In simulation all events were assigned to a facility and either had reported or modeled start, end, and emitting times. These emission periods were compared to the timing of aircraft overights, with uncertainty. In all cases, location was xed and timing varied on each iteration, resulting in a probabilistic comparison between the events and the ights. Methane detection plumes from the aerial survey were classied by the aerial team as O&G, agricultural, or waste management, all of which were landlls. Excluding pigging locations, 288 0.898 plumes were detected per 1000 facilities overown (R 2 =0.766, Figure ). On weekdays, the plume discovery rate was 0.988 plumes 1000sites (R 2 =0.867), while the weekend discovery rate 290 was substantially lower at 0.702 plumes 1000sites (R 2 =0.133), or 71% of weekday rate. These data suggest that some emission process or processes dier between weekends and weekdays for 292 emission types large enough to be detected by the aircraft method; a logical hypothesis is that these are due to human intervention on the facilities.