ug/m3 (0.07448 parts per million {ppm}); this value is below the 1 ppm time-weighted average (TWA). The other constituents fell several orders of magnitude below their respective TWA values.

The maximum 1-hour concentration were multiplied by 0.15 to give the regulatory screening average annual concentrations. These values are presented in Table 4 where the vinyl chloride concentration is 28.56 ug/m3 (0.01117 ppm).

/HARVEY/MT-0066G.RPT 3

The average annual values using the wind direction-weighted approach are provided in Table 5. These values are of the same order of magnitude as those calculated using the regulatory approach. However, the direction weighted approach predicted higher (lower) average annual concentrations for receptors located directly to the north (east) and south (west) as winds blew in those directions more (less) often. Evidence of this is indicated in the wind rose results.

F II


Tables

TABLE 1 EMISSION RATES FOR THE COMPOUNDS OF CONCERN

SUMMA CANISTER ANALYSIS ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL

SOUTH KINGSTOWN, RI NOVEMBER 1992

Compound Emission Rate in yg/m2-s

North Section South Section

Vinyl Chloride 2.132 4.405 x 10°

Benzene 1.126 x 10'2 3.509 x 10°

Trichloroethylene 2.737 x lO'2 2.455 x 10°

Toluene 3.974 x 10'2 3.515 x 10-3

I!


TABLE 2 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS

SUMMA CANISTER ANALYSIS ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL


Compound Concentration in ppmv

North Section South Section

Vinyl Chloride 1159.44 2.40

TCE 7.09 0.84

trans-1,2 DCE 8.54 1.02

cis-1,2 DCE NA NA

Benzene 4.91 1.53

Toluene 14.70 1.30

Ethylbenzene 5.95 1.43

NMOCs NA NA

TCE = Trichloroethene trans-1,2 DCE = trans-1,2 Dichloroethene cis-1,2 DCE = cis-1,2 Dichloroethene NMOCs = Nonmethane Organic Compounds ppmv = Paris Per Million, Volume NA = Not Available


Receptor

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

D fi

TABLE 3 MAXIMUM PREDICTED ONE-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS (ng/m3)

OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL


Benzene

1.055

0.6180

0.5024

0.4698

0.6148

0.4416

0.5967

0.4345

0.5273

0.3308

Trichloroethylene

2.478

1.457

1.222

1.141

1.495

1.074

1.447

0.7825

1.278

0.8033

Toluene

3.597

2.115

1.774

1.656

2.171

1.559

2.102

1.134

1.856

1.167

Vinyl Chloride

190.4

112.1

95.17

88.79

116.4

83.65

112.6

52.53

99.43

62.54


TABLE 4 PREDICTED AVERAGE ANNUAL CONCENTRATIONS (|ig/m3)

OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS USING THE REGULATORY SCREENING PROCEDURE

ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL

Receptor Benzene

1 0.1583

2 0.09270

3 0.07536

4 0.07047

5 0.09222

6 0.06624

7 0.08951

8 0.06518

9 0.07910

10 0.04962


Trichloroethylene

0.3717

0.2186

0.1833

0.1712

0.2243

0.1611

0.2171

0.1174

0.1917

0.1205

Toluene

0.5396

0.3173

0.2661

0.2484

0.3257

0.2339

0.3153

0.1701

0.2784

0.1751

Vinyl Chloride

28.56

16.815

14.28

13.32

17.46

12.55

16.89

7.880

14.91

9.381


Receptor

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

I. D I:

TABLES PREDICTED AVERAGE ANNUAL CONCENTRATIONS (|ig/m3)

OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS USING THE REGION SPECIFIC METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS

ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL SOUTH KINGSTOWN, RI

NOVEMBER 1992

Benzene

0.2064

0.03915

0.03983

0.03881

0.07696

0.04792

0.07530

0.04422

0.1402

0.07105

Trichloroeihylene

0.4794

0.08737

0.08443

0.08321

0.1719

0.1050

0.1464

0.06656

0.3248

0.1613

Toluene

0.6961

0.1268

0.1225

0.1208

0.2495

0.1523

0.2124

0.09632

0.4715

0.2341

Vinyl Chloride

36.66

6.567

6.1%

6.203

12.92

7.856

10.29

3.929

24.81

12.23


Figures

SOLID WASTE

AREA

FIGURE 1 SITE MAP

ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL GRAPHIC SCALE SOUTH KINGSTOWN. RI

0 100 200 OCTOBER 19-20, 1992

US EPA ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE TEAM RESIOENCES(RECEPTOR LOCATION)

APPENDIX A WIND ROSE RESULTS

ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL SOUTH KINGSTOWN, RI

NOVEMBER 1992

r


PROVIDENCE, RI YEAR: 1986

10.. 58

10 . 26

a. 40 5 . 73

5 .23

— iT i i

6 . 74

0 li

a: 0 3 6 10 16

SCALE (KNOTS) WIND SPEED (KNOTS)

N

NNE

NE

ENE

E

ESE

SE

SSE

0-3

0.78

0.41

0.44

0.34

0.35

0.25

0.30

0.43

2.20

0.92

1.05

0.75

0.61

0 40

0.61

1.15

5-10 3.68

1.97

1.92

1.4S

0.92

0.49

O.B1

1.96

6 . 4O

21 99

PERCENT OCCURRENCE 10-16 3.65

1.87

1.26

0.53

0.40

0 14

0.31

1.80

16-21 0.29

0.40

0.42

0.02

0.05

0.02

0.05

0.17

O . O B

0.15

0.14

0.00

0.00

0 00

0.00

0.01

10|.

I

03

S

SSW

SM

WSH

W

HNW

NM

NNH

5 . 54

MINO SPEED0-3

0.90

0.48

0.53

0.59

0.85

0.75

0.58

0 .41

3-6 2.36

1.35

1.26

1.83

2.48

1.93

1.61

1.47

(KNOTS)6-10

4.09

2.17

1.75

2.35

4.30

3.22

2.55

2.42

PERCENT OCCURRENCE 10-16 2.24

1.52

2.37

1.63

1.94

3 44

3.22

1.83

16-21

0.22

0.22

0.27

0.27

0.25

0.65

0.39

0.38

0.03

0.07

0.22

0.06

0.05

0.27

0.06

0.02


1 1 . 39 L

7 . 85

9 . 22 5 . 79 ^âi

5.71

9.16 \X \\ ^

^^ ÔV\^^ l̂ ̂S l̂ 2.39 10-17 -T-^ -̂̂ H

t^mif >•« e . 64 ^n

i \\ 2.11

4 . 53 \>

n 4 . 64 6 .08 1 1r

Li 9|. S3

,1 i i l 1 1 |' 1 1 1 1 | 0 3 6 10 16 21 99

SCALE (KNOTS)

WIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE MIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE 0-3 3-6 6-10 10-JE 1E-Z! *2! 0-3 3-6 6-10 10-16 16-21 î:

N 0.51 1.80 4.20 4.08 0.64 0.16 S 1.26 3.25 3.33 1.85 0.10 0.03

NNE 0.32 0.92 1.87 2.13 0.46 O.OS SSW 0.50 1.54 1.44 1.03 0.09 0.05

NE 0.37 1.22 2.05 1.75 0.30 0.02 SM 0.44 1.19 1.84 1.03 0.03 0.00

ENE 0.30 0.71 1.32 0.48 0.03 0.00 WSH 0.65 1.77 2.51 1.52 0.19 0.00

E 0.31 0.83 0.88 0.31 0.03 0.02 W 0.88 2.67 4.41 2.04 0.16 0.01

ESE 0.29 0.58 0.59 0.11 0.06 0.00 WNW 0.74 1.76 3.03 3.05 0.51 0.08

SE 0.27 0.83 0.66 0.33 0.00 0.01 NW 0.59 1.54 3.16 3.28 0.59 0.06

SSE 0.60 1.51 2. IB 1.62 0.08 0.09 NNW 0.56 1.76 2.97 2.09 0.35 0.13


7,. as

8. 74

10 . 33

1 . 97

1 . 43 i _ -I

13 . 74 J I f"

0 3 6 10 16 21 99

SCALE (KNOTS)

WIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE WIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE 0-3 3-6 6-10 10-16 16-21 0-3 3-6 6-10 10-16 16-21

N 0 37 1 74 2 73 Z 57 0 44 0 00 S 0 82 3 96 5 12 3 45 0 38 0 01

NNE 0 14 0 68 1 23 1 78 0 17 0 03 SSW 0 40 1 83 2 49 2 52 0 34 0 07

NE 0 17 0 65 1 42 1 43 0 22 0 02 SW 0 38 1 58 2 44 2 61 0 48 0 05

ENE 0 19 0 59 0 76 0 38 0 05 0 01 WSH 0 46 1 90 2 60 2 54 0 36 0 01

E 0 14 0 48 0 55 0 19 0 05 0 02 M 0 47 2 30 4 51 2 61 0 52 0 07

ESE 0 17 0 24 0 39 0 14 0 07 0 02 MNM 0 39 1 67 3 59 3 77 0 81 0 10

SE 0 27 0 50 0 63 0 33 0 05 0 02 NM 0 35 1 65 2 63 3 37 0 66 0 08

SSE 0 34 1 26 1 86 1 57 0 16 0 00 NNW 0 30 1 20 2 35 2 11 0 47 0 02

PROVIDENCE. RI YEAR: 1989

9'. IB

7 .86 5.57 I] 5.40

5.11

9 . 82

3.31

9 . 53 2 . O8

1 . 32

7 . 68 2 . 3O

r 7 . 74 6 . 63

5 . 24

11.23

c

0 3 E 10 16

SCALE (KNOTS)

N

NNE

NE

ENE

E

ESE

SE

SSE

WIND SPEED (KNOTS)0-3

0.69

0.35

0.30

0.31

0.28

0.16

0.2B

0.45

3-6 2.12

0.98

1.06

1.05

0.77

0.69

0.83

1.62

6-10

3.40

2.21

1.9S

1.16

0.79

0.41

0.94

1.77

21 99

PERCENT OCCURRENCE

2.52

1.53

1.43

0.78

0.24

0.06

0.23

1.36

16-21 0.43

0.31

0.30

0.01

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.05

0.03

0.02

0.05

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

S

SSW

SW

WSH

H

HNW

NW

NNM

HIND

0-3 0.95

0.64

0.66

0.73

0.71

0.40

0.46

0.44

SPEED3-6

3.53

2.04

2.01

1.95

2.27

1.86

1.47

1.55

(KNOTS)

6-10

3.89

1.98

2.32

2.46

3.92

3.38

2.25

1.85

PERCENT10-16 2.51

1.46

2.10

2.01

2.29

3.21

2.93

1.37

OCCURRENCE 16-21 0.25

0.37

0.54

0.47

0.31

0.78

0.63

0.29

0.10

0.15

0.09

0.05

0.03

0.18

0.12

0.07


r 7 .55

5 .44 7 . 5O 7 4 .59

5 . 02 y\ < î

8 . 80 N\ \\ &/>N As 3 . 53

^^^N^^^^NQ^T ̂ ^A^^^A*^ 9-3? -n- j a-^.j L^ggL 2-.2B Egr] TT U 3= *~^5"^

W ...5 *=* l̂ \± 2.15

V £/ "" //I 5.41 9.56 J

7.88 ^ I

11 .50

I | | 1 | 1 1r • 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 6 10 16 21 99

SCALE (KNOTS)

WIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE HIND SPEED (KNOTS) PERCENT OCCURRENCE 0-3 3-6 5-10 10-16 16-21 >21 0-3 3-6 6-10 10-16 16-21 >21

N 0.43 1.74 2.67 2.29 0.35 0.06 S 0.80 3.15 4.34 2.73 0.38 0.10

NNE 0.19 0.84 1.95 1.30 0.27 0.03 SSW 0.71 2.00 2.37 2.04 0.69 0.10

NE 0.27 0.90 2.11 1.62 0.10 0.01 SW 0.63 2.01 2.76 3.01 0.81 0.33

ENE 0.23 0.94 1.44 0.89 0.03 0.00 WSH 0.53 1.90 2.73 2.39 0.35 0.08

E 0.24 0.80 0.90 0.33 0.00 0.00 H 0.46 2.19 3.84 2.44 0.39 0.05

ESE 0.29 0.50 0.46 0.19 0.01 0.00 WNW 0.46 1.70 2.64 2.82 0.91 0.27

SE 0.34 0.73 0.79 0.25 0.03 0.01 NW 0.40 1.34 2.37 2.56 0.73 0.10

S5E 0.40 1.34 2.01 1.51 0.14 0.02 NNN 0.27 1.28 1.76 1.67 0.39 O.OB


1 1 . O5

8 . 15

7 .43

5 . 65

5 . 77

8.21 3 . 86

'-' Hl-t i= 2 . 83

8 .

r 8 O7 5 .64 3 . 82 8 . 64

a: 1 I0 3 6 10 16

SCALE (KNOTS)

N

NNE

NE

ENE

E

ESE

SE

SSE


0 82

0 41

0 37

0 28

0 47

0 22

0 24

0 33

3 E 2 74

1 03

0 98

1 05

0 97

0 49

0 70

1 19

6 10 4 43

1 40

2 04

1 51

1 00

0 41

0 50

1 19

I 21 99

PERCENT10 16 2 79

1 56

1 86

0 88

0 34

0 10

0 17

1 03

OCCURRENCE 16 21 0 25

0 23

0 34

0 13

0 01

0 00

0 01

0 OB

0 02

0 02

0 17

0 02

0 03

0 00

0 01

0 00

S

SSW

SW

NSW

W

WNW

NW

NNW

WIND

0 3 0 85

0 47

0 60

0 66

0 76

0 49

0 59

0 58

SPEED3 £

2 60

2 15

2 49

2 19

2 93

1 94

1 85

1 67

(KNOTS)

6 10 3 39

1 74

2 42

2 91

3 58

2 95

2 87

2 55

PERCENT10 IE 1 67

1 14

2 27

2 33

2 13

2 20

2 42

2 28

OCCURRENCE 16 21 0 11

0 11

0 26

0 30

0 19

0 51

0 35

0 32

0 02

0 03

0 02

0 01

0 03

0 11

0 07

0 03

YEAR:PROVIDENCE, RI 1986 THROUGH 1991

I

9|. 62

9 . 42

8. 31 6 .54

5 . 20

5 . 12

3.11

' • 0-3_ _ n —II __ ii _ ^— L [̂ = 2 . 22

7 . 55

7 . 32

6 . 39 5 .21

1O1 . 83

3 I0 3 6 10 16

SCALE (KNOTS)

N

NNE

NE

ENE

E

ESE

SE

SSE


0 60

0 30

0 31

0 28

0 30

0 23

0 28

0 42

3-6 2 06

0 90

0 98

o as 0 74

0 48

0 70

1 34

6-10

3 52

1 94

1 92

1 28

0 84

0 46

0 72

1 83

I" 21 99

PERCENT10-16

2 98

1 70

I 56

0 66

0 30

0 12

0 27

1 48

OCCURRENCE 16-21

0 40

0 31

0 28

0 05

0 02

0 03

0 03

0 11

0 06

0 06

0 07

0 01

0 01

0 00

0 01

0 02

S

ssw

SW

WSH

w

MNM

NH

NNN

HINO0-3

0 93

0 54

0 56

0 61

0 68

0 53

0 49

0 42

SPEED3-6

3 18

1 82

1 76

1 92

2 47

1 81

1 58

1 49

(KNOTS)6-10

4 03

2 03

2 25

2 59

4 09

3 13

2 64

2 32

PERCENT'0-16

2 41

1 62

2 23

2 07

2 24

3 08

2 96

1 69

OCCURRENCE 16-21 0 24

0 30

0 40

0 33

0 30

0 70

0 56

0 37

0 05

0 08

0 12

0 03

0 04

0 17

0 08

0 06

air quality modelin reporg t south kingstown .../harvey/mt-0066g.rpt table of contents section page...

Documents