600382076
ATMOSPHERIC TURBIDITY OVER THE UNITED STATES
FROM 1967-1976
Elmer Robinson
Ralph J. Valente
Air Pollution Research Section
Chemical Engineering Department
Washington State University
Pullman, Washington 99164
EPA Grant No. 806124010
Project Officer
Herbert Viebrock
Meteorology and Assessment Division
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Sciences Research
Laboratory, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publi-
cation. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
n
-------
ABSTRACT
Atmospheric turbidity, one of several measures of the impact of
airborne particles on the optical quality of the atmosphere, has been
measured in the United States with the Volz sunphotometer since 1960 in the
joint EPA/NOAA turbidity monitoring network. This paper describes geo-
graphical, seasonal and long term variations in climatological turbidity
for the period 1967-1976; and presents a new model, regionally stratified
according to background levels, relating atmospheric turbidity to relative
urbanization.
Results indicate that since the first five years of turbidity moni-
toring (1961-1966), the 1967-1976 data show that increases in annual
average nonurban turbidity are primarily found over the southeastern United
States. These changes are most noticeable in the summer season values and
little or no time trend is shown in winter data.
The simple model which is described involves the separation of annual
average urban turbidity for the monitoring sites into two terms repre-
senting background and local effects where local effects are related to the
population of the local urban area. This technique provides a basis for
estimating annual average turbidity at sites where no monitoring data are
available and for predicting long term changes in annual average atmos-
pheric turbidity. The correlation between model predicted values and
actual monitoring data is shown to be good.
Patterns of regional turbidity were developed for the period June 25-
July 5, 1975 to coincide with a heavy haze incident that had been examined
as a low visibility episode. Although some qualitative correlation could
be seen between the visibility and turbidity patterns the turbidity data
were too sparse to define the episode independently. This feature of the
turbidity data was a characteristic problem in attempting to evaluate
regional turbidity episodes.
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract iii
Figures vi
Tables viii
Acknowledgements ix
1. Introduction 1
2. Turbidity Observations 2
3. Research Techniques and Results 6
The Atmospheric Turbidity Data Base 6
Criteria for Climatological Analysis 6
Annual Average Background Turbidity 7
Turbidity Time Trends During the 1967-76 Period . 19
Discussion of Turbidity Trends 31
4. Model Relating Turbidity to Urbanization 33
Derivation of Long-Term Model 33
Model Assumptions and Limitations 36
5. Regional Studies 39
Introduction 39
Turbidity in a Slow Moving Anticyclone 39
Discussion 41
6. Summary 45
References 46
Appendices
A. Detailed Presentation of the Turbidity Coefficient
and its Calculation 49
B. Summary of Data For Regionally Stratified Model .... 56
C. Tabulation of Turbidity Annual Averages and Seasonal
Averages by years - 1967-1976, United States
Turbidity Network Stations 60
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1. Volz sun photometer 3
2. Annual average background turbidity, 1967-1976 9
3. Annual average background turbidity, 1961-1966, (after
Flowers, et al. 1969) 10
4. Change in annual average background turbidity since 1963 ... 12
5. Winter average background turbidity, 1967-1976 14
6. Spring average background turbidity, 1967-1976 15
7. Summer average background turbidity, 1967-1976 16
8. Fall average background turbidity, 1967-1976 17
9. Amplitude of the annual cycle in seasonal average turbidity. . 18
10. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Greensboro, NC 20
11. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Oak Ridge, TN 21
12. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Meridian, MS 22
13. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Little Rock, AR 26
14. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
New York, NY 27
15. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Green Bay, WI 28
16. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Huron, SD 29
17. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
St. Cloud, MN 30
vi
-------
Number Page
18. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at
Missoula, MT 32
19. Excess turbidity vs. population at network sites 35
20. Model predicted turbidity compared to measured values 37
A-l. Beer's law transmission of the direct beam at 500 nm .... 50
A-2. Geometry of optical air mass 52
V11
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1. Turbidity monitoring stations in the continental
United States 4
2. Background sites for climatological analysis (1967-1976). ... 8
3. Linear regression equations for seasonal and annual average
turbidity trends at selected sites for 1967 to 1976 23
4. Daily turbidity coefficient observations during an air
pollution episode - June 25 to July 5, 1975 42
viii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research work was aided significantly by the assistance
of Drs. Edwin Flowers, James Peterson, and Rudi Haas, Air Resources
Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, Colorado. We gratefully acknowledge
their help in accumulating data files and interpreting computer tape
records. Mr. W. Lee Bamesberger, WSU Chemical Engineering Department
was instrumental in setting up the WSU computer operations for our
data analysis.
ix
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Air pollutants when dispersed in the atmosphere can change the optical
properties of the atmosphere. These changes may occur due to increased
absorption and scattering effects resulting from both pollutant gases and
particles. Common atmospheric optical properties are the visibility which
usually implies an optical path parallel to the earth's surface and the
turbidity which is most commonly related to a change in solar intensity and
thus to a more or less vertical sight path. Actually, by definition, tur-
bidity in the meteorological context is "any condition of the atmosphere
which reduces its transparency to radiation, especially to visible radia-
tion" (Huschke, 1959). In a quantitative manner a turbidity coefficient
can be calculated from solar intensity measurements. The calculation pro-
cedure of Volz (1959) is used in this report and will be described in a
subsequent section.
The importance of turbidity is demonstrated by the fact that on hazy
days reductions in total irradiance at the surface can be of considerable
magnitude. For example, McCree and Keener (1974) found a 20% reduction in
total spectral irradiance at the surface (direct + diffuse) on a hazy day
as compared to a clear day in Texas. Their data also showed a 50% reduction
in the direct spectral irradiance with an attendant increase in diffuse
irradiance. These figures do not represent the maximum impact of atmos-
pheric turbidity on incoming solar radiation, however. Episodes of high
turbidity in the eastern U. S. have produced conditions in which as much as
85% of the incoming solar radiation appeared as diffuse skylight (WMO et al.,
1976). This compares to a "clean" atmosphere in which approximately 10-15%
of the incoming radiation appears as skylight.
This present report is an analysis of atmospheric turbidity over the
U. S. from 1967-1976 based on data from the EPA/NOAA turbidity network.
Geographical, climatological, and temporal variations in turbidity are
discussed and a simple, regionally stratified model relating long-term
changes in atmospheric turbidity to changes in relative urbanization is
described. This study is an extension of the report by Flowers et al.
(1969) which presented an analysis of the turbidity network data for
1961-1966, the initial period of its operation.
-------
SECTION 2
TURBIDITY OBSERVATIONS
The data for this study have been obtained from the files of the
turbidity observation network set up in the United States in 1960-61 and
operated since then as a cooperative EPA/NOAA program. Since 1971 the
United States turbidity network has operated as part of a global program
guided by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The basic instru-
ment used in this turbidity program is the Volz sunphotometer. The Volz
sunphotometer as illustrated by Figure 1, is sighted on the sun using a
diopter. This allows the direct solar beam to enter through the aperture,
pass through the filter and impinge on the photocell. The microammeter
readout (J.) is proportional to the monochromatic intensity (I,).
A A
The results of the initial 5 years of operation of the United States
network, e_. £., 1961-1966, have been described by Flowers et al., (1969).
This report continues the analysis of turbidity data and covers the period
1967 to 1976. Since 1966 the size of the network has ranged from 25 to 40
stations. Table 1 lists the stations which have participated in the network
since 1966 and the number of years during which data were collected from
1967 to 1976. A tabulation of yearly and seasonal average turbidity data
for all network stations is given in Appendix C.
Flowers et al. (1969) describes the Volz photometers used in the
network in considerable detail. Both Peterson et al. (1981) and Flowers et
al. (1969) describe the accuracy of the Volz turbidity photometers in terms
of calibrations against standard photometers. In comparison readings
using the field-type sun photometers and a laboratory-maintained standard
photometer the two types were found generally to agree within ±5% for
higher values of turbidity, 0.100 and above, and within ±10% for lower
values of turbidity, values near 0.040. Flowers et al. (1969) state that
network field readings are probably less accurate than these laboratory
results, but specific data were not available. Since the initiation of the
turbidity network there have been a number of different evaluations of the
Volz photometer and the turbidity measurement. Peterson et al. (1981) list
a number of the published studies in which the accuracy of the photometer
has been assessed.
In the present study as well as other references to turbidity network
data the calculations refer to the turbidity at a wavelength of 500 nm
because of the design and operation of the Volz photometer. Had a dif-
ferent wavelength been chosen different numerical values for the turbidity
would have resulted from the calculations. Angstrom (1961, 1963) describes
the turbidity concept and its calculation in considerable detail.
-------
•DIRECT SOLAR BEAM
DIOPTER'
.-APERTURE
...FILTER (500 nm PASSED)
...-SELENIUM PHOTOCELL
......METER READOUT(JX)
VOLZ SUNPHOTOMETER
Figure 1. Volz sunphotometer (single wavelength version)^
-------
a
V£>
I
r-.
O)
O>
c
=3
C
OJ
c
o
u
01
c
o
c
o
c
o
.0
UJ
cc
*f.
t. TJ
u
a>
O>
- u
01
o ^
o
«- o
•— caOr—
i.no"
•M O C
C (O
O O>-t- C f— I/I
-4-»
<_;Oi — _J«/>
+_>
uxioc: cccnsrjcio.^io,
C^ QJ •'"" T3 ^O *^3 *^O ^^ C) &J *X) OJ *^~
oo CQ
4
-------
In this study, as in those of Flowers et al. (1969) and Peterson et
al. (1981) the turbidity coefficient, B, is based on the developments of
Volz (1959). In this procedure B is the decadic extinction coefficient at
500 nm wavelength as defined by the expression
j/J0 = io-(R + z + B>m
where J = the observed solar radiation at 500 nm adjusted to the mean
sun-earth distance
J _ the solar radiation outside the earth's atmosphere at the mean
sun-earth distance
R = the Rayleigh scattering coefficient for the air molecules
Z = the gaseous absorption coefficient at 500 nm for ozone
B = the decadic turbidity coefficient
m = the optical air mass
In this equation and for 500 nm wavelengths the Rayleigh coefficient R has
a value of 0.063 at sea level and for an air mass of m = 1 while the ozone
absorption coefficient Z has a value of 0.05 (Eltermann, 1964; Peterson et
al., 1981). The decadic turbidity B could be written as BCQQ to indicate
the applicable 500 nm wavelength. However, since all values used in this
present report apply to 500 nm this extra complication will be omitted.
Appendix A to this report presents a more detailed discussion of the
development of the turbidity coefficient and also gives a sample
calculation applicable to the data from the turbidity network.
-------
SECTION 3
RESEARCH TECHNIQUES AND RESULTS
THE ATMOSPHERIC TURBIDITY DATA BASE
The data base for this study was developed from magnetic tape and hard
copy versions of the raw data from the U.S. atmospheric turbidity moni-
toring network. These were obtained either directly from EPA (see: U.S.
Dept. HEW, 1967-1970) or from published network reports (see: WMO-EPA-NOAA,
1971-1976). For the turbidity climatological analysis, a comprehensive
data set consisting of monthly average B values and the associated number
of observations for the period 1967 to 1976 was prepared for all monitoring
sites from the available source material.
CRITERIA FOR CLIMATOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
The nature of the turbidity measurement and the seasonal cycle in tur-
bidity present obstacles to climatological averaging. Since the measure-
ment can be made only when there is an unobstructed line of sight to the
sun (i.e., no clouds blocking the direct beam) the number of observations
varies from station to station and from season to season as well as with
prevailing synoptic weather. The techniques discussed below were developed
to minimize the potential for bias in the seasonal and annual average
values which could be caused by these observing or sampling problems.
Trial calculations indicated that since the annual cycle is less notice-
able within each season, seasonal average turbidities could be computed and
used as an unweighted average of all the observations for the season without
producing a significant bias toward periods of high or low turbidity. How-
ever, this could not compensate for the fact that all turbidity averages
tend to be biased toward clearer weather due to the nature of the measure-
ment. It should also be noted that if all observations for the spring or
fall season in a given year are close to the beginning or the end of the
season the calculated seasonal average may be some what higher or lower
than seasonal averages calculated during years with more complete data re-
cords or data distributed uniformly through the season. For this study,
seasons are defined in the conventional manner as: winter (December,
January and February), spring (March, April and May), summer (June, July
and August) and fall (September, October and November). The winter of
1978, for example, includes December 1977, January 1978 and February 1978.
In the annual averages each month is given equal weight even though
the number of observations varies from month to month. This definition
ensures that the annual averages will not be biased toward turbidities
-------
associated with months when more observations are made due to fewer cloudy
days.
The FORTRAN programs developed for this study calculated climato-
logical average turbidities, as defined above, for all sites and obser-
vations. These are given as yearly and seasonal averages in Appendix C.
Additional selection criteria were established as requirements for data
adequacy before computer tabulated values were included in the trend
analyses and model development. Specifically, stations were required to
have at least 3 years of data, seasonal averages were required to have a
minimum of ten observations, and annual averages were required to contain
observations during at least ten months out of the year as well as a
minimum of ten observations per season. These data criteria were chosen to
reduce the variance of long term averages due to periods of sparse data,
while discarding a minimum number of data points. These criteria were
considered to be generally reasonable minimum limits. They were not sub-
jected to objective statistical evaluations.
ANNUAL AVERAGE BACKGROUND TURBIDITY
The turbidity monitoring network stations as listed in Table 1 can be
classed as urban and nonurban stations. By a review of station locations
we classed as urban stations those located at sites where they would be
influenced by cities of over 100,000 population. Sites in much smaller
population centers, e.g. Pendleton, Oregon, or rural areas were considered
as nonurban stations. In general the stations were classified similarly to
that given by Flowers, et al. (1969) in their analysis of the 1961-66 net-
work data. In the present assessment we are most concerned with nonurban
or background turbidity. Thus in this report our use of the term
"Background Turbidity" refers to observations which we believe are
unaffected by nearby urban areas larger than 100,000 population. The
background sites used in our program are listed in Table 2.
Our examination of turbidity began with an examination of the average
background data, and Figure 2 shows the annual average background turbidity
over the U.S. for the period 1967 to 1976. Individual values range from
about 0.04 to 0.17. It should be noted that values for most cities with
populations of 100,000 or more are significantly higher than these
background levels. The effect of large cities on turbidity is examined in
the modeling study described in a subsequent section.
For comparison, between the 1967-76 and the earlier 1961-66 period,
the average annual background pattern of Flowers et al. (1969) is shown by
Figure 3. Although there have been some changes in the magnitude of the
annual average background turbidity, especially in the Southeastern United
States, since Flowers made his earlier analysis, there are obvious simi-
larities in the 2 sets of data.
The annual average turbidity pattern of Figure 2 shows significant
differences between eastern and western regions. The highest annual
average turbidities occur in the southern Appalachian and Smoky Mountain
regions and thus is similar to the results of Flowers et al. (1969) for the
-------
TABLE 2. Background sites for climatological analysis (1967-1976)
18
Station
Station
Mount Hopkins, AZ
Bishop, CA
Edwards Air Force Base, CA
Pittsburg, CA
Alamosa, CO
Boulder, CO
Gainesville, FL
Tallahassee, FL
Idaho Falls, 10
Caribou, ME
Beltsville, MD
Blue Hill, MA
Saint Cloud, MN
Meridian, MS
Missoula, MT
Los Alamos, NM
Upton, NY
Asheville, NC
Bismarck, NO
Cincinnati, OH (suburban site)
Pendleton, OR
Huron, SO
Oak Ridge, TN
Victoria, TX
Clkins, WV
Green Bay, WI
8
-------
vo
I**
01
«—»
PS
>Q
r
en
j*
u
<9
JO
01
en
£
9)
I
ov
-------
o>
W3
cr»
or»
ov
k.
5
•a
n
4>
Ol
«
9)
10
3
3
O)
10
-------
1961-66 period shown in Figure 3. In the west the minimum average
turbidity values are in the interior basin region generally defined on the
east by the crest of the Rockies and on the west by the High Sierra and
Cascade ranges. An increase since 1966 in the number of western stations
makes it possible to draw a somewhat more detailed pattern in this area
than was possible for Flowers and his colleagues. The flow of marine air
masses onto the west coast can readily explain the small west-to-east
gradient depicted in this region.
In the Rocky Mountain region and the Southwest, dry, continental air
masses are the dominant synoptic feature, whereas in the Smoky Mountain
region in the Southeast the influence of moist maritime tropical air masses
becomes important, especially in the summer when the Bermuda high pressure
circulation frequently drives warm, moist air northeastward from the Gulf
of Mexico. Higher relative humidity promotes the growth of small hygro-
scopic particles into the size range of 0.1 to 1.0 urn where they can act as
effective scatterers of visible light and increase atmospheric turbidity
(Covert et al., 1972). A number of authors, including Peterson et al.
(1981), Berri and Peterson (1978), and Flowers et al. (1969), have demon-
strated the dependence of atmospheric turbidity on air mass type trajec-
tory. Natural emissions and photochemistry may also contribute to higher
turbidity over the Smoky Mountains. Although the actual importance of this
effect has not been firmly established, the reports of Reisinger and Craw-
ford (1980) and Adams et al. (1980) both identify the United States coastal
areas along the Gulf of Mexico as significant source regions of biogenic
sulfur gas emissions during the summer months. These emissions are active
candidates for photochemical reactions leading to the formation of sulfate
and sulfuric acid aerosols with a subsequent impact on turbidity.
Anthropogenic sources of primary particles and precursors to secondary
particles are also greater in the Southeast than they are in the Southwest
and Rocky Mountains, and these anthropogenic sources also may contribute to
higher average turbidities in the Southeast. It should also be pointed out
that synoptic weather patterns combine to cause a region of maximum fre-
quency of stagnant high pressure systems over the southern Appalachian
region (Korshover, 1967), and that these weather patterns also can be
important factors in the occurrence of high regional turbidity.conditions
through a reduction in atmospheric mixing and dispersion.
By comparing Figure 2 to the analysis of annual average background
turbidity for 1961-1966 in Figure 3 (Flowers et al., 1969), changes in
background turbidity since the early 1960's can be estimated. Figure 4
shows the results of a comparison based on graphical subtraction . Because
of changes in the monitoring network and the empirical method of deter-
mining background sites, this comparative analysis should only be taken as
generally indicative of the possible trend. Nevertheless, the observed
turbidity increases east of the Mississippi and particularly in the South-
east shown in Figure 4 are believed to constitute real increases in annual
average background turbidity. The regional-scale growth and increasing
urbanization and industrialization of the South as increasing numbers of
industries and people move to the area are considered to be at least partly
responsible for this trend.
11
-------
0»
1-i
I
f«»
vo
en
T-t
•o
0
<0
<0
en
f-4
i
-------
In the southwest, unfortunately, data sets for the large, rapidly
growing cities in this sun-belt region of generally low turbidity are not
available. The slight decrease in turbidity over the Rockies shown in
Figure 4 is not believed to be significant; this change is more likely due
to an increase in the number of monitoring sites and a realignment of the
pattern in the Rocky Mountain region rather than to a real decrease in
turbidity. The general lack of a detectable increase in the whole area
north and west of the line from Texas to the Great Lakes was unexpected in
light of the large population and energy production growth in this area
during this decade.
Flowers et al. (1969) showed clearly that most stations had a seasonal
turbidity cycle with a summer maximum. The present analysis shows a
similar pattern. Also in those areas where the turbidity showed a gradual
increase over 1961-66 values and during the 1967-76 decade the increases in
annual average turbidity have been dominated by greater increases in the
summer season than in other seasons. Many sites in the middle Atlantic and
southeastern states show strong upward trends for the summer with little
change for the winter. This aspect was examined in detail.
Seasonal average background turbidity patterns for 1967 to 1976 are
shown in Figures 5 thru 8. In general the seasonal cycle in background
turbidity shows the lowest values occurring in the winter and highest
values in the summer. In the winter, as shown by Figure 5, the Rockies and
the western states experience low values of turbidity while over the east
coast and southeast states turbidity tends to be up to 3 times the western
values. Figure 6 shows the average spring turbidity pattern for the
1967-76 decade. Compared to the winter conditions springtime turbidity
increased by approximately a factor of 2 in all areas of the country. The
gradient between the west and the southeast is clearly evident.
Summertime background turbidity is shown by Figure 7. In the western
states and the northern great plains there is little apparent change from
spring to summer. However, in the southeast turbidity is approximately 2
times the spring values, from a spring maximum of 0.16 in the Appalachians
to a turbidity coefficient of 0.30 in the summer. The average turbidity
conditions for the fall, as shown by Figure 8, are generally similar to the
spring pattern but with somewhat smaller values in most areas.
More detailed analyses would show that this seasonal cycle is observed
generally at all network sites, although the amplitude of the cycle varies
from region to region. Slower moving stagnant air masses, greater solar
radiation leading to increased production of natural and anthropogenic
photochemical aerosols, and higher relative humidities associated with
maritime tropical air masses are some important factors which can contri-
bute to the summer maximum in turbidity. As mentioned previously, Flowers
et al. (1969) also reported seasonal cycles and higher turbidity values in
the summer.
There are regional differences in the annual cycle of background
turbidity. Figure 9 shows the graphically determined difference between
summer and winter average background turbidity over the U.S. based on the
13
-------
-------
10
\S?n
*«•/
b<0 V ,-T
IO
^
o
•
-
»
*
•^.y f
• i
o> i
.t--J
'S.
1
1
1
r ~~^
9 ^r
\/
/
/
V-
-/
V
\
^
~7'
;
»
I
I
1
^
* T-
-r
1
\J
^ 1
1
i
1
1
^^^f"m
****r^
- J»
,O
1 •
/
/
r -
j
•-I
-. (•
^^1
pi—
_^--
•vo
r*.
01
i—i
I**
vo
C7V
I J
fe I
5
- — j
£
en
a
o
J^
10'
9k--^
-r^O
L-^
^.
•^.•v.
a.
CO
I
^
-------
o*
i-t
i
r*^
vo
•o
s
en
sr
-------
VO
r»»
A
«-«
t
O
o>
0>
O)
2
O)
(O
00
-------
01
f-4
|
V
en
o
VI
5
o
Ot
£
-------
data for the period 1967 thru 1976. The amplitude of the annual cycle in
seasonal average turbidity is greatest over the Smoky and Southern Appala-
chian Mountains (AB = 0.15 to 0.20) and smallest over the Rocky Mountains
and the Southwest (AB = 0.02 to 0.04). Over the Smoky Mountain region,
clear skies in the summer are frequently associated with warm, moist tropi-
cal air masses. In the winter clear skies suitable for turbidity observa-
tions are frequently associated with drier, faster moving continental air
masses. These synoptic factors and the annual cycle in the photochemical
production of natural aerosols in the deciduous forests of the Smoky Moun-
tains and wet low lands of the Gulf Coast, are possible explanations for
the large annual cycles in turbidity of the southeastern states shown in
Figure 9. It should be re-emphasized, however, that the relative impor-
tance to turbidity of natural emissions either of hydrocarbons or sulfur
compounds is only speculative and has not been firmly established. In con-
trast to the southeast states, over the Rocky Mountains the differences be-
tween predominant air masses in winter compared to summer are less sharp.
Clear skies in all seasons are frequently associated with relatively dry con-
tinental air masses and daytime mixing usually penetrates to high levels pro-
viding a dilution of surface generated constituents. These factors appar-
ently contribute to the small amplitude of the annual cycle in seasonal
average background turbidity over the Rocky Mountains.
TURBIDITY TIME TRENDS DURING THE 1967-76 PERIOD
The previous described research results have clearly shown that the
seasonal turbidity characteristics differ in different regions of the
United States. Further details of these regional differences were
determined through an examination of seasonal time trends over the 1967-76
decade at specific sites across the country. The results are shown in
Figures 10 though 18. The sites examined are: Oak Ridge, TN, Greensboro,
NC, and Meridian, MS, from the southeastern states; Little Rock, AK, in the
southern Mississippi Valley; New York City in the northeast area; Green
Bay, WI, St. Cloud, MN, and Huron, SO, in the upper midwest, and Missoula,
MT, in the western mountain region. The selection of these sites was
limited to those stations with reasonably complete observational records.
Data adequacy criteria for these averages were mentioned previously. Al-
though these average values are not continuous variables, linear regression
calculations for the trend plots have provided a general quantitative
measure of the rate of change of the seasonal and annual average turbidity
at these sites for the period 1967- to 1976. The results of the regression
calculations are given in Table 3 and are discussed below.
The plots for Oak Ridge, TN, Greensboro, NC, and Meridian, MS (Figures
10, 11, and 12) are typical for sites in the Smoky Mountain and south-
eastern region of the United States. Slight increases in annual average
turbidity, over the period, as shown at the bottom of the figures, are
due mainly to strong increases in the summer average values, as shown by
the seasonal trends in the upper portion of each figure and the higher
correlation coefficients and regression slopes in Table 3. Interestingly,
trends in the winter, spring, and fall average values at these three sites
are not pronounced, and low values for the slope and correlation coeffici-
ents for these seasons were obtained. There is some evidence for changes
19
-------
0.3 J
gO.2
S
O.I
0.0
SUMMER
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
0.3-1
0.2-
Iffi
O.I
i i rr i i i r i i T
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
Figure 10. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at Greensboro, NC.
-------
0.4-
0.3-^
!0.2-
(CD
0.1-
67 68
0.3-1
g0.2H
Iffi
O.I
69
SUMMER
FALL
SPRING
WINTER
70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
i r I i I I i i i i
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
Figure 11. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at Oak Ridge, TN.
21
-------
0.3 n
0.2-
o
o
o
0.0
67 68 69
SUMMER
SPRING
FALL
WINTER
i i i I i i i i
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
YEAR
03.,
o
§0.2 H
tffi
O.I
i i i i i i i i i i i
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
YEAR
Figure 12. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at Meridian, MS.
22
-------
Table 3. Linear regression equations for seasonal and annual average
turbidity trends at selected sites for 1967 to 1976.
Site
Equation
Correlation
Coefficient, r
Oak Ridge, TN
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
B* =
B =
B =
B =
B =
-0.0018Y**
0.0027Y
0.016Y
0.0055Y
0.0061Y
- 0.218
- 0.052
+ 0.882
- 0.244
- 0.268
-0.42
0.34
0.86
0.50
0.83
Greensboro, NC
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
Meridian, MS
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
Little Rock, AR
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
New York, NY
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
0.0010Y
0.0015Y
0.010Y
0.0028Y
0.0036Y
•0.0015Y
0.0042Y
0.0151Y
0.0024Y
0.0049Y
0.0070Y
0.0031Y
0.0057Y
0.0021Y
0.0025Y
•0.0054Y
•0.0036Y
•0.0118Y
•0.0097Y
•0.0062Y
- 0.009
+ 0.022
- 0.499
- 0.094
- 0.113
+ 0.077
+ 0.089
- 0.871
- 0.0627
- 0.225
+ 0.060
- 0.037
- 0.130
- 0.0034
- 0.0065
+ 0.492
+ 0.415
+ 1.073
+ 0.831
+ 0.598
0.36
0.23
0.74
0.52
0.62
-0.04
0.05
0.86
0.29
0.65
0.17
0.64
0.70
0.33
0.61
-0.70
-0.49
-0.81
-0.76
-0.78
23
-------
0.3 n
0.2-
0.1 H
0.0
0.3 -i
§ 0.2 J
o
KB
O.t
FALL
WINTER
r r i i r
67 68 69 70 71
ill
72 73 74
I I I
75 76 77
YEAR
i i r i r i it i r i
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
YEAR
Figure 13. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at Little Rock, AR.
26
-------
0.3 -i
0.2-
IflD
O.I -
0.0 J-r
SUMMER
SPRING
FALL
WINTER
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
YEAR
0.3-1
60.2-
O.I
i i i i i r i i i i i
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
YEAR
Figure 14. Seasonal and annual trends in mean'turbidity at New York, NY.
27
-------
0.3-1
0.2 H
To
§
o
8
Iffl 0.1
o.o J-, , ,-
67 68 69
70 71
YEAR
74 75
SUMMER
.SPRING
~FALL
WINTER
76
0.2 -i
1 O.I-
e
o
0.0-L,
o
I I I I I I I I I
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 .
YEAR
Figure 15. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at Green Bay, VII
28
-------
0.3-1
02-
a
8
o.l -
0.0
I III II
67 68 69 70 71 72
YEAR
Till
73 74 75 76
0,2-n
0.1-
0.0-
I I I I I I I I I I
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
Figure 16. Seasonal and annual trends 1n mean turbidity at Huron, ND.
29
-------
0.2
O.I
0.0
O SPRING
O SUMMER
A FALL
Q WINTER
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 T4 75 76
0.2
0.1
0.0
_L
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
Figure 17. Seasonal and annual trends in mean turbidity at St. Cloud, MN.
30
-------
winter-summer difference is characteristic of the upper midwest as well as
of the west and southwest.
Figure 18 shows the annual and seasonal turbidity trends for Missoula,
MT in the Rocky Mountain region. The annual trend at Missoula indicates a
slight trend toward decreasing turbidity which, as indicated by the seasonal
plots is due apparently to changing winter conditions. The trends of the
seasonal turbidity values do not show differences between seasons. In the
annual record the 1969 value of 0.10 stands out and was looked at in detail.
The value is the result of a few high turbidity days in the winter and in
June, 1969 while most of the other data are generally around 0.08. Thus a
trend downward from the 1969 turbidity value is not considered reliable.
DISCUSSION OF TURBIDITY TRENDS
The turbidity data from the EPA turbidity network in the United States
for the 1967-1976 decade lead to several conclusions about the climatology
of turbidity during this period. Maximum annual average background
turbidity occurs over the Southeast and the Smoky Mountain region and
minimum annual average background turbidity occurs over the Rocky Mountains
and the interior Southwest. This geographical variation was shown to be
characteristic of all four seasons. An annual cycle in turbidity is
recognizable in all the regional areas. Maximum seasonal average turbidity
occurs in the summer and minimum seasonal average turbidity occurs in the
winter in all regions. The amplitude of this annual cycle is greatest over
the Southeast and smallest over the Rocky Mountain region.
Results also indicate increases in turbidity, especially in the summer
season, over the Southeast and the Smoky Mountain region since the early
1960's. Increasing urbanization and industrialization in the South are
believed to be the causes for this trend. The lack of trend toward increa-
sing turbidity in areas outside the southeastern states is apparently con-
trary to visibility trends found in many areas. Trijonis (1979), for
example, postulates a decreasing visibility trend in the southwest where
the turbidity data, admittedly sparse, do not show such a trend. Reasons
for this difference other than the very few turbidity stations are not
clearly identifiable but there are several possibilities. For example, the
sun photometer measurements because of restrictions due to cloudy sky and a
limited number of observations per season may not be numerous enough to
detect relatively small changes such as would occur in the relatively clean
environment of the southwestern states. Also, sun photometer sensitivity
decreases in conditions of very low turbidity (Flowers et al., 1969).
The subjective link between increasing summer turbidity and atmos-
pheric sulfates is supported by the studies of seasonal trends in sulfate
concentrations in the period 1963-1975 by Altshuller (1980). In his study
Altshuller found an upward trend in June, July, and August sulfate concen-
trations at nonurban sites in the east and midwest. This is similar to the
turbidity trends observed. The sulfate correlation to turbidity is also
supported by the visibility studies of Trijonis and Yuan (1978) in the
northeastern states where they estimated that about 50% of the visibility
restriction over the region could be attributed to sulfate concentrations.
31
-------
0.2
0.1
0.0
Q SPRING
O SUMMER
A FALL
WINTER
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
0.2
0.1
0.0
I I
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
YEAR
Figure 18. Seasonal and annual trends In mean turbidity at Missoula, MT.
32
-------
SECTION 4
MODEL RELATING TURBIDITY TO URBANIZATION
In addition to the geographical variation in climatological background
turbidity, significant differences also exist between urban and rural areas
within the same geographical region. To a less extent differences also
exist within a given city or town depending on the location of the
monitoring site. For example, Flowers et al. (1969) showed a difference of
0.03 in the long term average turbidity between a downtown Cincinnati, OH
site and a site on the edge of town. In the Los Angeles Basin in
California detailed turbidity studies describing the turbidity patterns
under different wind flows and smog haze conditions have been reported by
Peterson and Flowers (1978) and Peterson et al. (1978). Using a helicopter
to obtain turbidity profiles in urban and rural Cincinnati areas, McCormick
and Baulch (1962) showed that urban turbidity was especially affected by
the heavily polluted surface layer.
DERIVATION OF LONG-TERM MODEL
Long-term average atmospheric turbidity at an urban location can be
considered as the sum of two effects. The first, background turbidity B.,
is influenced by regional differences in relative humidity, predominant
synoptic air masses, long-range transport, etc. The second, the local
contribution to turbidity, B , is the excess by which the local turbidity
exceeds background levels. § is influenced by the extent of the
urbanization and industrialization of the city where the measurement is
made and the influence of any nearby major urban areas. Combining these
two factors gives an expression for the long-term average turbidity at any
location of the following general form:
B - Bb + Be
A model incorporating both of these factors could be applied to
predict long-term changes in atmospheric turbidity based on growth
projections for urbanized areas. Such a model could be used to predict
changes in the optical transparency of the atmosphere related to visibility
degradation, changes in solar radiation collector capability, and,
possibly, changes in the local climate. The latter climatic application
follows from Husar et al. (1979) who have suggested that increases in
turbidity can affect diurnal and long-term average temperature patterns.
Several factors influence the turbidity in excess of background, B ,
for a given city or town. Among these are particulate and aerosol pre-
cursor emission rates, types of industry, traffic patterns, effectiveness
of pollution controls, the influence of other nearby urban centers, etc.
33
-------
Ui
<0
O
00
o p
O L
8
co
K
•
o
*
O
o
o
)
w
— o
-
••
o
£
•
_ «»
Z 01
0 £
e r
j^
.1
£
H
^.
CO
lAl
CD
CO
Ul
°
CO
=> I
- n
itf
o
T*
^
^f ^
-2 |
••
- (A
>•
>»
•M
XT
— *r—
f.
**
(rt
I/I
- «!
U
X
Ul
•^ -
i ii i I I i r •- = ""
^Mo221<«2 t
o>
a
S 35
-------
0.83. This is quite satisfactory and, in fact, is close to the correlation
value of 0.89 calculated between predicted and observed values of B deter-
mined from the regression equation for the total data set. In figure 20
model predicted turbidity is compared to the observed network values.
As might be expected, at populations below 100,000 there is only a
slight excess turbidity above background levels. For cities west of the
Mississippi with populations of about 2,000,000 the total urban turbidity
(B + B. ) is roughly double the background levels . Turbidity doubling
occurs with populations of about 5,000,000 for cities east of the Missis-
sippi. This difference results from the geographical differences in
background levels.
Differentiating the regression expression gives an expression which
can be applied to predict changes in mean turbidity based on population
growth assuming no change in background turbidity
dT = 3.976 x 10"8.
For example if a city is projected to grow by 1,000,000 people in the next
fifteen years, which is not unrealistic for some sun-belt cities, this ex-
pression predicts an increase in mean turbidity of 0.040. Since the South-
west currently has mean annual turbidity of 0.06 this increase corresponds
to a reduction in the intensity of the direct beam of incoming solar radia-
tion of 5 to 8 percent, depending on the solar elevation angle. To predict
the average turbidity for any city whose population and location are known
or predicted, evaluate B. by interpolating on Figure 2 and calculate the
excess average turbidvty^J predicted using the regression equation given
above. Adding B to B. gives the model predicted value of mean annual
turbidity B. e D
Data from the 1980 U.S. Census can provide population figures which
could be used for additional model validation studies. Correlations ob-
tained with data from monitoring sites not considered for the background
turbidity plot may be lower than the correlation described above.
MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
In all predictive models, assumptions and limitations inherent in the
model must be addressed. For the turbidity versus population model de-
scribed above there are two principal assumptions. J_he first assumption is
that the excess average turbidity above background, B , is related to the
urbanization and industrialization of a city and thus to the population of
the city. The second assumption is that changes in pollution control tech-
nology, predominant industries, and climate will not significantly alter
the relationship between the population of a city and the excess average
turbidity.
The first assumption is logicaj_ and is supported by the empirical
correlation between population and B described above. An example where
this assumption could limit the accuracy of the model is in the case of a
36
-------
0.2-
tflD
O.I-J
0.0
0.0
1
O.I
I
0.2
0.3
Figure 20. Model predicted mean turbidity compared to measured values.
37
-------
small town where a single industry produces significant emissions near the
population center. Depending on how close the source is to the population
center, annual average atmospheric turbidity over the town may be somewhat
higher than predicted by the model. Variations in wind direction will
limit this effect in areas where the industrial source is located at a
distance from the town and the influence of the local source will probably
only be significant in towns located downwind, in the direction of the pre-
vailing wind, from the industrial source.
The second assumption can also limit the accuracy of long range pre-
dictions. Improvements in air pollution control technology and effective
regulation could lower B for industrialized cities. Changes in predomi-
nant industries could either increase or decrease B . For example, in-
creased use of coal fired power plants without adequate pollution controls
could result in the increase of B over cities, whereas improved control
technologies could allow for growth without altering the relationship
between urbanization and excess turbidity. The trend analysis described
previously for New York City may_be an example where improvements in
pollution controls have lowered B , but the reduction could also be due to
industries and people moving away from the central city.
38
-------
SECTION 5
REGIONAL STUDIES
INTRODUCTION
Air pollution increasingly has assumed a regional impact role. A
variety of assessments have been made of regional or "air mass" pollutant
situations, e.g. see: Husar, et al. (1976); Hall, et al. (1973); Peterson,
et al. (1981); or Flowers, et al. (1969). Air masses in which dispersion
is reduced and pollutant accumulation is favored by low winds, subsidence
and nocturnal inversions, and a trajectory over major urban and industrial
areas have been shown to develop reduced visibility patterns and conditions
of increased turbidity. It is the increased general frequency of
conditions of this type that is used as at least a partial explanation of
the relative maximum in turbidity values shown by the climatological
turbidity data to occurr in the southeastern states and southern
Appalachian Mountains.
In the present research the single station analyses of turbidity and
air mass conditions such as done by Peterson, et al. (1981) for Raleigh, NC
has been extended to regional sets of stations in an attempt to assess the
turbidity conditions in air pollution episode-type conditions—those
conditions classed by Husar as air mass "blobs." The meteorologist will
recognize these situations as slow moving, warm anticyclones. The results
of our study have not been completely successful because of limitations in
the available data, as will be apparent from the following discussion.
TURBIDITY IN A SLOW MOVING ANTICYCLONE
In an attempt to assess regional turbidity during conditions of
relatively high air pollution, time periods were sought which had both a
high proportion of turbidity network observations for several days at a
time and a high air pollution potential weather pattern—namely a slow
moving anticyclone over the eastern part of the United States. With such
data it was hoped that the movement of the pollutant air mass could be
tracked across the turbidity station network. No time period was found
with a really good combination of observational data and synoptic weather.
The usual problem was a very spotty observational record with large breaks
in all the station records. This could be due to cloud interference or to
the problems of a low priority observation.
As a substitute we decided to investigate one anticyclonic haze
incident that has been investigated in some detail, namely the period of
June 25, to July 5, 1975. During this time a large air mass formed and
39
-------
moved slowly across the Ohio Valley, recirculated over the area and then
moved across the southeastern states and over the Atlantic Ocean. This
situation has been investigated in terms of regional visibility and aerosol
chemistry by Husar, et al. (1976). During this time period the studies of
Husar showed that the general flow across the Ohio Valley and midwest was
blocked by a tropical storm "Amy" that moved northward off the United
States east coast. During this storm passage west to east air mass move-
ment over much of the area east of the Mississippi River was disrupted and
a large air mass with significant visible haze and air pollutant levels
developed. Within this air mass 850 mb wind trajectories showed that
during the first days of this episode, June 25-27, 1975, the general flow
was from the south and that the initial hazy air mass developed in air that
had moved in from the Gulf of Mexico. During the period of June 28-30 anti-
cyclonic flow had become centered in the Great Lakes area and the hazy air
mass recirculated back over the Ohio Valley and midwest from east to west.
Noon visibilities over large areas within the air mass were less than 3
miles from June 27 through the end of the episode. From July 1 to July 3
this low visibility air mass affected much of the upper midwest while the
circulation within the anticyclone continued. Flow from the northwest
began to be evident on July 3 and by July 5 the episode ended as the air
mass and its accumulated air pollutants and haze crossed Georgia and the
southeast states and moved over the ocean. Visibilities were less than 4
mi at Atlanta, Tallahassee, and other stations in the southeast when the
air mass crossed the area on its trajectory toward the Atlantic.
During this air mass haze episode there were a number of network
turbidity stations that were within the affected area. Table 4 shows the
turbidity data from stations in the haze air mass area for the period June
23 to July 7, 1975. The stations are listed in 4 general geographic groups
-- Appalachians, upper midwest, Ohio Valley, and east coast. Daily aver-
ages for the geographic groups are also shown. The very spotty nature of
the data set is quite evident in this tabulation. This sort of broken data
record is very characteristic of the turbidity record.
The upper midwest area with turbidity measurements at 4 stations,
St. Cloud, MN; Bismarck, ND; Huron, SD; and Green Bay, WI; shows some
impact of the air mass haze cloud between June 30 and July 3. This was the
time period when easterly and southerly flow recirculated the air mass
through the upper midwest. Huron and Bismarck while exhibiting turbidity
values above summer average values (see Figure 7) did not experience condi-
tions as high as most other stations. The conditions at Green Bay were
generally higher than the other stations, as might be expected because of
its location closer to the main industrial source regions.
Two of the network stations, Toledo, Ohio; and Youngstown, Ohio were
classed as an Ohio Valley group. Data are not available until June 29 for
these stations so the initial days of the haze episode are not documented.
The highest average concentrations for these 2 stations was on June 29
which is the day the air mass began its recirculation motion with flow from
east to west across the Great Lakes-Ohio Valley area. Although both of
these stations are in general higher than the upper midwest group of
stations the individual turbidity values and the average values for the
40
-------
period are about 0.200, very similar to the long-term summer average for
the area shown by Figure 7.
The east coast group of stations extend from Blue Hill, MA, outside of
Boston, south to Atlantic City, NJ and Baltimore and College Park, MD.
This area was, for the most part, on the edge of the haze air mass until
the final trajectory southward toward the coast on July 3 and 4. In
general the higher values of turbidity occurred near the end of the air
mass period in more or less agreement with accumulation features of the
synoptic situation pointed out by Husar, et al. (1976). Turbidity values
for Baltimore were significantly higher than most other stations, as might
be expected for a major industrial and commercial city. The higher
turbidity for Albany, NY on June 27 may have been due to the eastward
extension of the haze area early in the episode. According to Figure 6,
summertime background turbidity would be expected to be in the range of
0.20 to 0.25; thus, except for Baltimore the east coast stations do not
show exceptionally elevated turbidity values. New York City values,
although only 2 measurements are available, are in fact noticeably low,
0.068 on July 1 and 0.107 on July 2. These measurements are taken in
Rockefeller Plaza at ground level (altitude 27 m) and are only about half
the 1975 summer average for New York City shown by Figure 14. No
explanation is apparent although the tropical storm off the northeast coast
may have had an effect in bringing a clean air mass and deep mixing into
the coastal area.
The Appalachian or southeast section was considered to contain a group
of 7 stations in the area from North Carolina and Tennessee to Tallahassee
in northern Florida. In general this region had the highest turbidity
values during the latter part of the period, between July 3 and 5. At this
time the North Carolina-Tennessee area had values in the 0.600 to 0.700
range which is about twice as high as the long-term summer average for this
area of around 0.30. Farther south, in Meridian, MS and Tallahassee, FL,
peak values occurred on July 4. These observations would be in general
agreement with the southward trajectory of the haze air mass. Scattered
high turbidity values also occurred in the Raleigh, NC area on June 25 and
26. These occurrences seem to be of less than regional scale, however.
DISCUSSION
In the analysis of this summer 1975 episode and other episodes
attempts were made to draw meaningful isoline plots of turbidity , but
there was little success because of the scattered nature of the record.
This feature of the daily observations is clearly evident in Table 4.
The previous discussion of regional conditions indicates apparently
that rather significant regional haze episodes, visibility 3 miles or less,
may not be well correlated with the network turbidity data in terms of
increased turbidity in heavy haze. In the 1975 situation greater than
average turbidity occurred in the upper midwest and in the southeast but
apparently not in the Ohio Valley in the central part of the anticyclonic
episode. Reasons for this situation are not clearly evident but it points
up one of the problems that may occur in evaluating turbidity and
41
-------
0)
T3
O
(/)
•r—
CL
LU
C
o
•13
3
r—
0.
i_
•r—
^^
CD
c
•r*
&.
3
Q
C
O
•r—
+->
XI
o
+•>
01 in
o en
<£
M- •>
O) in
o
0 >,
•M r3
•r"
T3 O
s- in
3 CM
1
O)
>> c
f-3
•f— ""D
CO
0 1
*
O)
1—
XI
^
f~~
3 i— I
O
CO
en
CM
CO
CM
1^
CM
VO
CM
0)
E LO
3 CM
*"" D
C
0
•r—
re
00
C
o
•r—
01
0)
co 10
f- 0
f— 1 1— 1
^J"
co
CM
•
cn m
CM — •
r-H^-v
cn co
CD s*—*
•
cn ^-^
CO r-l
r— i *^™^
CM CM
•
(£t ff"H
r-l CM
^
("N^,
*^
CO CO
CO «—l
CM r-l
^1" *— 1
r**» to
i— 1 CM
0 CO
O CM
CM r-H
• *
O CO
<£> CM
CM CM
0
•t
I C
>>o s
0) 0
I— •>+->
i — O d» C
r- 3
O O O
•f- H- >-
_g**
o 42
cn CM
*""! —
vo -*" ^ r** tp
p*» r— i r** co
t-i — in «3-
. . .
CO' — > r-l O
en CM 10 en
r-l CO i— 1
CO'— co cn o
i— i CM co •— i r*.
CM «* r-l i— 1
*d-— cn
vo CM r--
r— 1 +~~* in
• •
^^ **""*
«a- CM
CM
f*^.
CO
f^^
•
o
Q " to "
O) Q. r—
-PS- r-
a) i/i o o) ••—
CD r— +J ITJ O I—
<; in CQ o CQ
(C
UJ
CM
CO
CO
o
cn
CM
*
o
p-^
CM
•
co in r-.
CM ^- O
r-l CM i— 1
CO CO O
i— i vo in
r-l O i— 1
cn
^i
CVJ
*
CO
^f
CO
•
CO
f— 1
VO
•
2
^
•4—* ^*
•r- Z
t-? ^~
<_> ^ Z
•r- " i-
+J >, 0 «
C C >- C
(T3 lO O
r— " ^> 3 ^"^
-l-> r— OJ D.
^ ^ z — >
CM'—
CO 1-H
CO* —
O *—»
en 1-1
CM—'
CO- — »
CM CO
•
in'—
o in
CM- — '
^- '••^
CO
-------
*•— »s
T3
O>
3
C
•4-^
c
0
0
1
1
«d-
i-< ao ao
CO *J- VO VO VO VO
en I-H en LO CM
Lp 00 ^^ ^G ^^
^ "^1 ^ "~1 *~1
CM CM i— I r-x
en CM co r~.
CM CM CO LO
. . .
CO
CO
CO CO
CO rH
rH CO
en co
co «a-
i-l CM
«* CM
i— i en
rH O
* •
CO CM VO
f- CM rH
co r-~ i— i
• • •
00 rH *r CM
«* CO LO CM
rH i— 1 rH ^J-
• • • •
O
_1 O
o z *
«oo z «* z
(U 3E «4-> O- r-
C -r- "- -i-
Q^ i— »r-
rH CM
r~~
co ^™^
r*^ i<"*
LO
CO ^"*"
en LO
CM — •
LO *3-
co —
'
co^-
Cn rH
CO'—
^- CM
CM* —
*~
en CM
"
CO *~*
O CM
rH>
^^ **^**
O CO
*d" **• **
•
**•—»•
i-H ^~
CM '
•
.^
C7) S>"
(O fl3
S- O.
O)
> OJ
(O r—
cn
C C
•r- (O
•r-
to S-
OJ k—
•~
e u
ro i-
(/) ra
M- W
O CU
Q£
s_
CU
^^ * •
E f^
3 1—
z a:
*
« «
43
-------
visibility data. Perhaps one problem is in the discontinuous and variable
record found for most turbidity data and the need for a statistical
treatment to smooth over the record variability. The previously calculated
climatological data seem to be satisfactory, in this report and in others
(e.g., Peterson et al., 1981 or Flowers et al., 1969).
44
-------
SECTION 6
SUMMARY
A climatological analysis of atmospheric turbidity over the U.S. from
1967 to 1976 and a simple, regionally stratified model relating annual
average turbidity to urbanization have been described.
The results of the climatological analysis illustrated the geographical,
seasonal, and temporal variations in mean turbidity. Maximum annual average
background turbidity occurs over the Southeast and the Smoky Mountain region
and minimum annual average background turbidity occurs over the Rocky Moun-
tains and the Interior Southwest. This geographical variation was shown to
occur in all four seasons. The annual cycle in turbidity was also described.
Maximum seasonal average turbidity occurs in the summer and minimum seasonal
average turbidity occurs in the winter in all regions of the U.S. The ampli-
tude of this annual cycle was shown to be greatest over the Southeast and
smallest over the Rocky Mountain region.
Results also indicated increases in turbidity, especially in the
summer season, over the Southeast and the Smoky Mountain region since the
early 1960's. Increasing urbanization and industrialization in the South
are suggested as possible causes for this trend.
To develop a simple, regionally stratified model relating turbidity to
urbanization, climatological average turbidity was treated as the sum of
two terms, background and excess average turbidity. The relationship
between urban population and excess average turbidity was shown to be
linear and well correlated (r = 0.76). The application of this
relationship to predict increases in annual average turbidity based on
population growth projections for urban areas was also described.
The technique of separating long term average values into background
and local effects may be useful in predictive investigations of other
properties of the atmosphere, such as visibililty, which are influenced by
man's activity.
Regional case studies of turbidity conditions during air pollution
episodes were attempted with only marginal results because of the
fragmented nature of the turbidity record at most stations. Some air mass
transport could be hypothesized from the turbidity data as long as visi-
bility records were available for guidance. These poor regional results
were in contrast to some single station records that have been published
showing day-to-day turbidity changes at a given location.
45
-------
REFERENCES
Altshuller, A. P. 1980. Seasonal and Episodic Trends in Sulfate Concen-
trations (1963-1978) in the Eastern United States. Environ. Sci. and
Tech., 14:1337-1349.
Adams, D. R., S. 0. Farwell, M. R. Pack, and E. Robinson. 1980. Biogenic
Sulfur Gas Emissions from Soils in Eastern and Southeastern U.S. Paper
80-40.5, Annual Meeting, Air Pollution Cont. Assoc., Montreal, June 1980.
ftngstrtfm, A. 1961. Techniques of Determining the Turbidity of the
Atmosphere. Tellus, XIII:214-223.
ftngstrtfm, A. 1963. The Parameters of Atmospheric Turbidity. Tellus,
XVI:64-75.
Berri, G. J., and J. T. Peterson. 1978. Dependence of Atmospheric
Turbidity at Raleigh, N.C. on Air Mass Trajectories. NOAA Technical
Memorandum ERL-ARL-68.
Covert, D. S., R. J. Charlson, and N. C. Ahlquist. 1972. A Study of the
Relationship of Chemical Composition and Humidity to Light Scattering by
Aerosols. J. Appl. Meteorol., 11:968-976.
Eltermann, L. 1964. Atmospheric Attenuation Model, 1964, in the Ultra-
violet, Visible, and Infrared Regions for Altitudes to 50 km. Environ-
mental Research Paper No. 46, AFCRL 64-740, Bedford, MA., Air Force
Cambridge Research Laboratories. 40 pp.
Flowers, E. C., R. A. McCormick, and K. R. Kurfis. 1969, Atmospheric
Turbidity Over the United States, 1961-1966. J. Appl. Meteorol.,
8:955-962.
Hall, F. P., Jr., C. E. Duchon, L. G. Lee, and R. R. Hagan. 1973.
Long-range Transport of Air Pollution: A Case Study, August, 1970.
Mon. Wea. Rev., 101:404-411.
Husar, R. B., N. V. Gillani, J. D. Husar, C. C. Paley, and P. N. Turcu.
1976. Long-range Transport of Pollutants Observed through Visibility
Contour Maps, Weather Maps and Trajectory Analysis. Proceedings, Third
Symposium Atmospheric Turbulence, Diffusion, and Air Quality, Raleigh, NC,
October, 19-22, 1976, American Meteorol. Soc., Boston, MA.
46
-------
Husar, R. B., D. E. Patterson, J. M. Holloway, W. E. Wilson, and T. G.
Ellestad. 1979. Trends of Eastern U.S. Haziness Since 1948. Proceedings
of the Fourth Symposium on Atmospheric Turbulence, Diffusion and Air
Pollution, American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. pp. 249-256.
Huschke, R. E. 1959. Glossary of Meteorology. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
Boston, Mass. 638 pp.
Kasten, F. 1964. A New Table and Approximation Formula for the Relative
Optical Air Mass. U.S. Army Material Command Technical Report 136.
Korshover, J. 1967. Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the
Rocky Mountains, 1936-1965. U.S. Public Health Service Pub. No. 999-AP-34,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
McCormick, R. A. and D. M. Baulch. 1962. The Variation with Height of the
Dust Loading Over a City as Determined From the Atmospheric Turbidity. J.
Air Pollut. Contr. Assoc., 12:492-496.
McCree, K. J., and M. E. Keener. 1974. Effect of Atmospheric Turbidity on
the Photosynthetic Rates of Leaves. Agricultural Meteorology, 13: 349-357.
Minzer, R. A., K. S. W. Champion, and H. L. Pond. 1959. The ARDC Model
Atmosphere, 1959. Air Force Cambridge Research Center, Air Force Surveys
in Geophysics, No. 115, Cambridge, MA.
Peterson, J. T., and E. C. Flowers, 1977. Interactions Between Air
Pollution and Solar Radiation. Solar Energy, 19:23-31.
Peterson, J. T., and E. C. Flowers. 1978. Atmospheric Turbidity over the
Los Angeles Basin. J. Appl. Meteorol., 17:528-435.
Peterson, J. T., E. C. Flowers, G. J. Berri, C. L. Reynolds, and J. H.
Rudisill. 1981. Atmospheric Turbidity over Central North Carolina. J.
Appl. Meteorol., 20:229-241.
Peterson, J. T., E. C. Flowers, and J. H. Rudisill. 1978. Urban-rural
Solar Radiation and Atmospheric Turbidity Measurements in the Los Angeles
Basin. J. of Appl. Meteorol., 17:1595-1609.
Reisinger, L. M. ,and I. L. Crawford. 1980. Sulfur Measurements - South-
eastern U.S. Paper 80-40.6, Annual Meeting, Air Pollution Cont. Assoc.,
Montreal, June 1980.
Trijonis, J., and K. Yuan. 1978. Visibility in the Northeast: Long-Term
Visibility Trends and Visibility/Pollutant Relationships. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, EPA-600/3-78-075.
Trijonis, J. 1979. Visibility in the Southeast - an Exploration of the
Historical Data Base. Atmos. Environ., 13:833-843.
47
-------
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service,
National Center for Air Pollution Control. 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970.
Atmospheric Turbidity Report, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Volz, F. 1959. Photometer mit Selen-Photoelement zur Spektralen Messung
der Wellenla'ng-Genabhangigkeit der Dunsttrubung. Archiv fur Meteorologie,
Geophysik, und Bioklimatologie, 810:100-131.
WMO-EPA-NOAA. 1971. Atmospheric Turbidity Data for the World. Environ-
mental Data Service, NOAA, Asheville, NC.
WMO-EPA-NOAA. 1972, 1973, 1974. Atmospheric Turbidity and precipitation
Chemistry for the World. National Climatic Center, Asheville, NC.
WMO-EPA-NOAA. 1975, 1976. Global Monitoring of the Environment for
Selected Atmospheric Constituents. National Climatic Center, Asheville,
NC.
48
-------
APPENDIX A
DETAILED PRESENTATION OF THE TURBIDITY COEFFICIENT AND ITS CALCULATION
BEER'S LAW
The atmospheric attenuation for a specified wavelength of the direct
solar beam can be expressed in the Beer's law relationship
Ix = I0>x 10-m (1)
where I is the monochromatic intensity which reaches the earth's surface,
I . is the intensity just before the beam enters the atmosphere at the
mean sun-earth distance, S and A are the wavelength specific,
vertical transmission, scattering and absorption coefficients,
respectively, for particles, S . and A . are the vertical transmission
scattering and absorption coefficients,Respectively, for gases, and m is
the relative optical air mass. The standard choice of base ten for the
exponential terms is arbitrary. Angstrom (1961 and 1963) presents a
detailed discussion of turbidity parameters.
The atmospheric turbidity coefficient (B ) at 500 nm, green light near
the peak intensity wavelength for visible solar radiation reaching the
earth's surface, is defined as the sum of the particle absorption and
scattering coefficients, thus
B500 = Sp.500 + Ap,500* ^
In turbidity equations, the term for Rayleigh scattering (S 5QO) is
usually symbolized by R and the term for gaseous absorption (A i™" is
usually symbolized by Z (for ozone, the only significant gaseous aosorber
at 500 nm). Employing this nomenclature, substituting Eq. (2) into Eq. (1),
and dropping the wavelength subscript (500 nm is now implied) gives the
conventional turbidity equation,
I - I0 10 ~(R + Z + B)m' (3)
At 500 nm the dimensionless constants R and Z have the values 0.063
and 0.005, respectively (Eltermann, 1964). Figure A-l shows the trans-
mission of the 500 nm component of the direct incoming solar beam predicted
by Eq. (3) as a function of the atmospheric turbidity (B5Q0) and the solar
elevation angle (y). The relative optical air mass, m, Ts a function of y.
49
-------
-------
Figure A-l applies to observations at sea level and at the mean sun-earth
distance. Correction terms for these variables are discussed below.
Figure A-l shows that, for a Rayleigh atmosphere (Br0Q=0) and for
vertical incidence (Y=90°), Beer's law predicts 86% transmission of the
direct beam at 500 nm. For a turbidity coefficient of 0.1 this transmis-
sion is reduced to about 70% and for turbidity of 0.3 it is reduced to less
than 50%. Furthermore, the decrease in transmission for a given change in
turbidity, d(I/I )/dB, is greater at low turbidities than at high tur-
bidities and this effect is more pronounced at low solar elevations than at
high ones. This illustrates that a small change in turbidity has a greater
effect on the optical quality of a cleaner atmosphere than it does on an
atmosphere which is already heavily laden with particles.
OPTICAL AIR MASS
The relative optical air mass, m, corrects the coefficients Z, R, and
B from vertical incidence (Y=90°) to the actual solar elevation at the time
of measurement. Values of B derived from Eq. (3) are thus corrected to
vertical solar elevation. This standardizes turbidity values and permits
comparison of turbidity measurements made at different solar elevation
angles, i.e. at different times of the day or in different seasons.
The ratio of the mass of air a beam of light passes through at the
solar elevation of observation to the mass of air a beam passes through at
vertical incidence is m. The geometry of the optical air mass for
atmospheric turbidity is shown in Figure A-2. The relative optical air
mass is evaluated according to the expression
/" P ds
m = (4)
;opdh
where dh is a path element of the vertical transit and ds is a path element
of the transit at solar elevation Y- For a plane parallel atmosphere ds =
dh/sinY so Eq. (4) reduces to
m = 1/sinY, (5)
which is accurate within 0.1% for solar elevations above 30°. However, the
curvature of the earth and the refractive properties of the atmosphere make
Eq. (5) increasingly inaccurate as the solar elevation angle decreases.
Considering the curvature of the earth and atmosphere and employing finite
difference notation, the exact relationship between As and Ah becomes
/ /RPCOSY\ / R.COSY \\
As = (R +h)(R +h+Ah) sin / arcsin(— - arcsinI—B (6)
e e V \ R +h / \ R +h+Ah/ /
R +h / \ R +h+Ah
e e
RecosY
51
-------
.VERTICAL PATH
ACTUAL PATH
TOP OF
ATMOSPHERE
'•-.THIN LAYER OF
•
" DENSITY p
..SURFACE OF EARTH
GEOMETRY OF OPTICAL AIR MASS
Figure A-2. Geometry of optical air mass.
52
-------
where the symbols have the meanings shown in Figure A-2. Substituting this
value for As into Eq. (4) and choosing a suitable step-width for Ah permits
numerical determination of m, considering curvature, for a standard atmos-
pheric density profile.
Kasten (1964) developed a numerical solution of Eq. (4) which allows
for both curvature and refraction. Based on the U.S. Air Force Model
Atmosphere density profile (Minzner, et al., 1959) and choosing 84 km as an
upper limit for the integration. Kasten developed the approximation
formula
m =
1
siny + a(y+b)
-c
(7)
where a = 0.1500, b = 3.855, c = 1.253, and y is in degrees. Above 84 km
the air density is so low that additional attenuation is negligible. Eq.
(7) is used to determine m for atmospheric turbidity calculations.
CORRECTION TERMS
Two correction factors, one for the elliptical nature of the earth's
orbit about the sun and the second for the height of the observation site
above sea level, must be applied to Eq. (3). Since the earth's orbit about
the sun is slightly elliptical the radiation intensity (I ) at the top of
the atmosphere varies with time. There is a difference o? approximately 6%
in I between aphelion and perihelion. Correction for the altitude of the
observation site is required because Rayleigh (gaseous) scattering for in-
coming solar radiation decreases in proportion to the decrease in pressure
for elevated sites. When these correction factors are included, Eq. (3)
becomes
-(R(P/P0)
+ Z + B)m
(±r 10
(8)
where r and r are the actual and mean sun-earth distances, respectively,
and P and P are the station and sea level pressures, respectively.
Solving Eq. (8) for B gives the working equation for turbidity
determination:
B-
- log
I
10
- (R(P/PQ)
Z)
(9)
In practice, J, the sun photometer reading, and 0 , the instrument
calibration coefficients, are substituted for I and I , respectively.
A sample calculation of B is given in the following section.
53
-------
SAMPLE TURBIDITY CALCULATION
Required Input:
Station: Blue Hill, MA
Date: 12/2/70
Time of observation: 1157 EST (Time Zone 5)
Latitude: 42.13°N
Longitude: 71.07°W
J (.nn = 63.0
0,500
J500 = 23'5
(£) - 0.97
Height of station: 198 m
Find Optical Air Mass (m):
A. From Longitude, Latitude, Date, Local Time, and Time Zone
calculate solar elevation angle: y = 25.65°
B. Apply Kasten's approximation formula (equation 7) to find m:
1
m = *-*r, = 2.2987
siny + .15 (y + 3.855)"1-"-3
Correct Rayleigh Term for Height of Station:
A. Apply hydrostatic equation or pressure reduction formula to
find P/PQ = 0.9987.
B. Apply correction:
P/PQ R = (0.9987)(0.0630) = 0.0629
54
-------
SAMPLE TURBIDITY CALCULATION (Continuted)
Substitute into Working Turbidity Equation (Equation 9);
23.5
(63.0)(0.97)
B = -- (0.004 + 0.0629)
2.2987
B = 0.114 (turbidity coefficient for 500 nm)
55
-------
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF DATA FOR REGIONALLY STRATIFIED MODEL
-------
o>
-o
CQ
^^ ^™* Lf^ CD •""* ^^J fO ^***" LO ^O C3 LO O^ ^J LO f~~ ^*\J Oj vO CO O"^ OO ^3" f^ ^j" \_f* ^3"
LO ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^\J OO ^^ C^ ^"' ^*» t^j vjp ^^» ^f CO LO LO O^ f^> O*^ OO OO **J ^f ^™~
O O •— O CM «— «— OOO.— •— OO'— •— •— i— OCVJr— O C> r— •— •— ^~
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGO OQOOOOOOOO
c
o
Q.
o
a.
ocriOO'— r~r^OmcOLr)LOcor~~i — r~
uo
CMVOO
f— LOO
CTiCO O«3->—
cvj »— oo "* r^
CSJr— O OJ
ro
T3
o
e
•o
^— f~~ f~} oo ^~- ^^ CM
CsJ ^^ C3 CO ^~" CO CO CD CD LO CO r~ C3 CD f™" CD r"
ICQ oooo>—ooooooooooooo
•— o roiocvjr— O O O •— •—
OO Of— O O O
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>>
.O
ca
OO»— O»— OOOOOO»— OOi— i— •— OO»— OOF— r—O»— •—
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCDOOOOOOOO
or regiona
1
03
a>
OO«~OCDOCDCDCDOCDC3C>CDC3OC3OC3O
OS
•o
o
3
oo
CO
X
I—I
0
LU
a.
a.
*
- — •
LO
OJ
»-~. ui
CV1 «3
ro
CsJ
o a:
'<:«'-•> <_>
-— <_) 0 C\J >
-o •— - "—•—-co — Q as: ««s:
-ro-.csj — y? -j^z
«a> »-^ — J * — LU • *-
C^- OJ , - •— i C/>Z: "tt) •>
O r- _J r— _Ji<: O) r— 0_ r—
4->-'-u-'O"'— • «l-i— r—
a;
•»->
•r—
to
CJOOODCJOQ
57
-------
a
Ice
cvi «*•?••. co r~~ i r> n f— r— i~~
O •— «* cr> cvi cn i~- >*& > — co
Cft ^t *— CVI U3 f*") UD «=t" CO 00
vr> cr> ro
cr> o i_n '
oc c\j r—
l£>r— OO Vf>
»— ^- O o
O i—- If) O
OOOOCOOOOOOOOOOC3OOCDOOOOOOOOO
c
o
3
a.
o
Q.
r— OO
^~'-Of>O CO O
co wo oo c^ ro
oc o < —
ui<>o
co
oo
o>
3
c
o
*«O ^O CO CVJ C3 t—> f*> ^" f*"> f~— ffr i^ g^ Lf) f^ CNJ ^O ^^ ^^
oooo ooooooo»—ooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
O i— OO r— f^- ro
3 i —
a>
-^-^
—• — -c_>z OooOoi •*— .
^ Z- O3T — - O —
- O*C:Q.Q
»• — o-*?c/ia> »rt
>CT-r~tnl-j3CO
•r- s-c •«-(/)
-OT-CO
-------
^ll»
T3
0)
3
C
•^
j *
^•^
C
O
0
1
1
CO
X
t—t
Q
z
UJ
CL.
Q_
«=c
u
o
«4-
4J
0)
E
0)
t.
«
2
W)
4J
C
(U
>»
«*-
o
w
0)
JO
§
c
C
0)
US
(/>
0>
I- •
Q.T3
O) ft)
5- i-
trt «/»
i- fQ
*-+ O) 0>
JO JO E
IOQ §10,
1 C
«4-
X3 TJ O
O) O)
I- M C
3 -f- O
l« (/)•!-
IO Ol 4->
Ol JZ t>
E •>-> —
ICQ C 3
— • O) U
II S- •—
0) it) ro
ICQ a. u
*
« *
•
o
o
U^
*
CM
4->
4->
4-*
O
f^
L*L
>>
•
•B
•r~
10
•o
c
3
O
U
Ol
J*
u
«o
J3
T3
C
4->
0
E
O)
QC
•f
«
i_
At
w
4->
C
O)
u
c
JD
k.
3
^^
^
.^v
+~>
o
O)
V(~
v»-
UJ
+
+
59
-------
APPENDIX C
TABULATION OF TURBIDITY ANNUAL AVERAGES AND SEASONAL AVERAGES
BY YEARS - 1967-1976,
UNITED STATES TURBIDITY NETWORK STATIONS
Footnotes applicable to all Appendix C Tables:
(1) Number of observations may exceed 1 per day
(2) **** indicates no turbidity observations
(3) All 1977 data should be disregarded, it shows in the tabulation
because December, 1976 is included in the 1977 winter average.
(4) See report reference list for primary source references, i.e. WMO
and EPA publications.
60
-------
trcn
UJD
(no
.
20 20
UJ uJ
Ovr>tf»-inr^«oaj* o cm»*.3-* <^«
•-JX ooooooo* _jcr o *
actn
LUX
ceo
OU. -H
20 ZO
UJ UJ
0:0 * sor^tn'O-joo
LU< * acfvr^h-Kh->o
« OOOOOOO Xi O *
• *
cn<
a:;/)
aJOD
33O ooif>ooj*o-«
Ou. •-«
20 . 20
UJ UJ
* oo* o o in o
«/)< 104
0:1/1 aci/>
LUCD UJCC
QC.O ootroo-f- no ceo r^ •-<
aOinvO-oin-3-*
* i\J^f\jrnmro*
i— a: « o o o o o o * t— OL o o
ZoJ * ••••••*
ctcn OLIO
UJJO UJCD
«t ODO ooirt(*)inm^mO'-«OJ'~«'* 2 CD2 O •-•
V)2L »- 1 »-i i— i i— i t-i OZ •—•
2 -Ou. Nl Z)u.
*•« 20 -• 20
i: o:
a. uj < uj
o _io _jo
i « <*if)p^min>oiroj •• « ** n
Dct o>t^>s-ininir»vO z z>;x i*- 4-
I— 2LU OOOOOOOO O 2UJ O O
2 2> ........ (« z> • •
O « O «
O O
X t-
•• ••
ujo: i>o-^{\jn>tir>£> UJQC r-x
-------
ctin
UJj3
CDO 0*
z n
OU-
ZO
UJ
o •• - \c
••4 co o
UJCD
CDO
2:
ou.
20
UJ
o
4
o
-JUJ
in
r- p~ a (vt *
r> in >o in *
o o o o *
• . . . *
f*l >-< O >O
^< >-4 r\j (\J >^
O
f*-
O
N-
o -H ^< o *
IT in c o «
O O i-t •-* *
• • • • *
a>
luCO
CDO *••« 0s
Z (VI
ou.
zo
UJ
ceo in n
UJ-4 •—« CP*
>—a: f-i o
ZuJ • •
ctin
UJCD
ceo
x
OU-
ZO
UJ
ceo
aJ<
l-Ct
ZuJ
in
n in
n (\j
o o
• •
o •* in
ao o .*
4- .n n
o o o
• • •
in coo
< r
p* co in co r- (vi
o in (vi so co (vi
r> (vi
z zo
Ct uJO
< COZ ^
Z •—'
» ou.
^ zo
o
O UJ
a
UJ
-i
••
UJ Ct
w >
2TLlJ ^^ «-* r* *~^ ^~* •"* ^"^ *^ '^ ^^
ctin
aJCO
CDO
¥.
ou.
zo
<
»-i ccin
Z UJO
Ct COZ
o z:
« zo
UJ
<
o
QL rxx
O ZUJ
X. Z>
in «
i— i
CD
r- iu a.
r- >-<
OX *-^ '*'
t-l (/)>-
o o in r- J> ru
CM »-« —« ^ >o ^^
>o n m in >t
o a* (vi cvi ^
(vi in f-
-------
oan ccu> arm
UJ3) UJCD UJCD
•BO lf> 33O -* O SDO O COO •* *» m CD (M O
Z OJ Z f> Z Z O> h- C" «O f*- .
I3U. 2U. OU. UU.
2O 2O 2O 2O
UJ UJ Ul UJ
on o in * o* o ~« o n tn «* *
O O O
U.4 b_4 U.4 U_<
cc(/> am actn crtn
IUOD UJOJ UJCO UJCC
ODO O XC O» O CDC CC CCO *C CC IT •* CO in
z in z ro z o» zaovoa>o»^-»
OU. -« Ob. Oli. -H ou. ** •*
20 20 20 20
UJ UJ UJ jj
o anD oo * tr^> o ctvD nj ^4 o» in oo r^
i*- Uj< o» * uj< o* uj< -* r> n c- >» in
r«j xsx ^ * 2a: -^ Zi: — i -4 -• o o o
• * XjJ • ZaJ ••••••
(/)< (/>«* ccm crco
UJU UJCD UJCD LUX
(DO -* OOO * O XO O QDO OJ O -^ O 1^ vO
ziu. ^
20 20 20 20
UJ UJ UJ UJ
oo o> oo o* * oo * oo f- * n in ^ «o
2< f^ * 2« * 2< (V * * r- CO IT>
«- 0:10 trio trui
bJT UJCC UJOD U-.'OD
(TO ^ ODO >* —< ODO O CCO 00 in CD in CM r-
s-» zto z rotvj^-Hrvjm
IDU. OU- DU. OU.
20 20 20 20
UJ UJ UJ UJ
ao n cto i"- o ceo * 3:0 --• —< •#• »o >o in
tU< r- aJ< JO OJ uJ4 * uJ< "U f^ O3 IT> i/1 l-t> >-«>
24 34
< cci/> av/> octn ottn
t-* UJJ} uJJD LUfZ3 UJO3
2 CDO fO ODO *•* ^ £O CD GDO O ^* ?** t*~ O* 00
OK 9L ^f JL CO ^4 j|L ^* ^J J> flQ ^^ P^ ^>» ^^ ^^
U. 2O < 2O 2 2O ~* 2 20 ^
1-1 1-1 CC Qt
j rr«/> z cccn o ccio o
4 ujo a ujo u, ujo u,
O* O OQZ "^ **^ ^^ rrvS" (\| to* 3iZ ^^ O CVi O* ON ^*
U.Z'-* -JZ _JZ^-«
UJ 2O _» 2O U 2O U 2O
UJ 4
i !• i (.) UJ * uJ » UJ
UJ -JO -JO 4 -JO UJ _IO
O 44 in » 44 in O 2 44 O (A) 44 I1- (VI >* O OJ CO
2 ^>oc in 4 sec in oa uj oa: ON o occ fu ^ •-* co >o in
4 2UJ (VJ h- 2uJ r-t O O 2UJ ^H -> 2uj --* r-4 »^ O O O
2> • UJ 2> • • 4 2> • 2> ••••••
U) 44 _) 44 i/) 44 2 44
00 44
jo a. in
#• •• •• ••
•^ UJ ON fr'H UJ ^^ ^^ ^^ uJ CN H^ UJ ON QN QN GN GN CN /£t\
-------
UJCD
ajo
so.
zo
o in —• o o
•4- nj oj
ctcn
UJOD
CDO
X
cc
M O
O >* -* O» * *
, < n -. r^ * *
* LlQt ^ ** O * *
, -JUJ • • • * *
zo
UJ
o
<
-ICC
_JUJ
o
o •-* ou *
in CD in *
ooo*
• • • *
O: to
uJCO
ceo
£
ou.
zo
o
-« oj
-i f- »
a co *
_IUJ
CCUl
UJCD
CCO —• f»- »O O
x in -^ oj
zo
UJ
cto
XuJ
DCO
Z
DU.
ZO
UJ
o »-•
*
*
P» -* *
co r- $
o o *
• • *
U.CC
ceo
X
ou.
zo
UJ
ceo
LU<
o
c\j
x
o
^ *
<> *
o *
• *
ce in
CDO •* o h- o o
Du. "*
ZO
UJ
oo —• * -< m «*
z« «-* * •* r^ —i
oruj • * • • •
Ct(/>
UJCD
COO
£
ou,
UJ
oo
a.u.1
o CM =o o
CD -*
* o o *
* o o *
* ^ -« #
* • • *
crtn
uJOD
ODO
£
OU.
ZO
UJ
z<
1-1 Ct
auj
30
n
* r* *
* —i *
* ~* *
* • *
UJCD
CDO CO *+
X tVI ~
in o r»-
(Xl/l
UJCD
ODO
ZO
UJ
ceo co co in *
UJ< * f>- -t *
h-CC rt O ~* *
ZUJ • • • *
co
O
zo
UJ
CCO
LLJ<
(-or
Zul
o ^ o o
*o *—« ^
-t in -*
ooo
• • •
UJCD
CDO
X
ou-
zo
UJ
oro
CD
ZaJ
*
*
*
*
o o
• •
Z CCU)
or ujoo
O COO <*) fl
u. x co in
»-• ou. >*
-J ZO
•4
U CCI/t
UJO
» cox
O X
u ou.
«rt ZO
cctn
uuCD
CDO
»-•
r> in
<\j o
oj
in
O O
CC ZO
o
u- CCl/)
CD 3:
X
• zo
CO
2 «
o
UJ
ao f- oj o
in oa
^ o r«- -i
o o ^- «o
in oo \o -*
o o o o
< CCIO
M uJOD
Z CDO
O
U. ZO
r^ (> CO
n o
< UJO
» Ou.
_J ZO
_l
1-1 UJ
>•
z zuj
< z>
CD «
OD o r-
ooo
uj or
¥- <
»-. UJ
r- co
<-• (\j
uj a:
H- <
»-. UJ
in
uj a
t- «.
HI UJ
ao a* o
(64)
-------
trcn
UJCD
03 O
UJO)
CCO
zo
uJ
O CO
< —
zo
UJ
-JUJ
-JUJ
*fr o o
t\» r>
n *
r*- *
o *
• *
trio
UJOD
ODO
zo
UJ
o
«.
-ICC
-IUJ
o
r*) f- r- o \O
O* •» (VI *-«
•-> 0^ CD * *
z*
* >t NO in IT
» •-• o o o
* • • • •
UJCL
CLO
QH/1
UJCD
CDO
•s.
ZO
UJ
cro
zo
UJ
CCO
ZoJ
o o
H-X
ZuJ
^H CO CVJ O
r- r* ^ CM
o o o o
CCV)
UjOD
CGO
Z
ou.
zo
UJ
CCO
K-CC
ZUJ
o CD in (vi
* co in ct> *+
* . > r- 4- f-
* o o o o
Z
CC ODO
o r
U. 3)U.
•-« ZO
_J
< ZU)
O UJO
aos:
tn
zo
UJ
I « in -x r-
o occ •-« o >o
zuj •-< »-» o
I- Z> • • .
cc «
o
Q.
•a aao
>-• 3:
z r>u.
cc zo
o
u.
1-1 uJO
U
o a« <*>
4 n
r-t \D f-t •->
Z LJCO
ac CDO
ox
U. OU,
•-. 20
zo
O UJ
(X -JO
CO
in zuj
H- Z>
o m
o >o
^-« o
CM
o
<
U UJO
cos:
» 3:
>- Du.
t- ZO
>-«
O uJ
_JO
O «
O OCC
O ZUJ
3 Z>
a «
UJ
cc
o o»
in -
>o
— « oj
GO
1-4 UJ
O) >
o -^ oj
r^ f»- r-
(65)
-------
at/>
UJCD
COO
z
ZXt.
20
UJ
o
CM r- ^ CD
n CM CM —«
in co cc ru *
m o CM oj *
~< -i — CM *
at/)
UJCD
CDO
z
DU.
20
uJ
O
QllO
ii-4
_IUJ
o
U.4
n
a * *
>r * *
-« * *
• « *
CDO
2:
DU.
20
UJ
O
\D OC ID •-« O
m CM CM 4-
cc CM co >o «
CD ao «o o^ *
o o ~H •-• *
u.4
am
UJCD
DDO
z
ou.
20
UJ
UJ4
za
ZUJ
(V o ee
oj *
^H *
• *
*
*
am
turn
(TO
z:
ZJU.
20
UJ
UJ4
za
ZUJ
o « *
in * *
~« * *
• * *
at/)
Lull
acc
z:
ou.
20
UJ
ao
tu<
ZaJ
r- o rvj iTi at
M -t ^ •* CM
vO co 4- ro
•^ ^ CM ro
UJX
03 O
z
at/>
o o
20
UJ
oo
24
GO ~i •-*
CM *
~ *
^ * ^ -*
• * • •
(M
•
JOO
Z
OU-
ZO
UJ
oo
2<
o o in
* * o
* * oj
* * -•
CDO
•s.
Ou.
2O
UJ
oo
2<
* —i ,-.
* r*- r:
a>
a>
aco
UJCD
ceo
z
I3U.
20
UJ
ao
CM
eo
CM
ai/)
UJCD
CEO
Z
2aJ
>£) 4 CO CM *
C7» f«- CO O3 *
O O O O *
• • • • $
20
UJ
ao
i-a
2uJ
*-•>
o in
* CM *o
* o o
« -< o
* • •
UJ2D
CDO
Z
20
UJ
ao
o r> r> ID 4-
f) CM CM n
* CM ^ r^ >o
* ao o* ^ <>
« O O •-! •-*
4 • • • •
atn
UJ!D
GOO
< z
«-• ou.
2 2O
a
o ac/i
U. UJO
1-1 QDZ
-I Z
in n CM
u 20
O -10
2 «
o oa
Z 2UJ
X 2>
U «
1-4
a
CM o -H
lf> f) Cl (M •-•
•i o» n >o -4*
••"t O r-l »-• CM
at/)
< UJCD
i-i CDO
2 Z
a DU.
o 20
U.
•-• am
_l UJO
4 COZ
U Z
• 20
_4
UJ UJ
U. «
< occ
a 2UJ
2>
2 «
<
in
in CM
tn ^ CM
o CM o
in o -«
a at/)
o UJCD
U. CDO
•-• z
< 20
(J
ain
» uJO
O CQZ
2 Z
« 3>j_
O 20
a
< uJ
2 JO
a «
UJ DCC
CO 2UJ
2>
2 «
4
in
f- cx> i»- m
ro CM n a*
IT) CM CM CM CO
O> If) «-i CM
uj a
»- 4
00 (^ •—•
a
4
CD a* O —i CM
so \o r~ Is- r-
(66)
-------
UJ03
coo
x
DU.
ZO
UJ
o
in & r-
o — • co
in
** oj -H CD cc *
in 4- *
o
*
*
UJ.B
COO >t
X <£>
DU- ^
ZO
uJ
O
_itu
o
U.4
OJ *
n *
o *
at/)
luCD
ODC
I
Ou.
ZO
UJ
CC •*
fH .4-
(\i
UJ4
xa
<> ^ ao in oj *
^ r^ CD o oc *
•-• o o o o *
• ••••*
actn
LUX
occ
£
Ou.
ZO
UJ
ao
UJ<
O -* O ^-4 O*
in ao ^ * rvj
a: in
UJD
210
act/)
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
tvj IT a
r-i O O
cc r^
O O
*
*
*
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
CL>
CCLL,
CL>
o o
* *
* *
« *
ODO O
X
OU-
ZO
UJ
oo *
Z4 *
•-•a *
UJOD
ceo
(\J
O (VI
ZO
UJ
n-a:
ZuJ
^H O\ o CT^ O »-<
34
OJ
* ^
* O
* •
ato
UJCD
CDO
X
ou.
ZO
O QCU)
O UJO
4
4 44
vf O OJ f- CO OJ
r-« r«- h- o oj •-•
oj •-* o t\j
••* o n oj in ~*
a« in i^ i^ o >t
o o o o o o
coo
3) X
* ou-
zo
o
o ai/>
4 UJO
a CDX
O X
-i ou.
O ZO
o
JJ
in
o
a 44
O ZUJ
_J Z>
O 44
O
CD
o o
UJ2D
an aoo
a x
z ou.
ZO
o at^
a ujo
4 CDX
a x
o ou.
-I ZO
o
O uJ
» JO
a 44
uj oa
O ZUJ
-I Z>
O 44
o
CD
OJ
t\J
o o
uj a
»- 4
1-4 UJ
V) >•
oj n ^ ir» »o
uj a
I- 4
1-4 UJ
IT) vO
a
4
f-« r-t IS) >-
(67)
-------
era) ocui
LUSQ LUOJ oJCD
coo OD co a> r- o in o mo «n o coo in o
x o» tvj -o •* s: «»- x «*
ZHi. DU. -* OU-
ZO 20 ZO -
UJ UJ UJ
o-4-4-fr*ru* « m * <\o*
_jct o o o o * o * _jct o * _jct o *
-JUJ • • • • * • * -JUJ • * -IUJ • *
O <>
LUX UJGC LUCO
CtO •-< CO >C 1/1 O in C COO -* O CCO
in in a» o cvi n x in x
zo 20 zo
UJ UJ UJ
ao in M (v n -» in * ao c cc n in « uj< in * w< r- *
£2 o o -« o o o # zcr o * £ac o *
2.UJ ••*•••* £uj • * £UJ • *
aJJQ UJOD UJCD
DO o t^ rn f\i n o -* ODO f- o coo o o
sD >O n r-» 51 (VJ
.
zo 20 zo
LU UJ UJ
oo * in o -« a> * *o oo in * oo * *
z» ODO fu o coo o m
s: r^mmoj^ ztvirg
zo 20 zo
LU UJ UJ
cro * 4- t^ *•« «o * f«- xo oo in cro * r-
LU< * CM -< -H ^« * (\j aJ< ^- (\J uJ< # uO
i— a: * o o o o * o ¥- ac o o e-a: * o
ZUJ * • • • • * • ZaJ • • Z'aJ * •
a:in
UJOD O UJCD LU2D
QQO Orsotoinoo) o aoo ro o ODO -^ in
^ (M (Vj -«
zo . o 20 zo
O
o cccn
< LUO
or CDS in o w -H >o ^- in
oz ^^
O ZO
u
UJ
ac
LU oac ojnr-^ftj^-n
o ZLU o o o o o o o
_» z> •••••••
O «
O
co
0
u
f£
LU
Q
_l
0
CO
ff
<
u
z>
LU
CELO
UJO
CDX -* -•
r>u- *"*
20
LU
« f- in
:DCC -* oj
ZLU o o
z> • •
«
cc r^ cc
> ^ ~
0
o
4
O
_l
o
u
*
cc
LU
>
2
LU
O
LU
HH
(/)
ctto
UJO
cox
ou-
zo
LU
-JO
«
oa:
ZLU
z>
«
QL
LU
>
•* ni
^5 ^^
t^ in
O 0
• •
3 S
2 2
ojcc coo»o^*cufn>*
i-< vO«Of-r^f*-f*-r- ...
«-«UJ i>ChO»O*a>CnO> HHUJ O^O^ HHUJ O^O* (68)
CO >• rl i— I r-l ^H i— « ^< .— I I/) >• i— I ^l (/)>• ,>4^4 v '
-------
(TV)
uJB
(CO
£
ou-
zo
UJ
o
m
OJ CO
oj
O
*
*
«
*
Ctlft
LUX
COO
X
r>u.
zo
UJ
o
4
-JUJ
*
*
!C
ru
cr a- *
>o f- *
o o *
• • «
UJQD
ceo o
z in
OU-
ZO
n c
in >o
UJX
ODO
X
cc
90
o o
UJ
QCO CO N- ^ 00
IjJ^i G^ ^D ^0 ^5
zx oj ~« -^ >r
ZUJ • • • •
ZO
UJ
0:0
Lu<
ZuJ
o * «
o « «
OJ * *
• * *
*
*
*
*
*
act/)
UJCD
oj o
UJCD
•DO
IXL.
zo
UI
oo
f) »"^ ^3 ^^ ^3
OJ O OJ
zo
UJ
00
z<
•-•a:
>» *
* *
« *
a>
o «
>fr *
« «
• «
oet/>
UJCD
coo ^ co oj in in
ou.
zo
UJ
ceo
l-Ct
ZuJ
ao oj ~* h-
j> r«- o* >o
o o o o
UJCD
00 O
UJ
CtO
H-CC
ZUJ
0
•
>o *
0*
• *
in cc
00
r^- m
00
• •
art/)
UJCD
COO
X
OU-
ZO
o a>
n oj
•-» OJ
o ccu>
UJO
• CDZ^ ^"4 ^D OJ G^ 0^
O Z •"• "^
Ou.
» zo
z
o uj
t- -JO
o « n in -< oj •*
z occ ^ rn n oj ^
I—t ZUJ r—I »—I •—I OJ ^^
I Z> . • • . .
trin
UJCD
ODO
Z
< ou.
o zo
1-4
CC CCtf)
o ujo
-i cox
u. z
• ou,
uj zo
_I
-J UJ
UJ ZUJ
z z>
l-l «
«t
o
•4" -* D QD 00
in o oj oj
^ in -< in ^
a> in a* r*- >*
ro o^ >o oo m
••* o o o o
UJ CC
K <
i—i UJ
in >
CD CN O <-"
vO vD f- f>-
UJ CC
t- <
i-i UJ
in >
n •* in
(69)
-------
*?,-
Cttn
coo
z.
OU-
ZO
UJ
O
4
Jet
"-<>
^
cttn
UJCD
CDO
3T
Ou-
zo
UJ
cto
UK
Z31
zuj
•^ oo >o n (vi \o o
"« (vi >o in in in
in r>- in •-< in f1- *
•-i f- o cc o «-* *
•-< O •— < O •— • •— i *
m c •-<•—• CT ro o
in >» •* -« "4 ft
• ft • • • • ft
Or in
CDO
y
OU.
ZO
UJ
o
4
_io:
Hi (
«JUJ
u.4
ctcn
U.-CL
CDC
21
OU-
ZO
UJ
CtO
UK
Z.X
ZUJ
co o m -* o
^~ AJ C^ -4 i— t ^H ft
• • t • ft
oj in -- o o
4- n in in
0^ ^^ ^D ^D 4
CO ^^ C^ ^3 ^
oj oj oj oj *
• • • • ft
ctcn
CDO
z
ou.
ZO
UJ-
0
<
-JCt
111 1
"' '
o
U.4
cttn
LuOD
CCO
z
OU-
ZO
UJ
cto
UJ<
z^t
ZuJ
Cti/)
UJCD
COO
2;
ou.
ZO
UJ
cto
uJ4
h-Ct
-9* 1 1
<&UJ
»-«>
ctin
uJCD
CDO
^
OU-
ZO
&(/)
UJO
g"
^)t«
20
. UJ
^)tj>
44
oct
•y^
4b^
«
Cl O
1— 1
ru *
OJ ft
~« *
• 4
O O
9* 4
-« *
r— ( ft
f> oo
n cvj
ON i— •
t—t f*.
'• fl ^»
-« C
CO <^ ^ 00
^ ^ l^ ^ *
i— * (^i oj n ft
^H «— < ^-« i— i ft
• • • • ft
oj 0s m »"• co
in 4* ^^ ^o
^^ ^* CO CO fm^
CO O CO CO •-•
O -^ O O ^H
<^ ^D l^ CM 00
in in ^ >o
OJ ^ OJ OJ
OJ O> OJ OJ ^
»-H •— 1 •— 1
CO O ^ OJ O
O O ~* (\i •-*
•-t «-l t-l <-< «-l
<
o
1— 1
or
o
_i
u.
»
UJ
uJ
in
tn
^
i
<
i
«J
_j
<
luca
coo r** (*) *^ -^ o
ZO
UJ
tO C^ ^^ ^^ ^3 ^^ ^
2 *5. ^h ^^ i^< ^^ ^
1-lCt O ^H I-l —t ft
CtUJ • • • • ft
ln<
ctin
UJOD
aco oj ^H ir> >o in
z -» >o h- oj oj
ou. •—<
ZO
UJ
cto o oj oj ro co
«AJ *3C ^^ ^^ -^Q ^^ *^^
>— at o o o o o
ctcn
UJCD
rnf"^ ^^ ON ^j ^^ (j^
Z •-« 00 C7* •-• OJ
ou. oj oj oj n
-ZO
ctcn
uio
COZ ^ OJ OJ OJ r-4
Z »^ •"• «^ ^-«
Ou-
ZO
UJ
UQ
^t ^t ^O ^^ CO ^^ ^]p
oct o n in in co
ZUJ ^4 ^ rH ^ 0
«
cttn
ODO
ou.
ZO
Ul
oo
z<
H^Ct
Olaj
cn<
ctcn
LuX
occ
j;
OU-
ZO
UJ
cto
JJ-4
•^1 . 1
^UJ
H-l>
UJO)
CDO
4 Z
••-• OU.
O ZO
ct
o oim
_U UJO
O ODZ
2T
* "^'*
< ZO
H-
Z UJ
4 -JO
_J 44
h~ OCt
4 ZUJ
^•^
^^^*
H-l
CO O
in
(*1 *
n »
•—I ft
• 4>
n 4-
OJ
•^ C7^
^ J">
O O
CT* 41
sO
_4
r— 1 — H
r— 1
^ CT^
* in
^ o
O
UJ Ct
I- <
»-t UJ
(vi
in >o
uJ ct
»- <
i-* UJ
O) >-
r> •* in
r- r^ r^
^^ ^^ ^^
uJ Ct
»- <
1-1 UJ
so
>O
C70)
-------
crin
uu:o
coo
zo
UJ
o
-JUJ
O o .-« (M co *
co in d ^ (vi o *
o o o o o o *
• •••••*
UJ30
GDO
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
(*) f*) ^"4
zo
UJ
o <*• •-< in *
< in «o in *
• *
-JLiJ
o
(Tin
Uiffi
mo
z
DU.
ZO
UJ
(TO
UJ<
h- cc n o \fi •-• o
tr» <\j CD vo <\i -*
f- o oo (n n «o *
4- r^ o in * •-« *
o o o o o o *
• •••••*
etc
z
ou.
zo
u
cto
n cc « IT
-* n tu -H
-i rg
trx
crui
JDO
z
zo
UJ
z<
•-•a
QLUJ
0» o cvi in •* o o>
M in "* ~* (vi ^
•-H $ ^ O (VI O* <~<
in * in ct >o n in
o * o o o o o
• * • • • • •
coo
z
in o CM
zo
UJ
•-« *
Z< O *
•-HO: (vi *
CtLU • *
a>
UJCD
xo
z
ZO
LU
ao
Z-U
«* ^ in
o ^ ^ ^- 4- cvj ao
n r> 4- r> (vi cvi n
o o o o o o o
UJOD
(CO
Z
ITi CT1
(VI -«
ZO
UJ
ceo
(vj in
-» tn
ZLU
am
ODO
z
O ZO
I
< aiJi
0 UJO
HH CD2.
i^ ZO
_1
_l UJ
< -JO
u. «
O ZUJ
X Z>
^- OD -4- o ^ o vr
ao >o ao -t in in 4-
^H f in «* in >t fu 4-
o o o o o o o
LLJOC
(DO
ao •* ao
r- o m
zo
•-< (Xl/l
O UJO
Z ixtz —i «o
i— i Z «-«
_J ZO
t-4
UJ
» _JO
O « ^« O (VI O
o z>cr CD oo o» oo
<4 ZUJ •— i i—t i— i t— i
o
X
u
ao o* o -«
>o >o f- r--
HH UJ
V) >
uj cr
K <
•-• UJ
W1 >•
oo
>D
C71)
-------
cet/)
UJOO
CDO
X
OU-
ZO
UJ
o
<
-jcr
o
tvj in (v co
m n ^o *
o 03 o o> i^ *
••H O .-I O O *
• • • • • *
at/)
UJOO
CDO
20
UJ
O
-1UJ
o
at/>
UJX
CDC
ZO
UJ
ao
UJ *
<»• n r*-
rvj
cc*
o *
ocoo
oo
*
«
UJ03
CDO
s
o »-» o
etui
UJ2D
CDO
£
ZO
cto
H-CC
ZUJ
vO IT)
4D vO
O O
*
*
-£> r*- in
o* >o <*
o o o
ZO
UJ
cto
aJ<
I-CC
r- -« r- in ^ *t •<• r»- •* n in
innn^^nronO'Air*-
ooooooooo^n
atn
LU03
ZJU.
ZO
I/) LJO
o
Z
HI ZO
_l
-J UJ
ZUJ
Z>
in ao
o —.
rvj •-«
n
ao
CDO
Z
OU-
ZO
art/)
UJO
in CDX
< z:
GO
CJ» <\J 00
-* (\i (vi
Z ZO
o oj oo -4 CD in
f-« •—I O O CO ^
i—« •—I »-t i—I O O
*: zuj o o
UJ Z> • •
a «
o
«->OOOOOOO(*)
UJ Ct
t- <.
HI UJ
tn >•
ru
in
r-
uacc h-aoa^o^ojfn^-invot^
H-< \ovOvDf*-^r*r^r*r»-r*r^
^^ uJ o* c^ c^ o^ o^ c^ o^ cr^ c^ o^ c^
(/)>- i-H^-lr-ll—li—
-------
am
UJD UJ3J
CDC^ C5 C^ f^ ^^ Uft 20^2
x * ^ ^ -• 2
OU. =>U.
ZO 20
UJ UJ
o cc in o ^ -4 o
ja o o -< o o
_JUJ • • • • • _JUJ
<> o
am
UJCC
CDO OG >C Ql (VI 4
auj • • • • • auj • *
a>
am
UJCD UJCD
no <&•** o •&•*'* ceo
rsu. DU.
20 20
UJ UJ
ao *+ n «*i (T> in ao
uj^ sn >^ in ^ o t|^i-JC
ZuJ • • • • • ZUJ
am
UJCD UJCD
CDO ^* o^ oo ro ^^ CDO o^ co -^ oo *^ in o ^* ro in
^r c^ >j GO c^ in ^L **^ ^5 (vi (vi tn ^ ^ c^ ^f ^*^
"^Ht ^H •—I O OU. •"• «-*i—4^-li—I r^ »—( «-M ^H
zo z zo
UJO > UJO
uj aoz (vj (vi cvi (v» CD o « 4-
^5 ^^^L ^D ift j% ^^ ^O CL fll^O^ ^^
CD ZUJ O O O O O »-i ZuJ (VI
H* Z> • • • • • H- Z> •
a « _i «
u co
•• ••
-------
cttn
UJOD
aoo
a: en
UJCQ
CDO
20
uj
o
O «•* •—I f*4 O O O ••*
inaoo
20
UJ - "'
^ o co <*> o* in ' f^
_JCt -« r+ -4 O *•« .-H
JUJ • • • • • - •
o
*
$
*
.
aw
UJCD
ODO
X
o o
*
*
*
CDO
Z
ou.
20
UJ
;*<
2UJ
-«-*(*»
OOOOO^O—4
(XV)
UJQD
CDO
O 2
Z Z3U.
< 20
_»
>• at/)
cr ujo
UJ
CO
O UJH
2 CDO
< X.
X 2rO
a
< am
X UJO
ODZ.
(VI CM (V) ^« -*
a: zo
4
a. uj
UJ «
UJ 2UJ ^^ •"• "^ •—•
_l 2> ....
O
u
« uj
V) >
UJ Ct
I-
-------
OCJ/)
ceo
X
UJCO
COO
20
UJ
o
4
o
u.4
20
UJ
o
<
-JCt
-JUJ
o
u.4
*
*
*
*
U.CC
ceo
DU.
20
UJ
ceo
LU<
act/)
UJOJ
COO
20
UJ
CC^>
UJ<
XjJ
cr><
aJOC
(BO
CCV)
coo
20
UJ
oo
2<
20
UJ
CtUJ
a>
ctu-
OL>
- >» * r-
000*0
GDO
oo
Cf«
o
20
UJ
a:o
UJ4
to
H- CtlO
I- UJOD
UJ (DO
in £
x 20
2UJ
«-•>
34
ctin
UJCO
GDO
2 =>U-
4 2O
O
o
•
UJO
CDZ:
20
•
-J UJ
_J -JO
HS 44
x oa:
2UJ
UJ 2>
O 44
-J
CO
<—i O>—i^<<—ii-^Oi—<•-•< f* O
X UJO
u cox
•-i X
X =>u.
20
»
Ct UJ
O JO
CD 44
Ct DCt
4 2UJ
2>
2 44
in
a
o
wet
H-4
»— • UJ
r»-eoo«o^fur)^-if>-
ujoc
»— 4
I-H UJ
(/)>-
(75)
-------
LJCD
zo
UJ
o
oooooooooo*
_JUJ • •........*
U1QD
zo ~
UJ
Q» ^y CO ft *& ^0 ^"^ CO ^D ^W ^** ^^ 4^
Ixj ^t CD ^^ ^3 ^3 ^3 C^ ^^ ^D ^^ ^^ 4^
'HOf^rHr-^OOO'i-lO o ro ^ ^
^£ ^ ^^ ^ ^? QC ^ ^ CD ^^ ^^ ^^ ^
•-^o: ^* ^oo* oooo*
CCUJ •« ...« ....«
UJCD
^j^t^~j ^^ QQ ^2 ^2 C^J ^0 ^5 ^D ^^ ^f ^«
^b »jp (^J ^^« L^^ ^^ ^Q ^p- ^^ ^^ ^Q ^^
zo
UJ
0»^S fO G3 ^p ^u C^ ^^ *"H t^^ ^^ '•^ ^D
i^J ^X f^* ^0 ^D ^D ^D ^2 '^f CO ^D '-^\ ^t
•—a: ooooooooooo
ZuJ ••
....
•-« «
-------
at/) at/)
UJD UJO)
ODO McDOfoncoojin^o o coo
x
.
20 ZO
uj uj
. O rOt-4{\j(MaoaocO(Motn* O
_JUJ ••••••••••* _JLU
o <>
!*.< u.<
at/) at/)
LuCD Lu£E
ODO oO'eoeor-o^vCvCr^r^o CEO
Z or^ao^a3O»«or)in>o z
z>u. ^ ou.
ZO ZO
UJ . UJ
cro ntnr-cooroonr'-o* * 0:0
r-r>tf>r-ce-«ooNCo *
~o ODO o
-* oo»noo*>oroin z a*
'
ZO 20
UJ UJ
oo ^* vor~r-o>oi/>>o-** oo
z< vc-^* z<
I— "Ct r-«4 »-lr-lt-t«-
(/)<
am
UJOD UJOD
coo ^HiD>t-^"*fnojr^oirvO coo oo
vO(\jr-^(«.r«-r^i^r)co xco
.
ZO ZO
uJ UJ
ao — icovD^-t>tcro(\j(\jtr)o
»— a: oooooooo— too i— x
ZUJ •••••••••• •
a; to 0:1/1
UJO3 LUCD
»-" coo ojojo^^oo^omoo >-• CEO oo
Q.Z irnoo^r-ir-in-^oxo *as ^
a. 3u. >tM-*(^-*<*>n(vj{vj(vj D DU. ^
^ zo o zo
v> tn
(/) at/) i/) acn
*-i UJO ft UJO
«/) ODZ -*vO<\J(VJ(M(\J(VJ(VJOJ(VJ-« 31 CDS -«
V) ZE •—• ^1 i— t »— I «— t >— I i-4 i-^ i-^ £ r-t
1-1 Du. » OU.
X ZO • > ZO
»-
» UJ >-t jjj
Z _JO O _IO
O ZUJ •— l^-li-«^li— li— Ir-t.-lf-tr- «O < ZUJ
1-4 Z> ••••••••••• to Z>
a « z «
UJ
-------
CHS)
UJEO
too
20
UJ
o
<
••JO:
-to*-«oo*-«
o*
•*
a co
UJCD
DDO
zo
uJ
(ro
UJ<
CDO
UJ
CtLLj
CL>
M
«— i *
• *
•— o •— i
UJCD
ODO
2:
ou.
20
UJ
aco
»-ct
^oooooooo
3C<
a: in
LJ03
»-• ODO
o 20
to
»-l UJO
in zo
»H
3 UJ
O -10
h- ZUJ
z z>
,__.
\io)
-------
a en
UJOD
coo
Z5U.
zo
UJ
o
UJCO
QDO
O r~t O
<>
^5 ^^ ^^ C^ l^ *^h ^^ A
cooin^inin^-*
ooooooo*
• • •••••*
ZO
UJ
o
_ILu
^ o
eo oo
r- f- *o in o *
o oj •-« r> i»- »
O r*l r* •*» O 4
UJOO
mo
ZO
UJ
ao
M
W»
OJ
cco^-ocaincooie
in i/> ^t ^ in •*• in >•
OJ
j=
ceo
r-
o
O
c>
o
tn oo o o in -^
co o in >o LO r—
o o o o o o
* ^
zo
UJ
LLJ<
2: a
C (\J
n o £j» >j-
* cvji n in
f\J f) fVJ f\J
a*/)
UJOQ
'SO
z
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
_ ."^
CX.UJ
CL>
atn
UJOD
CCO
z
in o ^ cvj in
n o f> cvi
(*J & QD *-> *••' ^*
^^ O (Jv »-^ (VI
i-H f\J *-<
O
u
CO GO C^ ^^ ^^ ^3 ^^
fU C*> r-« ^^ (*)
}5
cn
f-i
ro <*> AJ tr> o* 3> m
CD ^D tO ^^ ^* ^ _c
O^% (^ ^^ ci. A j *
*«^ ^^ ^^ SB* *p '4*'
* e
2
««-
•o
O)
O »^ N- O •-+ CVJ &;
CVJ -^ o
at/)
uJCQ
CDO
Z
ZO
UJ
k*4'V
•^^
auj
0 ^>
t/?4^
XtO
UJOD
CCO
z
C3 CO ^^ ^^ C^ ^^
co in *o in ^
&• O O If) O *
(vi rvi ^ m oc *
A
• *
\f} CM CT* >O C^ *^
00 *O ^ lO LH f*)
ZO
UJ
0^ 'fl'
o *
OD n
o o
in -t
o o
m ro *t
o o o
ZO
CCO
aj
1C
ao P* 4- -» n cvj
•o «n ao o o in
o o o —< o o
ZuJ
auo
UJOO
coo
z
DU.
ZO
aio
ro m
in
o o
*•* ao in -*
<
z
t- coz —•incvicvjocvjcvjcvj
ZZ l-« i-H^H«-«»-<»-<»-<
o
UJCD
coo
IS.
OU-
ZO
ZO
< -JO
o Da:
O ZuJ
in z>
co
«£>
o
CO
o
o
O
o
CO
o
in
vO
o
>o
o
in
o
in
o
•^ UJO
(Vj CVJ -« -0 « 03 Z
•™* ""^ ^ X- Z
J3 »- ou.
*^ !-. ZO
-C O
C7> uJ
^ a _jo
ir> m -* •= »-
in to r> >. i-
o o o s- z zuJ
• -. • a» < z>
to -^ r» o «o -d"
^ oo p^ 4- ao n
r> cvj evj cvj cvj
(VJ (VI OJ f\l <\J -<
o ^ in «o ui ru
n in •* »o m in
^H rl «-H i—1 i—4 O
UJ Ct
H- <
ac
o ^
in
uj a
rvj rn
o
CT1 CT* 0^ ^"4 ii i
r-« »-« i—i (jO >
(79)
-------
ortn
UJ20
COO
OU.
. 20
UJ
V®
co !•»• -* in o
•o o ru ^*
-« so ru
o o
ou
o
<>
(TV)
uJCD
COO
*
*
*
zo
UJ
o
<
_jor
-JUJ
f) If) 00 Cf> O> SO
ID CO GO O (M 4- *
(v» CM *
A) ^
CKtO
UJCD
ccc
zo
UJ
0:0
LU<
xa:
ZaJ
O
•
O
•
O O
• •
*
*
*
zo
UJ
cro
UJ<
2UJ
•X)
* CO O
* >* >0
#00
* • •
o» ir» in oo 4- *
<* IT >f in IT *
o o o o o *
• ••••*
tun
mo
ZO
UJ
00
•-•ex
CtLU
a>
o o
*
*
*
in
o
•
oo
cc
o
QDO
ZO
UJ
00
z<
•-•a
Ctiu
a>
*
*
*
*
co
coocooo*
•••••••*
a: i/>
ceo
2:
OU-
ZO
UJ
CEO
ZUJ
o in cu
am
UjCD
20 «
\O 00
O» O
in
GO
or en
O UJCD
O CDO
*•« Z
x ou.
UJ ZO
ru
r- n ^ (\j •-<
>t >t -o -4- co
o o o o o
3t UJO
uj OD 2:
Z X
ou.
» zo
w
O uJ
Z -10
oor
ZUJ
co «
o
rvi ao ^^»-<
ooooooooo
ui cr
t- <
GO
O OJ
p- r-
UJ a:
V- <
•-< UJ
(80)
-------
CX(S)
UJD
CDO ^^(J><*)X>OODnh->O
3E ^> in in r> <*) co ^ \o
* O ~« I-H AJ *
* ••••*
ZO
01
trin
UJQD
uivor^f^ •* \r» \t\
ZO
UJ
or-^* in * ® o •-!
uj< ^r^r-ao* n tvi IT o r-
yojtvn* -4'-*fvj^'-"
ou. ^ --1 ru tvi — i tvi
ZO
x. crtn
a ujo
O 032
>- Z
DU.
UJ
Z UJ
JO
2 ZUJ
< z>
OD
<
-------
crt/)
uJOD
mo
Oti.
20
UJ
O
-jo:
-IUJ
o
»—1 r^ »^ r-4 -^ »^ «^ O ••* O
(XtS)
Ui£D
ceo
(\j
co o
tvi
20
UJ
0:0
ZUJ
ctco
UJOD
JDO
31
in o
20
UJ
oo
2
ODO
S
ou.
20
UJ
CtO
CO >t
4- ^
^4 O
2uJ
n tn nj rvj n >>•
^^ ^^ ^^ ^1 ^O ^U ^O *^"
^H (^ ij^ ^^ ^^ •^^ 0^ ^D
r-«^H^OOOOO
2 bJCD
UJ CDO
20
(M **4 (Vi >x CM v-i •-« i—<•—I^H
UJO
2DZ
a 20
UJ
_l UJ
UJ «
u. ocr
UJ 2UJ
y: 2>
u «
o
ino?^ir)ru>Of~-o
co o^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ro m ^o
(82)
-------
UJCD
mo
Z
20
UJ
o
— tin^-onoomino
>O(Vj(VJ(Vi<\JCVI-«
-4.-40.-«-*— «*
••••••*
UJOD
mo
Z
ZJU,
zo
UJ
o
_»UJ
*
*
mo
zo
UJ
ao*
— < *
fu*
•*
(Tt/)
UJOO
tec
s
Ou.
zo
UJ
LUCD
aoo
ZQ
UJ
OO
CCLLi
a>
t/x
CO*
O»*
o *
• *
»»CD>oa)(M-«*
>C'^C^-fV)«O*
^i-*^H»~ir-i«— i*
••••••«
UJOD
330
z
DU.
ZO
UJ
OO
CtiL.
LiJCD
ceo
(\jf\jtnn-*rr»a>fnoiri
zo
0:0 ^
i— at
ZUJ
OOOOOOOO-HO
LUQD
DDO
zo
UJ
ao
ZUJ
*
*
*
*
ctco
UJOD
ODO
zo
crto
^ UJO
tr CDZ
O Z
'> OU.
zo
uJ UJ
Z. -JO
zo
^ QUO
o: UJOD
o mo
UJ
z
z zo
UJ UJ
O -10
UJO
Z ZuJ
o z>
I- «
a.
u. oo:
UJ ZUJ
H- z>
n
LU cr
HH UJ
-------
ort/>
UJOO
COO
Z3U.
ZO
VU
O
<
_ior
-JUJ
U.4
LUOC
ODO
ZO
UJ
cto
UJ4
(£(/>
uJU
CDO
ZO
UJ
oo
Z
or en
UJOD
ceo
ZO
UJ
oro
ZUJ
4 OT(S)
Z UJOD
HH QQO
-J £
O DU.
QC ZO
4
(_> acn
uio
x 03 z:
i- z
OC DU.
O ZO
Z
UJ
I 4<
o oor
•-* ZUJ
UJ Z>
-J 44
4
CC
uj or
h- 4
M UJ
—i ID
O^ (VI
^ r-* 4- tn *
o o a* r> *
>-4 »•* O r-4 $
• • • • 4
t^ o m f^
O CO CT* vO
oj rvj .-**-«
ro
O* *
ro #
ro *
t*- ro ^- 4" o
OJ OJ OJ OJ
4- r*- *
•-« in *
CO I*- CO •-» f)
j- o^ in co f^
»H (VI (M OJ
in o >o n <*>
in in in in in
o o o o o
rn in in oo
o> in •-• tu
o o^ o co
OJ (VI (VI (VI x4
n r^ 4- o n
(\j in 4 o> in
•—I ^^ r-l i-^ O
in
4
Z
•_<
J
o
QL
4
O
X
or
o
Z
•>
X
0
1 • 1
UJ
-J
4
or
••
UJ
H-
1-4
or i/)
UJCO
CDO
£
=>U-
zo
UJ
o
4
-jo:
-JUJ
^.2*
U.4
UJOD
ODO
£
ZO
UJ
UJ4
£3C
JjT ^L^
^0 ^C
or in
LLIJ3
CDO
£L
OU-
ZO
UJ
oo
•-•a:
CtUi
a>
ori/)
UIOQ
ODO
y
ou.
zo
UJ
oro
»-or
••» i.i
ZUJ
or in
UJCO
ODO
ou.
zo
or to
UJO
03 £
£
OU,
ZO
uJ
_IO
44
^or
ZUJ
*y "^
^ ^
44
or
4
UJ
o
ro
in
ro
CO
«_<
g,
\Q
0*
fs-
0^
OJ
ro
ro
^^
•
0^
in
OJ
*c
GO
OJ
•
CO
.^
OJ
f+
OJ
I—I
•
|«».
o>
OJ
(7-
tn
o
r— 1
O
f-t
r-t
OJ
»— 1
o
in
^
o
r*
O"1
^
0s
OJ
«c
OJ
r— 1
•
cc
co
!•<
\c
<— <
OJ
•
o
41
»
«
«
r~
o\
OJ
00
4"
«-4
Otf
CO
^
00
^»
in
f-4
•— 1
f^.
0*
o
*
*
4
*
c
*
«
*
*
o
4
*
«
4
f-4
ro
\£
4
o
t— »
ro
•— •
4)
4
0
(VI
r«-
o*
o o
OJ
*-•
0 *
^^ 9
0 *
• 9
l«- O
^>
in *
OJ #
ro *
• *
4- o
Q\
^4
f*. 41
OJ *
•— ' 4<
• *
oj in
ao in
•-4
>c in
in 4-
O O
ro in
r- in
in
•-4 «-4
i— i
o> in
in 4^
•-* 0
vO r»
p^ ^»
O* CN
or
U.4
UJQC
COO
^f
DU.
ZO
UJ
0:0
UJ4
£ X
§>
:*(/>
ni •p
CDO
y
Z)U.
ZO
UJ
oo
Z4
•"•or
CCUJ
^)<
CCl/1
1^1 iTl
ODO
^
~^u
ZO
UJ
ao
aJ4
1-3:
"5^ 1 1 1
4&UJ
•—>
4 Oil/)
Z UJCO
»-4 COO
-I £
O OU.
or zo
4
O Oil/)
UJO
X 03 £
»- £
or ou.
0 ZO
Z
UJ
» JO
X 44
o oac
*-" ZUI
1. 1 ^ -^
vu ^.-^
_J 44
4
or
••
uj or
1- 4
*-i UJ
&
-in
tvi
OJ
>— >
•
^
00
o
vC
OJ
•
OJ
co
in
i—i
.— i
•
o
l>-
ro
in
o
•
in
&*
OJ
OJ
i— i
.
TO
ro
^
OJ
r^
o*
0
4>
*
$
*
O
*
*
4t
*
O
*
41
#
*
in
rvi
OJ
4
o
•
in
OJ
f-4
OJ
4*
o
ro
jw
o*
ro
oo
(C
o
i—i
•
o^
ro
in
oo
OJ
•
^
^
|«»
i-^
•— i
•
ro
OJ
o^
>D
O
•
OJ
•H
OJ
i— i
i— i
1—4
in
»•«
^.
fi
o^
^
ro
OJ
oc
OJ
•
f^
00
ro
OJ
ro
•
in
v0
in
CC
(-4
•
O
,4f
r-
m
o
•
CO
OJ
OJ
1-4
I— 1
co
o
OJ
m
f-
CT>
-------
•»
<
z
•••4
_l
o
a
o
X
H-
a
o
z
•>
X
o
1 . 1
Uf
a
••
UJ
H-
i— (
at/)
UJOD
20 o
;£
DU.
ZO
UJ
0 ft
^^
^0 ^t
am
UJOJ
QDO h-
2 ^4
ou.
ZO
UJ
ao ac
jj^ ?*)
H-a o
am
UIOJ
3DO f-
Z •"*
ou.
ZO
am
uO
CDZ CVI
jr
OU.
ZO
UJ
J[Q
« ^
^DQ^ ^^
ZLL) 0
^F *^ M
4f,^ •
a rvj
< r-
Ul O*
am
UICD
CDO
Z
ZO
UJ
o
4
II 1
III 1
o
am
UJQO
no
3E
OU.
ZO
uJ
ao
Ui<
zcr
V)^t
rt^ ^^
UJ03
xo
z
ou.
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
•"•a
CLuJ
am
UJCC
(EC
2
DU.
ZO
Ul
ao
*i^*
t-a
•-<>
z
-1 UJOD
O ODO
a z
< ou.
U ZO
x am
»- UJO
a aox
0 Z
Z Ou-
ZO
»
Ul Ul
_J _JO
•"• oa
> ZLU
1,1 ^» -^^
Ul ^->
X «
<
••
H- <
1-1 ul
O
fw
•^
^
o
(VI
CO
^.
r—t
t*
in
o
ft
ft
(I
ft
o
ft
jQr
ft
CO
^
(*)
O
^
(•»
(VI
(VI
p—
o*
^
o*
(VI
h-
(VI
•^
(VI
n
(VI
f*.
l«-
(VI
>o
o
(VI
o
cc
0
•
0
^
^4
o
^
o
(VI
f—
CO
(VI
^4
c«-
^
1— 1
0
^>
0s
!>-
O^
(VI
t-H
o*
0
f*-
o*
(VI
o
in
n
in
•o
rvj
^
o
r-t
•
r>
o
CVI
^
in
o
(VI
~o
o
1— 1
(VI
^*
CJ"
^
«-»
^
fo.
o*
^
^
CT1
^
o
CJ1
^.
r^
in
(VI
CO
co
CVI
*o
(VJ
t— I
•
(VI
^o
CVI
co
^
o
o
(VI
o
o
«•*
(VJ
1-4
in
(VI
«-*
xO
f^.
o^
o
$
ft
ft
O
ft
1^
ft
4t
JP
O
ft
ft
ft
ft
0s
c^
f"»
ro
o
O^
o*
»— 1
r«-
f)
o
^
f«.
^
(85)
-------
UJ3J
mo
2
-ZX*.
2O
UJ
in in
.4- .^
oof<-*
o
UJCD
ODO ru
z in
UU.
20
UJ
o rv
_JUJ
<>
u. in r> *
in f- tn *
oo o *
UJCD
aio
2O
UJ
LutE
ceo in o n
o» eo n w
OD oc ro o*
o o ^ o
20
uJ
uxt
UJCD
aio
z
ou.
20
UJ
oo
2<
ooir»r*-*ro>tn
a>
in*
^*
•-> *
• *
coo -< -^ cvj o o
^ — • n o *
OC >C O ^ *
O O r-4 (-1 *
• • • • *
20
UJ
oo
a>
t/x
a:in
LUOD
CEO
z
ou.
20
UJ
UJCD
coo
«— x
ooooooooooo
r«- n
ao r- ^ r~
- c\j ^ 4- n
H-CX o o o o o
20
UJ
_j crco
O UJOD
oc ODO
O
20
x
t- ex to
or ujo
O (DZ
2 Z
ou.
• 20
O
a: uj
O -JO
CD «
wi so:
2 2UJ
UJ 2>
uj «
oc
O
a to
< UJCD
»^r*^ooa)oo»*)i*-r^vO *- aoo >t r* oj >o n
(vi^in-^ncowi^fuo*^ oz CO^CDOJ
r>^e\l(M(M— »»^»^»^ ,ii 3U. t\4 £VJ OJ (*>
< 20
a
ort/>
x ujo
*-««OCUfVJ{VjrU(\J«J(\JO-* »~ CDZ -« OJ (V (U ^
•— ' r-« »~t >-< •— » •— i •— i •— i >-4 O£ Z ^-i <— t »— « i— «
o ou.
2 20
(\jfvjn>*(vintnnaina)
"X. _1O
o « - n
< ZUJ O O O O O
Z 2> • • • • •
en «
«-•
OD
suet
i— <
»-iUJ
U1 >-
-------
cein or to
UJCD UJOD UJ2D
O3O acin
UJCD UJCD UJX
CDO ID in COO ^ O CCO CC 00 PO
T n tvj zoo x in in <^
ou. 3u. r>u. ^
zo zo zo
UJ UJ LU
cro n ^« CEO ^ * ceo r- r- r-
-« * uj< «o o •*
rvj * xa: ^ nj ^
• * Z'uJ • • •
i/xt ax tn
2 (VJ Z •-< Z r-« O
3u- 3U. ^ Da. -« ^«
zo zo zo
UJ UJ UJ
O'O
am cein txcn
UJCO UJCD UJQQ
coo n tu coo in in coc ^« r»-
z>u.
zo zo zo
UJ UJ LU
CEO o> in cto m ao cro nj ^o >t
UJ«* P» vO ajO
H-CC o o t—ac. *-t -< >-a: r-i o o
• • zuj • • ziu • • •
»-4> H-l>
act/) in cttn a ir>
UJCD UJJQ UJCO
coo cvj n co
Z 04- (/)Z •* -^ Z O 3D ^
ou, — • uj Z)u, n oui in ^ -<
zo o zo. zo
ccv) o cttn o ac
UJO 1-1 UJO M UJO
o CDZ *-* in x OD£ -« -« x coz -• u.
o zo » zo • zo
k-4 1-4
» Ul I- UJ I- oj
(SI _JO 4 -JO < JO
D « O CVI Z « h- 00 Z « O n 41
CO OCC IV (7- Z OCC * •-• Z OCt (VI n ^
Z ZuJ ••* ••* •-< ZUJ •— i »^ •— « Zuj ^H ^^ ^i
3 Z> • • U Z> • • U Z> • • •
_J « Z « Z
O •"• »^
O O U
••••••
uj cc r- co LU ct r- oo oJ
H-< vO >O I— < <£^O »—
>-i UJ O^Ch i— t UJ 0s O* I-H
-------
CC(S>
UJCD
QQ^^ ^h
ou.
ZO
UJ
O CD
-jcr -«
ecu)
I.UTI
aco
z
Ob.
ZO
UJ
CEO
ZuJ
3>
cn<
a: cn
UJCD
CDO
z
ou.
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
(XUJ
CL>
r>*
«-i*
• #
acin
UJCD
CDO
ZO
UJ
ao
*
*
ZUJ
ooooooooo
cxtn
UJCD
CDO
ZO
UJO
O
>-" ZO
X
O UJ
-JO
m. «
o ocr
O ZUJ
UJ Z>
-J «
o
UJ Ct
H- <
HI UJ
(88)
-------
oein
UJCO
coo
LU03
CDO
ui
o
zo
UJ
o
in
o
o« cn \o
\o r- in
o o
o o
U.4
ttl/V
CDO
IDU.
ZO
ceo
UuOD
CDO
>o
co r>
o o
zo
UJ
(TO
zee
zuj
n -* oj
UJ03
COO
CtCO
UJ33
010
zo
UJ
oo in
Z< (Vi
.-.cc -«
* ^•
* —.
zo
UJ
OO
z<
in o
eo o
in cy> o
h- *O C i
O O
ao
3t >o o
o o o
o^ r»-
r- o
o ^
»-< CO
r> 4- r> oj co
\o r~ ao o ao
o o o o o
ctcn
UJCO
Ct^5 CD f^ ^^
z fvj in *«
zo
UJ
CtlO CO O
UJ< (M (*)
I—CC O O
ZUJ • •
~* •-* in
in
UJCO
coo
zo
O UIO
••« coz
X Z
o =>u.
» zo
Z
2 UJ
O -JO
t- «
(/) DCt
O ZUJ
Z Z>
D «
o
Ctl/>
UICD
fT^<^ »^ O^ »~* OJ (^ If)
Z
Z «
UJ
a.
in in in ^ *o 1*1
o o o o o o
UJ CC
t- <
•-. UJ
tn >-
ixl Ct
t- <
»-« UJ
tn >
-------
a to
UJOD
CDO CO ^^ ^O ^ O
Z o o Cf* -41
DO. ^ -«
ZC
UJ
O o ^- f- O *
4 * if. >»
CtLU • * • • •
UJOD
DO «O O
Z o
ou. ^
zo
UJ
OO ~* *
z< ^ *
o «
• *
a, ty
o ^
in
o o o o
*
*
*
*
(£(/>
UJtB
aco
DU.
zo
c\j
in
UJ
cro >t -H oo ~*
iij UJCO
_l QDO -* ~<
>• z in (vi
in ou. (vi oj
•z. zo
uj ctcn
a. uo
zoz o
o O (VI -* (VI
n
4 uJO
O CQZ —
nino
I- 20
o
•-. zo
CL UJ
_J -JO
UJ 44 *» f^
Q OCC O 4"
4 ZUJ (VJ (VI
-I Z> • •
co
o
o
X
I- 20
O
O UJ
en _io
ro
a.
* DOC
Z ZUJ
o z>
(X «
o in o ^ ^H >t -t cvi^ao
r«-in»or«-o»vor^eDO>r»-
oooooooooo
UJ (X
H- <:
1-1 UJ
in >-
CD
o f-i
(J\
UJ (X
t- <
•-< UJ
in >
(90)
-------
UJD
QDO
z
3L-
UJ
o
"%sr
OCtf)
UJOD
ceo
2
ZXi.
zo
UJ
oco
UJCQ
mo
(vi
zo
UJ
oo
Z<
»-t£X
CtUJ
•*
cummin -^ — •
O <— i •— i
*
*
*
*
UJOD
mo
tvi
zo
UJ
i.im
coo
o>o*-40oo>-i/)>o
UJ ZO
UJ
tO (TiA
(A UJO
UJ
Z
Z
UJ ZO
UJ
in
I ZUJ
a. z>
2: «
UJ
•-i>OC\l(M(\J(VIH(VI'^
LU a:
v-<
»-«UJ
,.
(91)
X '
-------
oei/>
UJCD
03 O
3C
ou,
zo
UJ
O
<
-JCt
-IUJ
in «•>
*t n in f- in o
in f- in •* in
nor-* r- o« o co r- o *
f*) *w4 ^ * ^ ^ O O ^* ^ *
QUA
UJOD
GOO in -^ co n
z o ^* o* m
ou. ^ ^<
zo
UJ
o
«a
-to:
-JUJ
o
f-
o
^H o o
ru m tn in
O* 00 f- «O
o o
*
*
o ••* *-<
act/)
UJOD
ceo
z
DU.
ZO
UJ
(TO
UJ<
ortn
ujm
CDO O^ ^ (VI
z co n n
ou. -^ -«
zo
UJ
Lu<
in n rvi
r- o o
f) O
(M
ro >o •* *
o in ^> *
•-! iVI (VI *
UJCD
•BO
» o o
in in
in in (vi (vi
ZO
UJ
oo
z<
a>
ax
04 o^cvi^inooo^ovo*
4* -j- M * IT. ^no^-*
.*'7t*t't'7 .*^«
UJ33
33O
£
ou.
zo
UJ
oo
z<
>-a
Q:UJ
a>
co r*-
i^. o
in
o c> o
cvi o
t>~ (vi •-< in o in *
^- — o« o n c *
•-* 1-1 o « <-( CVI *
• • • • • • *
tr
UJOD
CDO
z
ou.
zo
UJ
cro
uJ<
in o o» o (vi
— . o
ctai
LUCE
CCC O
Z
OU-
ZO
UJ
zu
O O O O O O
ZUJ
oc n in a> o
o 33 —i co rvj
r*- •* so r- 0s o
>* in 4- in ao r-
o o o o o o
t
»-« oet in
Ct ZUJ —•
z> •
X. «
l-l >-4 p-l r-4 ••—I (-4 cH (VI (VI O
<
x ZO
UJ
UJO
• O5Z.
uj 2:
a> ro CD n CD
(vi o o» a» o
•* n (vi •-« in
r- oj (vi oj ^ (vi ^«
a zo
*-i
< UJ
a. -jo
a. «
O ZUJ ^-i
z z> •
a
o
•— » o< OD OD
•-• o
OD r*-
o o o »•« •-* o
t- <
i-« UJ
Vi >-
UJ QC
t- <
i-< UJ
in
(92)
-------
CC(/) CCU) CCU)
UJ3J uJOD UJCD
CDO O O CDO SO COO (•) f) O
Z Z ^ Z ~ r>
ou. ou. ou-
zo zo zo
UJ UJ UJ
-O** o o O (Vi o *
< * * 4 >C < (V) (VI *
-ICC . * * -JCC »•« -ICC **,-«*
—ltd * * _JIU • —IUJ • • *
O <> 4>
.U.4 U.4 U-<
ecu)
UJCD
CCO
z
OU-
ZO
UJ
ceo
UJ4
zee
ZUJ
o
*
*
4t
*
0
t-l
_l
(VI
(VI
•
CCU)
CCO
z
zo
UJ
CCO
UJ<
zee
ZuJ
(VI
in
(VI
in
(VI
•
ecu)
UJCD
CCO
^r
ou.
zo
UJ
CCO
uJ ecu) ecu)
UJCO UJCQ UJOO
ceo (vi eg coo ® coo o ru oj
ou. ou. ou.
zo zo zo
*
UJ UJ UJ
oo n ci oo o1* oo 4> oo o
z< ^ ^- z< o z< t> (vi ^
CCUJ • • CtUJ • CCuJ
Q-> Q-> O->
CCU)
UJCO
CCO
z
OU-
ZO
UJ
ceo
uJ<
H-CC
ZuJ
(vi m
rg
^^ ^0
C5 ^3
•— ' O
• •
UJCQ
CDO
*^^
ZO
UJ
CCO
LU<
»-ce
ZuJ
(VI
CO
o*
o
•
CCU)
U-'JX
coo
z
11^1^
zo
UJ
CCO
oJ4
h-CC
ZUJ
0 (VI
«— •
* 00
^ ^o
* •— 1
* •
(VI
(V)
CO
f*>
,— 1
•
«
z
o
CC
I.H
>
•»
O
z
1— 1
_j
CC
UJ
t»
U)
••
t—
»-4
U)
CCU)
UJCO
coo ^t in
z n in
zo
CCU)
UJO
QQ«S ^^ \@
z
zo
UJ
-JO
« 0 ft
OCC ^ f*.
ZUJ -» ^
z> • •
«
CC f^ -+
< >o r-
UJ O^ O^
>• 1— 1 t-l
z
o
^_
>^
o
z
1—4
X
»
o
z
o
z
o
UJ
CC
••
UJ
t—
>-«
U)
CCU)
UJCD
QDO
z
zo
CCU)
UJO
coz
z
zo
UJ
«
OCC
ZUJ
z>
«
CC
UJ
o
o
p^
CO
(*)
o
(VI
•
<~t
r-
CT*
«-4
z
o
o
z
I-*
X
U)
«t
»
UJ
1
t-
^—
4
UJ
U)
•«
UJ
1-
1-4
U)
CCU)
2DO
z
ou.
zo
iXU)
ojo
coz
z
""^t^
zo
UJ
-IO
«
oee
ZUJ
z>
44
CC
4
UJ
>-
O (VI O
•* o m
•^N
•-• »-4 f^
1— 1
^W ftX Q\
(VJ * (VI
f^ 1— 1 1— <
• • •
CD O^ €5
vO >O ^
Q\ O^ O^
t-l ^i f-t
(93)
-------
act/)
UJOl
coo
(VI
•* co •-« o
zo
." UJ
v o oroif>ru
UIQD
z o »o co ro in «-H (vi
ZDU. «•*
zo
UJ
QC^S ^^ ^^ fO ^P GO ^D fO ^ ^
LiJ^t ^^ ^^ CD ^? ^D ^^ ^^ ^ ^
• •••'•••»*
QCIO
UJCO
CD ^5 ^^ ^3 Ifi ^J1 00 ^"^ CO ^^ ^3
z CT» (\j in oo ><•<—•
ou. -«
zo
UJ
(1^^^ GO £ (M ^O *"^ IO ^^ ^^ ^
•-HQ: -H« fvt^^^H^^*
CCuJ .•« ••••••«
UJCC
£ in (vi m f) »n -^ (\j
zo
UJ
^^ ^f f^ ^" ^O C^ ^^ ^^ ^^" CO
^I QQ ^^ ^^ ^y ^^ £rt JJ ^"4 (*^
ZuJ •••••••••
UJCD
Z 3U. (*) «-t CO (VI (VI j-«
«-> zo
o
a a in
3E «^ ••< »~» «~« ^* ••"«
Ul ZO
UJ
3E UJ
-JO
^ ^t ^t *P ^^ ^U ^^ ^D ^p CO GO CO
^o ^^?QI m ^^ co o^ ^^ *"*^ ^^ ^f co
Z ZUJ ^^ •—< f—I t—I ^^ i—« f-4 «—! O
HI Z> •• ••
^£ «
UJ
UJ Ct
I- <.
*-« UJ
(94)
-------
too ^vO(Tr-4-coDir»^{vio 200 -* o
r \rt-tn-t44-ifl-tOf~ r >*
DU. ou. ~*
zo zo
UJ UJ
o — laDinr^aooDco^t^* o oj *
"• < i-ia:4>r^sC>o>£>cDf~o
20 ZO
UJ UJ
3:0 f-ro^oCT«ino(VJ^o* CKO -H *
n *
• «
-UOD UJOD
33 O 4-OOO-Of-Or^^H^O COO (VJ O
CO CDl/)vO>O4-(Vl>O« £ vD
20 20
UJ UJ
oo «o* o«-i* *-*tt. •-* *
CCuJ •# ••••••••* CtUJ • *
UJCC UJGD
ODO 0>*(Vllf)irif>OD^f\J^-* OCO O —
^ -t^-t^nifj^-fn-tforn-^ z nj
On. OU.
20 20
UJ UJ
0:0 ir)rut^ir»eDrur^i>-r^^in ceo * <*>
i— a: ooooooooooo t-cr * o
2uJ ...... ..... ZUJ * •
3t<
UJiB < UJOD
" O CKtO
u ujo _» ato
in CDZ r-4\O(VJ(M(VJ<\J(\l(M(VJ(Vj.-4 < CD£ 00 <-4
I-«Z •"• ^H.-- UJ UJ UJ
< -JO < _JO
CD « OvOvt-HOO^tVJ-HfVJin U. « O ^O £T 2UJ — < O
UJ 2> ••••••••••• 2> • •
UJ « 2 «
Q: <
O t/>
•• ••
ujCC l»-ODO>O»^ftJ(TJ^-U1»Of*' UJO: f"- CO
»-< O^^O>9k^O^O^O>O >-O
(/> V- l-^i~I^H^^^<- ^rt «— I
(95)
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5.
ATMOSPHERIC TURBIDITY OVER THE UNITED STATES
FROM 1967-1976
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
Elmer Robinson and Ralph J. Valente
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Washington State University
Department of Chemical Engineering
Pullman, VIA 99163
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
CDTA1D/03-0341 (FY-82)
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
R-806124-01-0
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory - RTP, NC
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/09
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Geographical, seasonal and long term variations in turbidity for the period 1967
1976 from the EPA/NOAA turbidity network are described. A model relating atmospheric
turbidity to relative urbanization is also presented.
The 1967-1976 data show that increases in annual average nonurban turbidity
since the first five years of turbidity monitoring (1961-1966) are primarily found
over the southeastern United States with increases of about 30%. During 1967-1976
annual average turbidity increases primarily at stations in the Southeast. This
increase 1s due mostly to increasing summer turbidity.
The model which is developed involves the separation of annual average urban
turbidity into background and local effects terms where local effects are related to
the local urban area population. This is a basis for estimating annual average
turbidity at urban sites and for predicting long term changes. The correlation
between model predicted values and actual monitoring data is shown to be good.
Patterns of regional turbidity were developed for the period June 25-July 5,
1975 to coincide with a low visibility pollution episode, but the turbidity data
were too sparse to define the episode independent of the more detailed visibility
pattern.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
106
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
96
-------
------- |