CORRESPONDENCE_1984-1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

stale of California Memorandum To Ray Menebroker, Manager Date January 11, 1984 SourceEvaluation Section Subject Sampling at Forward, Inc. Class II-1 Landfill in Stockton Janette Munson, Source Evaluation Section Rich Vincent, Technology Assessment Section / .? Stationary Source Division From Air Resources Board In August 1983, while working in the Enforcement (now Compliance) Division, we collected samples of ambient air in and around Forward, Inc. Class II-1 landfill in Stockton. We also sampled for emissions from the landfill surface. The attached memo dated August 11 , 1983, describes the samples, their locations, the sampling method used, and the requested analyses. Attachment II shows the wastes reportedly buried at the fill . Attachment III shows the laboratory results. The sampling was part of EnforcementDivision's project of characterizing emissions from class II-1 and class I landfills. Forward was chosen because it was then a center of controversy regarding alleged groundwater pollution affecting the farm land surrounding the fill . Enforcement Division had urged the San Joaquin County APC, to test at Forward. The APCD declined but by a letter on June 28, 1983, invited the ARB to test. The "CSI" samples were withdrawn from under buckets inverted over the trenches. They were intended for comprehensive analyses for hydrocarbons and chlorinated hydrocarbons (the Tenax samples) and for pesticides (the XAD samples). The results of those analyses were used to determine the amount and type of analytical work needed on the much more numerous ambient air ("AMB") samples. GC/MS analyses of the CSI samples on Tenax (AIHL Lab. No. 31601 ) indicated negligible amounts of compounds of concern except toluene and chloroform. These compounds were also present as contaminants in the blank for the CSI Tenax samples, so the compounds cannot be regarded as emissions from the fill . The pond water samples (AIHL Lab No. 31603) were analyzed for organic gases in their equilibrium vapor spaces. No organic compounds were detected above 0.10 ppm(v) In view of the lack of indication that either the ponds or the trenches wore emitting anything, only a few of the ambient air samples on carbon were analyzed (AIHL Lab No. 31604) . Two samples at site 4 indicated no chlorinated compounds significantly above concentrations present in their associated blank (which was contaminated with methylene chloride (CH C1 ) , chloroform (CHC13) , and perchloroethylene (C204)) . Three samples Meh at site 2 showed no detectable (less than 0.1 mg of) benzene, toluene, or Xylene and no detectable (less than .01 mg of) styrene. All calculated concentrations (uncorrected by blank analyses) of carbon sample analates in air are at least two orders of magnitude below NIOSH/OSHA workplace standards.