-------
VARIABLE...OZONE
BEGINNING DATE.-.July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...020NE
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
S'TES
0.4
0.30
0.20
CQ
CO
Q
0.10
-40.00 -24.00 -aOO 800
RESIDUAL (OBS-PRED)
THE BINSIZE EQUALS 8.000
24.00 40.00
RESIDUAL ANALYSIS
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
11.32857
15.31332
0.94604
-O.O9671
5.90000
16.40000
0.50000
-13.30000
49.80000
BIAS CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.050O LEVEL
LOWER BOUND 1.4885
UPPER BOUND 21.1686
STD RESIDUAL CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.0500 LEVEL
LOWER BOUND 1588510
UPPER BOUND 387.9745
THE MEASURES OF GROSS ERROR
RESIDUAL COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION/
RATIO OF RESIDUAL TO OBSERVED*!? DEV
0.7046
-------
VARIABLE...OZONE
BEGINNING DATE..July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE-OZONE
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS—RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV OZONE
AVERAGING TIME..,ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28 •
o
LJ
(A
CD
58.6 -
8 -
LJ
cc
-24.3 -
-36.0-
50.00 100.00 150.00
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (KM)
200.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS -0.1967
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.5309
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.1904
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 57.865
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.502
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 1 5.351
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.077
FIGURE D-lc. Analysis of ozone concentration residuals (observed minus
predicted) as a function of downwind distance.
D-12
-------
VARIABLE...OZONE
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE..July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...OZONF
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS RAPS'DATA
^-N
2
m
o.
Q
CO
LJ
ce
58.6
46.95
36.52
30.96
24.22
19.35
11.33
3.30
-1.57
-8.30
-13.86
-24.29
-35.99
' '.' ' ' ' ' ' '
. m
CD LTJ _ JTJ n
-
' LTJ
•Q m ° m "
"° m -
mm a Ha
— § — ra_M E.m n
b a CD Q „_ _
n.
1 ' ' ' i i i i i i . . i t i , , , , i-
SITE
15.00-
2o.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS 0.2999
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0 0825
Sit
D-13
-------
Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations
NO2 concentrations are compared in Table D-4 and Figure D-2. The model does an
excellent job of predicting the trends of the observations, with a correlation coefficient of
0.96. The bias and gross error are approximately 9 and 13 ppb, respectively.
Approximately 93 percent of the predicted NO2 concentrations are within a factor of two
of the observed value.
Although the model effectively predicts the trends of the NO2 observations and shows no
systematic bias in predicting the lower (<60 ppb) concentrations, it does tend to
systematically underpredict the higher observed NO2 concentrations. As seen in Figure
D-2 and Table D-4, this underprediction occurs in scenarios 1 and 6 and at downwind
distances ranging from 5 to 69 km. Whether this underprediction is due to
unrepresentative measurement traverses, the presence of additional emissions along the
plume path, incorrect characterization of NO2 formation, or specification of too-fast
dispersion cannot be determined at this time.
Nitric Oxide Concentrations
Predicted and observed NO concentrations for the 16 scenarios are compared hi Table
D-5 and Figure D-3. The model exhibits less ability to predict NO concentrations than to
predict NO2 concentrations. The model tends to overpredict the NO and underpredict the
NO2 concentrations, indicating that the model may be underestimating the NO to NO2
conversion rate.
Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations
Almost all observed plume-average SO2 concentrations are underpredicted by the RPM-
IV (Table D-6 and Figure D-4). Since, in the absence of clouds, SO^ oxidation is fairly
slow, this underprediction indicates that either (1) the measurement does not truly
represent plume-average concentrations (e.g., may be closer to the centerlirie), (2) there
are additional SO2 emissions sources not simulated by the model, or (3) excessively fast
diffusion rates were used in simulating the plume expansion. The bias (48 ppb) and gross
error (62 ppb) tend to be dominated by the few highest observed SO2 concentrations.
Only about 50 percent of the model predictions are within a factor of two of the
observations.
9U24R2.1S
-------
•* - -
Scenario
— — — — — _
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
6
6
7
8
8
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
14 ,
15
15
16
————___
Date
(July,
1976)
2
2
2
5
5
5
5
5 •
7
7
7
14
14
14
15
15
18
20
20
23
23
23
28
28
30
30
30
30
i
Downwind
Distance
(km)
5.0
69.0
120.0
10.0
27.0
46.0
44.0
73.0
85.0
83.0
108.0
23.0
44.0
46.0
29.0
52.0
26.0
21.0
60.0
25.0
125.0
165.0
51.2
27.0
26.8
12.0
23.0
35.0
—
Concentration (ppb)
Observed
————————
159.6
149.2
79.6
26.9
13.4
13.6
64.6
17.8
13.8
13.8
14.4
128.8
81.0
22.6
19.2
17.5
12.4
21.2 -
24.3
3.1
43.4
38.2
25.4
36.5
16.5
25.2
21.1
66.5
"
Predicted
™— •™«™*™™™-^— _
106.0
87.8
55.5
27.0
16.9
15.0
46.6
31.7
26.8
15.5
14.0
75.5
56.0
21.8
16.6
13.5
15.7
19.5
15.5
26.8
30.4
38.9
6.4
32.4
23.8
27.2
20.9
45.7
. —
Percent
(100*(Pred.-
Obs.)/Obs.)
-33.6
-41.2
-30.3
0.4
26.1
10.3
-27.9
78.1
94.2
12.3
-2.8
-41.4
-30.9
-3.5
-13.5
-22.9
26.6
-8.0
-36.2
764.5
-30.0
1.8
-74.8
-11.2
44.2
7.9
-0.9
-31.3
91124r2.16
D-15
-------
VARIABLE...N02
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE.-July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...N02
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS-RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV N02
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE..-RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
120.00-
90.00 -
a.
Q.
5 6O.OO
UJ
30.00
X
30.00 60.00 90.001
OBSERVED (ppb) '
120.00
MOMENTS OF THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION
OBSERVED
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
41.77143
42.16977
1.61245
1.47850
22.6000O
43.4000O
14.40000
3.10000
159.60000
PREDICTED
33.19285
23.92922
1.50916
1.59737
26.80000
38.90000
15.70000
6.40000
106.00000
SKILL OF PREDICTION PARAMETERS
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT OF PREDICTED
VERSUS OBSERVED 0.962
THE BOUNDS OF THE CORRELATION AT THE
CONFIDENCE LEVEL OF 0.050 ARE
LOW BOUND. 0.919 HIGH BOUND 0.983
RATIO OF OVER TO UNDER PREDICTIONS 0.647
PERCENT OF OVER PREDICTIONS
GREATER THAN 200 PERCENT OF THE
OBSERVED 3.571
PERCENT OF UNDER PREDICTIONS
LESS THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE
OBSERVED 3.571
FIGURE D-2a. Scatterplot and model performance statistics for "plume
average" RPM-IV predicted and observed NO concentrations (ppb).
D-16
-------
VARIABLE...N02
BEGINNING DATE...July 19.76
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...N02
DATA
..^ N02
iAMPLEFSI2E V£gIABLE-RAPS DATA SITES
0.40
0.30
0.20
co
Q
0.10
•45.00 -27.00 -9.00 9.00
RESIDUAL (OBS-PRED)
27.00 45.OO
THE BINSIZE EQUALS 9.000
RESIDUAL ANALYSIS
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
8.57857
20.22660
1.16788
0.79661
0.80000
18.00000
-2.00000
-23.7000O
61.39999
BIAS CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE O.O500 LEVEL
LOWER BOUND -7.0125
UPPER BOUND 24.1696
STD RESIDUAL CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.05OO LEVEL
LOWER BOUND 277.1386
UPPER BOUND 676.8778
THE MEASURES OF GROSS ERROR
THE ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERROR IS 21.64
THE AVERAGE ABSOLUTE ERROR IS 13.62
RcAT OF RELATIVE VARIABILITY
OBSERVATION COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
RESIDUAL COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION5
0 4S42
RATIO OF RESIDUAL TO OBSERVED ST DEV
0.4796
-i 7
-------
VARIABLE...N02
BEGINNING DATE.-.July 1976
ENDING DATE..July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...N02
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS—RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV N02
AVERAGING TIME—ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
m
-s-
-a-
i
50.00 100.00 150.00'
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (KM)
200.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS -0.0508
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.4161
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.3286
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 53.021
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.098
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 9.951
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.026
FIGURE D-2c. Analysis of N0_ concentration residuals (observed minus
predicted) as a function of downwind distance.
D-18
-------
VARIABLE...N02
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...N02
?ur EnR^IION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
IwlDASED4CTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV N02
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
71.08
55.63
41.85
34.51
25.61
19.18
8.58
-2.02
-8.45
-17.35
-24.69
-38.47
-53.92
CD
D
CD
LTJ
CD
D
CD
a
~Q-
-§-
m a
m
5.0O
i i i i
10.00
-i ~i
SITE
15.00'
20.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS -0.2927
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.6003
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.0903
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 8 129
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0069
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 17 912
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -1 239
FIGURE D-2d. Analysi
predicted, as . "
of
D-19
-------
TABLE D-5. Predicted and observed plume average NO concentration (ppbj from the
Labadie Power Plant using aircraft traverses from the MISTT data base.
Scenario
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
6
6
7
8
8
9
10
10
11
*11
12
13
14
15
15
16
Date
(July,
1976)
, 2 •
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
14
14
14
15
15
18
20
20
23
23
23
28
28
30
30
30
30
Downwind
Distance
(km)
5.0
69.0
120.0
10.0
27.0
46.0
44.0
73.0
85.0
83.0
108.0
23.0
44.0
46.0
29.0
52.0
26.0
21.0
60.Q
25.0
125.0
165.0
51.2
27.0
26.8
12.0
23.0
35.0
Concentration (ppb)
Observed
36.0
54.7
11.0
14.8
6.6
3.4
18.4
18.8
6.5
6.5
3.1
26.5
16.6
6.8
6.1
4.0
4.3
8.9 -
8.0
51.2
11.0
9.7
22.6
7.9
8.6
6.0
4.8
8.9
Predicted
53.0
37.6
17.6
15.5
7.0
5.3
43.4
4.6
11.1
7.1 .
5.7
81.0
31.2
7.4
7.2
4.5
4.9
8.5
5.1
29.7
9.3
9.0
39.0
9.9
1.1
7.0
4.5
15.7
Percent
(100*(Pred.~
Obs.)/Obs.)
47.2
-31.3
60.0
4.7
6.1
55.9
135.9
-75.5
70.8
9.2
83.9
205.7
88.0
8.8
18.0
12.5
14.0
-4.5
-36.3
-42.0
-15.5
-7.2
72.6
25.3
-87.2
16.7
-6.3
76.4
91124r2.16
D-20
-------
VARIABLE...NO
BEGINNING DATE..July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...NO
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV NO
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
20.00
40.00 60.00
OBSERVED (ppb)
80.00
MOMENTS OF THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
SERVED
13.98929
1 3.40346
1 .83470
2.541 1O
8.600OO
1 6.60000
6.10000
3.10000
54.70000
PREDICTED
1 7.24643
18.66O21
1.76588
2.70870
8.50000
17.60000
5.30000
1.10000
81.00001
SKILL OF PREDICTION PARAMETERS
AT ™E
LOW BOUND 0.394 HIGH BOUND 0 834
124°3°
PERCENT OF UNDER PREDICTIONS
vee-M IH Performance statistics for "plume
average RPM-IV predicted and observed NO concentrations (ppb).
D-21
-------
VARIABLE-NO
BEGINNING DATE—July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE-NO
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM-RPM-IV NO
AVERAGING TIME—ALL HOURS
STRAT1TFYING VARIABLE-RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
0.80-
0.60-
g
I
1
3
0.40
0.20-
-40.00 -24.00 -8.00 8.00
RESIDUAL (OBS-PRED)
' 24.00 40.00
THE BINSIZE EQUALS 8.000
RESIDUAL ANALYSIS
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
-3.25714
13.90900
-1.59819
4.49794
-0.70000
0.40OOO
-6.60000
-54.50000
21.50000
BIAS CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.0500 LEVEL
LOWER BOUND -10.6450
UPPER BOUND 4.1307
STD RESIDUAL CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.0500 LEVEL
LOWER BOUND 131.0519
UPPER BOUND 320.0787
THE MEASURES OF GROSS ERROR
THE ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERROR IS 14.04
THE AVERAGE ABSOLUTE ERROR IS 7.99
VARIOUS MEASURES OF RELATIVE VARIABILITY
OBSERVATION COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
0.9581
RESIDUAL COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
0.9943
RATIO OF RESIDUAL TO OBSERVED ST. DEV.
1.0377
91121,
FIGURE D-3b. Residual analysis plot and model performance statistics for
"plume average" RPM-IV predicted and observed NO concentrations (ppb).
D-22
-------
VARIABLE...NO
BEGINNING DATE..July 1976
ENDING DATE..July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE. NO
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS-RAPS DATA
IwfoA?F^CJION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV NO
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
in
m
o
g
10
39.7
29.1
19.6
14.6
8.5
4.0
-3.3
-10.5
-15.0
-21.1
-26.1
-35.6
-46.2
TT
-ff
m
' p
50.00 10O.OO -150.00
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (KM)
200.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS O.1558
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.2308
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.4999
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 53 604
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 0.438
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS -6 151
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 0.055
« °f f/oncentration residuals (observed minus
as a function of downwind distance.
D-23
-------
VARIABLE... NO
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...NO
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV NO
AVERAGING TIME-ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE-RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
o
LJ
tn
39.72
29.10
19.62
14.57
8.45
4.03
-3.26
§ -
a
tn
Ld
CC
10.55-
14.97
-21.09
-26.14
-35.61
-46.24
-m
m
m
Ft
^n
-Bm.
m
'°
m
I I [T] I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I
5.00 10.00 15.0O' 20.00
SITE
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS 0.1280
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.2575
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.4783
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 7.679
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 0.044
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS -6.06.3
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 0.372
91121*
FIGURE D-3d. Analysis of NO concentration residuals (observed minus
predicted) as a function of scenario.
D-24
-------
TABLE D-6. Predicted and observed plume average SOj concentration (ppb) from the
Labadie Power Plant using aircraft traverses from the MISTT data base.
Scenario
1
1
1
2
2
2
3 '
3
4
5
5
6
6
7
8
8
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
14
15
15
16
Date
(July,
1976)
2
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
14
14
14
15
15
18 •
20
20
23
23
23
28
28
30
30
30
30
Downwind
Distance
(km)
5.0
69.0
120.0
10.0
27.0
46.0
44.0
73.0
85.0
83.0
108.0
23.0
44.0
46.0
29.0
52.0
26.0
21.0
60.0
25.0
125.0
165.0
51.2
27.0
26.8
12.0
23.0
35.0
Concentration (ppb)
Observed
189.0
132.7
8.0
145.8
44.0
30.8
30.8
101.8
18.3
18.3
15.0
395.3
426.1
111.6
82.3
52.5
34.7
80.7
46.0
271.5
32.0
24.0
272.3
100.9
104.8
137.7
89.2
32.3
Predicted
123.0
78.7
15.8
64.9
29.1
26.0
118.0
16.5
22.7
13.8
11.2
289.0
158.0
82.8
28.6
20.4
37.6
32.8
29.4
100.0
26.3
14.3
78.8
34.7
43.2
31.8
26.9
117.0
Percent
(100*(Pred.-
Obs.yObs.)
-34.9
-40.7
97.5
-55.5
-33.9
-15.6
283.1
-83.8
24.0
-24.6
-25.3
-26.9
-62.9
-25.8
-65.2
-61.1
8.4
-59.4
-36.1
-63.2
-17.8
-40.4
-71.1
-65.6
-58.8
-76.9
-69.8
262.2
91124r2.16
D-25
-------
VARIABLE...SO2
BEGINNING DATE.-.July 1976
ENDING DATE-.July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...S02
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV S02
AVERAGING TIME—ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
60.00 120.00 180.00
OBSERVED (ppb)
240.00
MOMENTS OF THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION-
• OBSERVED PREDICTED
AVERAGE 108.15710 59.68929
110.62520 60.27854
1.54154 2.10196
1.54684 4.93650
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
80.70000
132.70000
30.80000
8.00000
426.10000
31.8000O
78.80001
22.70000
11.20000
289.00000
SKILL OF PREDICTION PARAMETERS
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT OF PREDICTED
VERSUS OBSERVED 0.770
THE BOUNDS OF THE CORRELATION AT THE
CONFIDENCE LEVEL OF 0.050 ARE
LOW BOUND 0.557 HIGH BOUND 0.888
RATIO OF OVER TO UNDER PREDICTIONS 0.217
PERCENT OF OVER PREDICTIONS
GREATER THAN 20O PERCENT OF THE
OBSERVED 7.143
PERCENT OF UNDER PREDICTIONS
LESS THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE
OBSERVED 42.857
FIGURE D-4a. Scatterplot and model performance statistics for "plume
average" RPM-IV predicted and observed SCL concentrations (ppb).
D-26
-------
VARIABLE...SO2
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE.-.July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...S02
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV S02
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE-RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
0.40 -
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
-200.00 -120.00 -40.00 -40.00
RESIDUAL (OBS-PRED)
THE BINSIZE EQUALS 40.000
120.00 200.00
RESIDUAL ANALYSIS
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
SKEWNESS
KURTOSIS
OTHER MEASURES
MEDIAN
UPPER QUARTILE
LOWER QUARTILE
MINIMUM VALUE
MAXIMUM VALUE
48.46786
74.83524
0.86875
1.23753
32.10000
66.20000
4.50000
-87.20000
268.10000
BIAS CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.0500 LEVEL
LOWER BOUND 7.9574
UPPER BOUND 88.9784
STD RESIDUAL CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
AT THE 0.0500 LEVEL
. LOWER BOUND 3793.7070
UPPER BOUND 9265.6730
THE MEASURES OF GROSS ERROR
THE ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERROR IS 88.03
THE AVERAGE ABSOLUTE ERROR IS 61.83
VARIOUS MEASURES OF RaATIVE VARIABILITY
OBSERVATION COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
1.0228
RESIDUAL COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
0.6919
RATIO OF RESIDUAL TO OBSERVED ST. DEV.
0.6765
FIGURE D-4b. Residual analysis plot and model performance statistics for
"plume average" RPM-IV predicted and observed SO,, concentrations (ppb).
D-27
-------
VARIABLE...S02
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...S02
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS-RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV S02
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE-RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
Q
LJ
£
i
279.7
222.5
171.6
144.4
111.5
87.7
48.5
9.3
-14.5
-47.5
-74.6
-125.6
-182.8
i i i i
\ ii i r
LTJ
m m
m
•a rfi
m
m
I .CJ...
J I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I I i
50.00 100.00 J 50.00
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (KM)
200.00
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS -0.2920
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.5998
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.0911
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 59.569
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.152
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 77.648
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS -0.559
FIGURE D-4c. Analysis of SO™ concentration residuals (observed minus
predicted) as .a function of downwind distance.
D-28
-------
VARIABLE...S02
BEGINNING DATE...July 1976
ENDING DATE...July 1976
OBSERVATION SOURCE...302
OBSERVATION ANALYSIS...RAPS DATA
THE PREDICTION ALGORITHM...RPM-IV S02
AVERAGING TIME...ALL HOURS
STRATITFYING VARIABLE...RAPS DATA SITES
SAMPLE SIZE...28
Q
LJ
CE
Q.
1
1/1
m
o_
g
Q
Ul
CT
279.71
222.53
171.57
144.41
1 1 1 .48
87.68
48.47
9.25
-14.54
-47.47
-74.64
-125.60
-182.77
1 '*' I I I ' 1 | ' '' I I I I I I | I . I I I
LTJ
-
LTJ
Q
-
a LTJ • • -
' LTJ LTJ
•C3 H m m
-td m m uaa
- .a — R_CJ fn — ..S
_ |_J LJ LJ ^^ —
'
_
LTJ a
•
_
I'll.. . 1 I i i i 1 -i i i i 1 i ' i i . i , ,
5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
SITE
THE LINEAR MODEL PARAMETERS
THE CORRELATION IS 0.1167
THE LOWER BOUND IS -0.2682
THE UPPER BOUND IS 0.4694
AT THE 0.0500 PERCENT LEVEL
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 7 175
THE Y-X LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 0 007
THE X-Y LfNEAR MODEL INTERCEPT IS 34 704
THE X-Y LINEAR MODEL SLOPE IS 1.826
FIGURE D-4d. Analysis of SO concentration residuals (observed minus
predicted) as a function of scenario.
D-29
-------
CONCLUSIONS
™ ' **?*' ^ Preliminary evaluation of the RPM-IV has shown that the
mode succeeds in replicating measurement of point-source NOX and ozone levels. The
model has demonstrated its usefulness for predicting plume concentration levels
downwind of isolated sources. However, the model is not intended for use in an urban
environment or in situations with extensive plume overlap, as may have occurred in some
of Uiese measurements. Under such conditions, it is recommended that a photochemical
gnd model, such as the Urban Airshed Model, be used.
Further evaluation of the RPM-IV using additional plume data bases is recommended to
determine the strengths and weaknesses of the model and identify areas that need
improvement. Although there have been significant technological advances in plume data
collection by aircraft, no recent plume characterization measurement studies have taken
advantage of the new technologies. Furthermore, although the RPM (and other
photochemical plume models) have been used to assess the ozone impacts from sources
that emit hydrocarbons and other reactive organic material, very few plume hydrocarbon
me^urements have been available for evaluating the performance of these models^
predicting ozone from hydrocarbon sources. Further evaluation of the RPM-IV with
better plume measurements is recommended.
References
' D-A; Stewart' J- Johnson, R. J. Frost. 1979. "Evaluation of Plume
Modehng Techniques for Estimating Short-Term NO2 Concentration Impacts from
^ SyStemS APPUcati°ns, Inc. , San Rafael, California (S YS APP-
o'-- 198°- "Volume H. Evaluation
of Short-Term NO2 Plume Models for Point Sources: Data Volume." Systems
Applications, Inc., San Rafael, California (SYSAPP-80/159).
91124R2.IS
D-30
-------
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before ^completing)
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
2.
Reactive Plume Model IV (RPM-IV) User's Guide
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION
Systems Applications Internationsil (SAI)
a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Systems Applications International (SAI)
101 Lucas Valley Road
San Rafael, CA 94903
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Technical Support Division (MD-14)
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
IOTES
fa I°anua:l ?°r,the Reaoti™ Plume Model iv (RPM-
17- KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a- DESCRIPTORS
Reactive Plume Model (RPM) ,
Photochemical model,
ozone photochemistry,
VOC/NOx point source modeling
IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
b.lOENTIFlERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page;
c. COSATI Field, Group
..
21. NO. OP PAGES
22. PRICE
Form 2220—1 (Rev. 4—77) PREVIOUS EDITION
IS OBSOLETE
-------
-------