vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory
P.O Box 15027
Las Vegas NV89114
EPA-600/4-78-054
September 1978
Research and Development
Environmental
Monitoring Series
Airborne Measurements
of a Copper Smelter
Plume in Montana
The Anaconda Company,
Anaconda, Montana
October 1 - December 9,1976
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad categories
were established to facilitate further development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously planned to foster
technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING series.This series
describes research conducted to develop new or improved methods and instrumentation
for the identification and quantification of environmental pollutants at the lowest
conceivably significant concentrations. It also includes studies to determine the ambient
concentrations of pollutants in the environment and/or the variance of pollutants as a
function of time or meteorological factors
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
-------
EPA-600/4-78-054
September 1978
AIRBORNE MEASUREMENTS OF A COPPER SMELTER PLUME
IN MONTANA
The Anaconda Company, Anaconda, Montana
October 1 - December 9, 1976
by
Frank G. Johnson*, David T. Mage** and Norman J. Cimon
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
* On assignment from National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
** Present assignment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
Protection of the environment requires effective regulatory actions
which are based on sound technical and scientific information. This
information must include the quantitative description and linking of pollutant
sources, transport mechanisms, interactions, and resulting effects on man and
his environment. Because of the complexities involved, assessment of specific
pollutants in the environment requires a total systems approach which trans-
cends the media of air, water, and land. The Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory-Las Vegas contributes to the formation and enhancement of
a sound monitoring data base for exposure assessment through programs designed
to:
• develop and optimize systems and strategies for moni-
toring pollutants and their impact on the environment
• demonstrate new monitoring systems and technologies by
applying them to fulfill special monitoring needs of the
Agency's operating programs
This report presents the results of helicopter measurements taken to
determine the geometry of the plume of The Anaconda Company's copper smelter
at Anaconda, Montana. These data were collected as input to mathematical
models used to predict ambient concentrations in the Anaconda area. In
addition, this report represents a significant contribution to the effort
to gain more insight into rates of diffusion on complex terrain. The Air
Quality Branch of the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las
Vegas may be contacted for further information as to the availability of
these data.
George Es. Morgan
Director
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas
-------
CONTENTS
Disclaimer ii
Foreword iii
List of Figures vi
List of Tables xiv
List of Abbreviations xvi
List of Symbols xvii
1. Introduction 1
2. Summary 2
3. Recommendations 9
5. Description of the Anaconda Smelter 10
6. Description of Data Collection and Processing 13
References 16
Appendices
A. Description and Results of Flights 18
B. Data Adjustment 179
C. Sampling Time 184
D. Determination of Plume Parameters 186
E. Discussion of Data 189
F. Upper Level Winds 202
G. Plant Emission Estimates 204
H. Computation of Stability Classifications 206
I. Comparision of a from S0~ and B 208
J. Quality Assurance Procedures . ... 209
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
A-9
A-10
A-ll
Horizontal Diffusion Coefficients vs. Distance
Vertical Diffusion Coefficients (Cross Sections)
vs. Distance
Vertical Diffusion Coefficients (Spirals) vs. Distance . .
Smeltering Process, Anaconda, Montana
Sikorsky S-58 Helicopter
Helicopter Instrumentation
Sampling Locations, October 1, 1976
Plume, October 1, 1976
Temperature and Dewpotnt Soundings, 0724 MST,
October 1, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0934 MST,
October 1, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 4, 1976
Plume, October 4, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0623 MST,
October 4, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0822 MST,
October 4, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 5, 1976
Plume, October, 5, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0613 MST,
October 5, 1976
Page
3
5
6
12
14
15
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
30
32
33
34
VI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
0
A-12
A-13
A-14
A-15
A-16
A-17
A-18
A-19
A-20
A-21
A-22
A-23
A-24
A-25
A-26
A-27
A-28
A-29
A-30
A-31
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0759 MST,
October 5, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 7, 1976
Plume, October 7, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0619 MST,
October 7, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0826 MST,
October 7, 1976
Plume, October 8, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 8, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0624 MST,
October 8, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0851 MST,
October 8, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 12, 1976
Plume, October 12, 1976 ...
Temperature Sounding, 0645 MST, October 12, 1976 ....
Temperature Sounding, 0834 MST, October 12, 1976 ....
Sampling Locations, October 13, 1976
Plume, October 13, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0638 MST,
October 13, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 14, 1976
Plume, October 14, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0627 MST,
October 14, 1976
Plume, October 15, 1976
35
38
39
40
41
43
44
45
46
48
49
50
51
53
54
55
57
58
59
60
vn
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
A-32 Sampling Locations, October 19, 1976 63
A-33 Plume, October 19, 1976 64
A-34 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0629 MST,
October 19, 1976 65
A-35 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0848 MST,
October 19, 1976 66
A-36 Sampling Locations, October 20, 1976 69
A-37 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0904 MST,
October 20, 1976 70
A-38 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1120 MST,
October 20, 1976 71
A-39 Sampling Locations, October 21, 1976 74
A-40 Plume, October 21, 1976 75
A-41 Plume, October 21, 1976 75
A-42 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0638 MST,
October 21, 1976 76
A-43 Temperature Sounding, 0833 MST, October 21, 1976 77
A-44 Sampling Locations, October 21, 1976 80
A-45 Plume, October 22, 1976 81
A-46 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0816 MST,
October 22, 1976 82
A-47 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1033 MST,
October 22, 1976 83
A-48 Sampling Locations, October 26, 1976 85
A-49 Plume, October 26, 1976 86
A-50 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0646 MST,
October 26, 1976 87
vi n
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number
A-51
A-52
A- 53
A- 54
A-55
A-56
A-57
A- 58
A-59
A- 60
A-61
A- 62
A- 63
A- 64
A-65
A-66
A- 67
A- 68
A-69
A-70
Sampling Locations, October 27, 1976
Plume, October 27, 1976
Temperature Sounding, 0647 MST, October 27, 1976 , ,
Temperature Sounding, 0827 MST, October 27, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 28, 1976
Plume, October 28, 1976
Plume, October 28, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0641 MST,
October 28, 1976
Temperature and Dewpofnt Soundings, 0841 MST,
October 28, 1976
Sampling Locations, October 29, 1976
Plume, October 29, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0640 MST,
October 29, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0823 MST,
October 29, 1976
Sampling Locations, November 1, 1976
Plume Under Fumigation Conditions, November 1, 1976
Plume, November 1, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0651 MST,
November 1, 1976
Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0757 MST,
November 1, 1976
Sampling Locations, November 3, 1976
Plume, November 3, 1976
Page
... 89
... 90
... 91
... 92
... 94
... 95
... 95
... 96
... 97
... 99
... 100
... 101
... 102
, , , 104
... 105
... 105
... 106
... 107
, . . 109
... 110
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
A-71 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0645 MST,
November 3, 1976 Ill
A-72 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0838 MST,
November 3, 1976 112
A-73 Sampling Locations, November 4, 1976 115
A-74 Plume, November 4, 1976 116
A-75 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1056 MST,
November 4, 1976 117
A-76 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1305 MST,
November 4, 1976 118
A-77 Sampling Locations, November 5, 1976 120
A-78 Plume, November 5, 1976 121
A-79 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1309 MST,
November 5, 1976 122
A-80 Sampling Locations, November 8, 1976 124
A-81 Plume, November 8, 1976 125
A-82 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1230 MST,
November 8, 1976 126
A-83 Sampling Locations, November 9, 1976 128
A-84 Plume, November 9, 1976 129
A-85 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1208 MST,
November 9, 1976 130
A-86 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1307 MST,
November 9, 1976 131
A-87 Sampling Locations, November 10, 1976 134
A-88 Plume, November 10, 1976 135
A-89 Plume, November 10, 1976 135
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
A-90 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0918 MST,
November 10, 1976 136
A-91 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1055 MST,
November 10, 1976 137
A-92 Sampling Locations, November 11, 1976 140
A-93 Plume, November 11, 1976 141
A-94 Plume Impaction, November 11, 1976 141
A-95 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0714 MST,
November 11, 1976 142
A-96 Sampling Locations, November 12, 1976 145
A-97 Plume, November 12, 1976 146
A-98 Plume Under Stable Conditions, November 12, 1976 146
A-99 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0719 MST,
November 12, 1976 147
A-100 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0951 MST,
November 12, 1976 148
A-101 Sampling Locations, November 13, 1976 151
A-102 Plume, November 13, 1976 152
A-103 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0716 MST,
November 13, 1976 154
A-104 Sampling Locations, November 15, 1976 156
A-105 Plume, November 15, 1976 157
A-106 Plume, November 15, 1976 157
A-107 Sampling Locations, November 16, 1976 160
A-108 Plume, November 16, 1976 161
A-109 Plume, November 16, 1976 161
xT
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
A-110 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0723 MST,
November 16, 1976 162
A-lll Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0840 MST,
November 16, 1976 163
A-112 Sampling Locations, November 17, 1976 166
A-113 Plume, November 17, 1976 167
A-114 Plume, November 17, 1976 167
A-115 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0718 MST,
November 17, 1976 168
A-116 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0910 MST,
November 17, 1976 169
A-117 Sampling Locations, December 3, 1976 171
A-118 Plume, December 3, 1976 172
A-119 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0740 MST,
December 3, 1976 173
A-120 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 1008 MST,
December 3, 1976 174
A-121 Sampling Locations, December 8, 1976 176
A-122 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0744 MST,
December 8, 1976 177
A-123 Temperature and Dewpoint Soundings, 0943 MST,
December 8, 1976 178
B-l Example of First-Order Linear Response 179
B-2 Example of Second-Order Linear Response 179
B-3 Response of a First-Order Instrument to a Gaussian
Input 180
B-4 Example of Exponential Decay for First-Order Linear
System 182
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
D-l Example of a Surface Reflection 187
E-l Equation (1) vs. Frequency 191
E-2 Horizontal Dispersion Coefficients vs. Downwind
Distance 194
E-3 Vertical Dispersion Coefficients Determined from Cross
Sections vs. Downwind Distance 195
E-4 Vertical Dispersion Coefficients 196
E-5 a Values Stratified by Wind Direction, Spirals 198
E-6 a Values Stratified by Wind Direction, Cross Sections . . 198
E-7 a Values Stratified by Wind Direction 199
E-8 Topographical Cross Sections in the Vicinity of the
Stack 200
F-l Location of Pibal Pads 203
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
1 Summary of Missions 7
2 Source Characteristics 11
A-l Summary of Mission, October 1, 1976 21
A-2 Summary of Mission, October 4, 1976 26
A-3 Summary of Mission, October 5, 1976 31
A-4 Summary of Mission, October 7, 1976 36
A-5 Summary of Mission, October 8, 1976 42
A-6 Summary of Mission, October 12, 1976 47
A-7 Summary of Mission, October 13, 1976 52
A-8 Summary of Mission, October 14, 1976 56
A-9 Summary of Mission, October 19, 1976 61
A-10 Summary of Mission, October 20, 1976 67
A-ll Summary of Mission, October 21, 1976 72
A-12 Summary of Mission, October 22, 1976 78
A-13 Summary of Mission, October 26, 1976 84
A-14 Summary of Mission, October 27, 1976 88
A-l5 Summary of Mission, October 28, 1976 93
A-16 Summary of Mission, October 29, 1976 98
A-17 Summary of Mission, November 1, 1976 103
A-18 Summary of Mission, November 3, 1976 108
A-19 Summary of Mission, November 4, 1976 113
xiv
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
A-20 Summary of Mission, November 5, 1976 119
A-21 Summary of Mission, November 8, 1976 123
A-22 Summary of Mission, November 9, 1976 127
A-23 Summary of Mission, November 10, 1976 132
A-24 Summary of Mission, November 11, 1976 138
A-25 Summary of Mission, November 12, 1976 143
A-26 Summary of Mission, November 13, 1976 149
A-27 Distance vs. Observed SOo Maximum 153
A-28 Distance vs. a (S02), Transect (m) 153
A-29 Summary of Mission, November 15, 1976 155
A-30 Summary of Mission, November 16, 1976 158
A-31 Summary of Mission, November 17, 1976 164
A-32 Summary of Mission, December 3, 1976 170
A-33 Summary of Mission, December 8, 1976 175
E-l Values of R 190
E-2 Table of Critical Values of KS 192
H-l Times of Daylight and Solar Elevation 206
H-2 Key to Stability Categories - ... 207
J-l Sulfur Dioxide Cylinder Histories 210
xv
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS
AGL Above ground level
BRKN Broken (5/8 to 7/8 cloud cover)
B t Total light scattering
C Celsius
CLM Calm winds
EMSL-LV Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-
Las Vegas
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
K Kelvin
kg Kilogram
km Ki1ometer
m Meter
min Minute
MOD Monitoring Operations Division
MSL Mean Sea Level
MST Mountain Standard Time
N Neutral
OAT Outside Air Temperature
OVC Overcast (8/8 cloud cover)
ppm Parts per million
s Seconds
SCT Scattered (1/8 to 4/8 cloud cover)
THN Thin (cloud layer less than opaque)
TST True solar time
xvi
-------
LIST OF SYMBOLS
SYMBOLS
yg Microgram
Po Sea level pressure (mb)
rd Dry adiabatic lapse rate (°C/m)
R Gas constant
S Stable
i Time constant
X.; Input concentration
x Centerline concentration
X t Output concentration
a Horizontal dispersion coefficients
a Vertical dispersion coefficient
X Obscured
W Indefinite
Z Height above ground
xvn
-------
INTRODUCTION
The State of Montana and The Anaconda Company have been monitoring air
quality in the locale of the Anaconda copper smelter for years using a
network of sulfur dioxide (S02) monitors. Violations of the primary and
secondary S02 standards have been recorded. The amount of control required
has been estimated using a mathematical dispersion model and the data from
the two monitoring networks. The representativeness of the data from the
fixed network stations to portray maximum ambient concentrations has been
questioned on the basis of station locations. In addition, the magnitude
and frequency of violations of the air quality standards projected for
areas which have no monitoring stations have been sharply debated. The
mountainous area south and west of the smelter is of major concern. The
probability that the plume will strike the ground in this area- is increased
because of the high ground elevations relative to the stack height. No S02
monitors are located in these remote areas.
In response to a request from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Regional Administrator for Region VIII, the Monitoring Operations
Division (MOD) of the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-
Las Vegas (EMSL-LV) conducted a field study between October 1, 1976 and
January 31, 1977, to characterize the plume of The Anaconda Company smelter
in Anaconda, Montana. During the period October 1 to December 8, 1976, an
instrumented EMSL-LV helicopter was deployed to measure plume parameters
for comparison with model calculations. The parameters of interest were
plume height, horizontal and vertical plume spread, and concentration of
S02 at the plume centerline and near points of surface contact.
The helicopter-borne air quality monitoring system measured concentrations
of S02, nitric oxide, oxides of nitrogen, ozone, aerosol light scattering
(nephelometer), temperature, dewpoint, and location. The S02 and nephelometer
data have been adjusted for instrument response times.
A helicopter-transportable ground S02 monitor was developed and used
to measure S02 concentrations in remote areas impacted by the smelter
plume. Double theodolite upper-level wind measurements were taken over the
4-month period. The results of the ground S02 measurements are contained
in an EMSL-LV report (van Ee, 1978). The wind data are available at this
office.
-------
SUMMARY
The EMSL-LV conducted a field study between October 1, 1976 and
January 31, 1977, to characterize the plume of The Anaconda Company copper
smelter in Anaconda, Montana. During the period October 1 to December 8,
1976, an instrumented EMSL-LV helicopter was deployed to measure plume
parameters for input to mathematical models. The parameters of interest
included plume height-of-rise, horizontal and vertical plume spread, and
concentrations of S02 at the plume center!ine and near points of ground
contact for input to mathematical models.
The helicopter-borne air quality monitoring system measured concentrations
of S02, nitric oxide, oxides of nitrogen, ozone, aerosol light scattering
(nephelometer), dewpoint and temperature, and location. This system was
installed in a Sikorsky S-58 helicopter. The S02 and nephelometer data
have been adjusted to account for instrument response times.
In addition, a helicopter-transportable ground S02 monitor was developed
and was used to measure S02 concentrations in remote areas impacted by the
smelter plume (van Ee 1978). Double theodolite upper-level wind data were
obtained for the 4-month period and are on file at this office.
Thirty-nine sampling missions were flown by the S-58 during the field
study period. Nine of these were aborted due to instrument malfunction,
aircraft problems, or adverse weather conditions. The coefficient, a ,
determined from multiple transects through the plume at a given distance
for a given mission are shown in Figure 1. Both nephelometer and S02 data
are reported. As many as 19 transects are represented by each point. The
data are adjusted to a hypothetical 3-minute sampling period. The Pasquill-
Gifford-Turner (Turner, 1969) dispersion coefficients have been included
for comparison.
An attempt was initially made to separate the stable and neutral
stability cases as determined from temperature soundings. Due to the
complexity of the terrain and other factors, such a stratification proved
to be insignificant. Stratification of the data was made based on wind
direction and the character of temperature inversions (See Appendix E).
The large scatter of the thermally stratified dispersion coefficients
suggests that the amount of turbulence associated with flows having various
velocities in this highly complex terrain is important in determining plume
dispersion. For this reason, each set of observations is nearly unique and
should be treated as such when applying them to mathematical models. The
least squares fit of all the data suggests that, in general, more rapid
-------
2.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure 1. Horizontal Diffusion Coefficients vs. Distance.
-------
dilution than might be expected occurs near the stack. This has been
observed previously (Fanak and Turner, 1976).
Figure 2 summarizes the vertical dispersion coefficients, a , computed
from vertical cross sections of maximum concentrations. Again, considerable
scatter is evident for the reasons given above. A trend for rapid initial
dilution in the vertical is noted. No sampling time adjustment has been
made for the vertical cross sections. The average time required to construct
a vertical cross section was 33 minutes.
Figure 3 represents values of a computed from soundings cf the plume
made by flying tight spirals through the plume at known distances from the
stack. On the average, 3.37 minutes were required to complete each maneuver.
The least squares regression line once again suggests rapid initial dilution
with little further dilution in the vertical at greater distances.
Table 1 presents a summary of the missions flown. The predominant
stability near stack height (S = stable and N = neutral), the status of the
S02 and nephelometer instruments and the type of data collected, i.e.,
plume center!ine height, a , a by means of cross sections, a by means of
spirals and upper level winds are given.
-------
400
300
250
200
_ 150
£
£ 100
g 90
co 80
g 70
° 60
bN 50
40
30
25
20
15
10
i i i
LEAST
SQUARES
FIT
STABLE
NEUTRAL
j I
0.80.91.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.07.08.09.010.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure 2. Vertical Diffusion Coefficients (Cross Sections) vs. Distance.
-------
500
400
300
250
200
150
co 100
I 90
51 80
r/3
70
. N
° 60
50
30
25
20
15
10
A STABLE
• NEUTRAL
i i i
1.0 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure 3. Vertical Diffusion Coefficients (Spirals) vs. Distance.
-------
10
-o
c
in
'ro
NS-
t) '•-
Q.
CO
+J
NO
10
[
X
CO
o
*—I
to
CO
o
>-
o;
co
CQ
u
IO
GO
CM
O
CO
JD
(O
CO
OJ
4J
(C
Q
x:xx:xxxxxxx:xxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
x x
X X X X X X
xxxxxxxxxxx
X X X X X X
xxxxxxxxxxx
X X X X X X X
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cozcococococoaEcocococozcoco
co
OOOOOi— i— i— r— CVJCMCVJCMCVJCVJCVJOOO
•^. ' ^^-^vv.'^>^^v->x.'Xi^^^.>^>xx^^-vv-s^^-^.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOi— •— •—
-a
0)
3
c
•I—
-p
c
o
-------
CO
NS-
-a
OJ
-p
E
O
—i
co
O
I—;
CO
co
or
, NO
r
x
-w
OJ -C
E en
'
O
(ft
CO
CM
O
(O
-P
CD
-t->
n3
Q
xxxxx:xxxxxx:x
x x
x x
x x
xxx
xxx
xxxxxxxxxxxx
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X
xxxxxxxxxxxx
I
co
CO (/}
c/> to co to
LO co
o o
en o
o r-
I— CVl CO LO
ro co
O O
CM CM
8
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
• That the complexity of the terrain in the vicinity of the smelter
be characterized and an attempt be made to correlate terrain to plume
dispersion.
• That a permanent S02 monitoring station be placed on the elevated
terrain to the southwest of the smoke stack.
• That all of the upper level wind data be analyzed for persistence
and frequency. That these data be analyzed for directional and vertical
wind shear and some attempt be made to establish correlative properties to
plume dispersion.
• That the frequently observed downwash conditions be investigated
and reported on separately.
• That a statistical investigation be made of the data in an attempt
to optimize helicopter plume sampling techniques.
-------
DESCRIPTION OF THE ANACONDA SMELTER
The Anaconda smelter is a primary copper smelter. It produces copper
anodes from concentrates of sulfide ores, leached precipitates, and scrap.
At the time of the plume study, the smelter was operating 24 hours per
day, seven days per week, with operations interrupted occasionally for
maintenance. Production for this period (October 1976 through February 1977)
averaged approximately 560 tons of anode copper per day. Smelting was
accomplished by a reverberatory furnace (receiving approximately 20 percent
of copper feed) and a fluid bed roaster - electric furnace (receiving approxi-
mately 80 percent of the copper feed). Matte from the two furnace systems
was converted to blister copper by blowing in Pierce-Smith converters.
Blister copper from the converters was then refined in gas-fired furnaces and
then cast into anodes. Figure 4 is a block diagram which shows the operation
and flue gas flows.
The sulfur charging rate into the smelter averaged approximately
5.5 x lo= kg per day during the study period. Small amounts of sulfur left
the smelter in the slag, as fugitive emissions and as SO emissions from the
acid plant stack. The large majority of sulfur was emitted as S02 in flue
gas. The flue system conveyed most of these gases to the main stack except
for a small amount which was diverted into the acid plant when this unit
was operating. Most of the flue gas diverted into the acid plant came from
the flow from the converter hoods. When the acid plant was operating, the
volume diverted was approximately 34 m3/s. The actual sulfur intake varied
with the S02 content of the flue gas. The average intake of sulfur into the
acid plant was approximately 3,270 kg/hr.
10
-------
TABLE 2. SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS1
Source: Main Stack
Stack Height: 178 m, the stack is on a hill 203 m above
the valley floor to the east.
Stack Diameter: 18.3 m
Exit Velocity2: 1.92 to 2.52 m/s
Flow Rate3: 505 to 661 m3/s
Exit Temperature4: 337 to 370° K
S02 Emission Rate: 0.86 to 10.83 kg/s
Stack 5
Concentration : 1.7 x lo6 to 16.4 x lo6 yg/m3
Information furnished by Region VIII, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
2
Based on stack area and flow rate.
Measured at 1000 MST daily.
4
Measured 41.14 m below stack top.
5
Based on exit velocity and emission rates.
11
-------
CONCENTRATES
AND CONCENTRATE SLURRY
PRECIPITATES
FLUX
FLUE
REVERBERATORY
FURNACE
REVERTS
GAS
CONVERTORS
ROASTER
ELECTRIC
FURNACE
* t I ^*
f MATTE MATTE SLAG
-> SLAG j | j P^ '
FLUE GAS
BLISTER COPPER
S(SO,|
STACK
MAIN FLUE
FLUE GAS TO
AGIO PLANT
BAGHOUSE
Figure 4. Smelting Process, Anaconda, Montana.
12
-------
DESCRIPTION OF DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING
A Sikorsky S-58 helicopter was used for in-plume measurements (See
Figure 5). Its sampling speed was 60 knots (KTS), its cruising range was
approximately 4 hours and its operational ceiling was approximately 2750 m
mean sea level (MSL). The helicopter was instrumented to measure the follow-
ing parameters (instrument designation): ozone (Rem 216 B), nitric oxide
and oxides of nitrogen (Monitor Labs ML8440)* and sulfur dioxide (TECO-43).
Aerosol light scattering was measured with an integrating nephelometer,
Bscat' ^MRI 1550). Measurements were also made of temperature and dewpoint,
(Cambridge CS-137), position (Collins DME-40) and altitude (Computer Instru-
ments Corporation 8000). Position was determined by continuous triangulation
using two air navigation beacons. In addition, magnetic heading was recorded.
Figure 6 is a block diagram of the instrument package. Analog and digital
voltages were processed by a data acquisition system (Monitor Labs ML 7200)
at a selected rate of scan either 1 or 2 seconds.
The data system converts the output voltages to BCD characters recorded
on 7-track magnetic tape (Cipher 70). The magnetic tape was then processed by
a digital computer and a printout of calibrated engineering units was obtained.
In addition, any four analog outputs could be recorded on a strip chart
recorder. Calibration procedures are described in Appendix 0.
In addition to the routine adjustments that were applied to output data
based on calibration and span of the instruments, two other considerations
were made when processing the data. These were instrument response and
averaging times. A complete description of the data adjustment for instru-
ment response may be found in Appendix B and for sampling time in Appendix C.
Plume parameters and horizontal and vertical dispersion coefficients were
determined by application of the method of moments as outlined in Appendix D.
The following types of missions were flown:
1. Flights to dimensionalize the plumes. These consisted of tight
spiral descents through the plume at known distances from the stack to
determine the vertical extent of the plume and the height of the plume
centerline. These were immediately followed by one or more transects at
centerline height to measure the plume's lateral extent and to determine
*A1though 03, NO and NO were measured, no measurable amounts of oxides of
/\
nitrogen, and no significant 03 deficiency was noted within the plume.
13
-------
the centerline concentration. This technique is preferable for the more
unstable or very stable conditions as it takes less time than the other
maneuvers. It is also more applicable at greater distances where the diameter
of the spiral would not introduce as large a proportional variation in the
distance from the stack.
2. Helicopter flights to obtain data with which to construct vertical
cross sections of the plume. These flights consisted of a series of transects
through the plume, normal to the wind flow and over a given path, at incremented
altitudes (usually 30 m) in order to determine the horizontal and vertical
distribution of the various pollutants.
3. Low altitude helicopter measurements to determine near ground level
concentrations of S02 during the periods when the plume was observed impacting
upon the surface.
Figure 5. Sikorsky S-58 helicopter.
14
-------
MONITOR LABS
NOX
NO
TECO
SO?
REM
RECORDER
SELECTOR PANEL
STRIP CHART
RECORDERS
MONITOR LABS
DATA ACQUISITION
SYSTEM
CIPHER
MAG TAPE
MRI
NEPHELOMETER
ALTIMETER
Figure 6. Helicopter Instrumentation.
15
-------
REFERENCES
The Anaconda Company, "Calculations of Ambient Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations
Resulting from Anaconda Reduction Works," Environmental Engineering Dept.,
Butler, Montana, 1971.
Bowne, N.E. "Diffusion Rates." Journal of the Air Pollution Control
Association, 4(9): 832-835, 1974.
Fanak, F.H., and Turner, H.E. "Plume Dispersion from the Sudbury Tall Stack."
In Proceeding of the Seventh Annual International Techniques Meeting on
Air Pollution Modeling and its Application, Airlie, Virginia, September 7-10,
1976.
Liu, Mei-Kao, and Durran, D. "On the Prescription of the Vertical Dispersion
Coefficient and Complex Terrain." In: Proceedings of Joint Conference
on Applications on Air Pollution Meteorology, Salt Lake City, Utah,
1977.
Middletown, W.E.K. and Spilhaus, A.F., Meteorological Instruments. University
of Toronta Press, Toronto, Canada, 1953.
O'Boyle, C.J., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 1977.
Pasquill, E. Atmospheric Diffusion, Chapter 4, D. Van Nostrand, London,
England, 1962.
Thyer, N., Journal of Applied Meteorology, "Double Theodolite Pibal Evaluation
by Computer," pp. 66-68, American Meteorology Society, Boston, Massachusets,
March 1962.
Start, G.E., Dickson, C.R. and Wendell, L.L. "Diffusion in a Canyon Within
Rough Mountainous Terrain." Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 14,
April, 1975.
Turner, D.B., Workbook of Atmospheric Diffusion Estimates. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, 6th Printing, No. AP-26,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1973.
van Ee, J.J., "Ground-Based Sulfur Dioxide Measurements Within a Copper Smelter
Plumo, Anaconda, Montana," (undergoing pre-publication processing) U.S.
Er.,ironmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support
Lai.'C--- '"-dry, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1978.
16
-------
Whaly, H. and Lee, G.K. "Plume Dispersion in a Mountainous River Valley during
Spring." Journal of the Air Pollution Central Association. 4(10): 1001-
1005, 1977.
Wylie, C.R., Jr., Advanced Engineering Mathematics, 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill
Book Company, New York, i960.
17
-------
APPENDIX A. DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS OF FLIGHTS
Included in this appendix are descriptions of each flight, a summary
of the results of each flight, a map showing the location of sampling,
photographs of the plume, and temperature (OAT) and dewpoint (DPT) profiles.
Included with the temperature profiles are stack height and the dry adiabatic
lapse rate, r .. Heights are given in meters above mean sea level (m MSL).
Measurements were made of both S02 and particulate distribution (Bscat\.
Omissions indicate that the data are not available.
18
-------
The following format is followed for each flight.
1. Weather observations: taken by FAA personnel at the Silver Bow
County Airport, Butte, Montana. The following data are presented.
a. Time (MST)
b. Cloud Height (hundreds of feet above surface) HI indicates
cirroform clouds
c. Cloud cover
d. Wind direction (direction wind blowing from, degrees true
north)
e. Wind speed (knots)
The following abbreviations are used:
a. CLR = clear (less than 1/8 cloud cover)
b. SCT = scattered (1/8 to 4/8 cloud cover)
c. BRKN = broken (5/8 to 7/8 cloud cover)
d. OVC = overcast (8/8 cloud cover)
e. THN = thin
f. CLM = calm wind
2. Plant emissions, SC^: Time (MST) followed by S02 emissions in
micrograms per seconds (yg/s).
3. Centerline height/distance/concentration: Height of plume center-
line (m MSL)/distance from the stack (km)/concentration at plume centerline,
SOp (ppm).
4. Three-minute a : Average value or a adjusted to a 3-minute sampling
period obtained by making one or more transects through the plume at a given
distance from the stack. This is followed by the type of instrument used:
B , or SOp. The following format is used:
Average values of 0 (m)/standard deviation of the a s(m)/number of
J -j
measurements considered in determining the average/distance from the stack
(km).
19
-------
5. a values as determined from cross sections (m)/time required to
construct cross section (minutes)/distance from the stack (km).
6. az values as determined from spirals through the plume. The format
is the same as #5.
7. Winds aloft as determined from pibal measurements. The following
format was used: Time (MST)/height (m MSL)/direction (True North)/speed
(m/s).
20
-------
October 1, 1976 0724-0940 MST
Stable conditions were noted at stack height throughout the mission.
Spirals were made through the plume at 2.7 km from the stack. These were
followed by transects through the plume at the height of plume centerline.
The S02 instrument was not operational. No wind measurements were made.
TABLE A-l
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 1, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0800 150 SCT 130/03
1100 150 THN SCT 330/03
2. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: =^2200 m MSL/ 2.7 km/—
3. Three-minute a , Bscat: 143 m/ 25 m/ 3 cases/ 2.7 km
4. a , Spiral, B,.^.: 112 m/ 4.2 min/ 2.7 km
z scai.
67 m/ 3.8 min/ 2.7 km
54 m/ 2.0 min/ 2.7 km
74 m/ 3.0 min/ 2.7 km
74 m/ 3.8 min/ 2.7 km
151 m/ 5.2 min/ 2.7 km
100 m/ 4.2 min/ 2.7 km
80 m/ 3.3 min/ 2.7 km
82 m/ 4.6 min/ 2.7 km
105 m/ 3.7 min/ 2.7 km
21
-------
Figure A-l. Sampling Locations, October 1, 1976.
22
-------
Figure A-2. Plume, October 1, 1976.
23
-------
00-ODE 00-007 00-09Z OO'OFZ OO'OZZ DO'DOZ 00'08T 00"091
aoniiiib
00-0*1
— 5-
O
O
CVJ
r--
o
to
CD
-a
c
o
CO
C\J
O C\]
CO
l>
LU
LU
CJ I—
O
_J ^
CJ CJ
o
2 CJ
(±1 O
LU -2L
QQ LU
oo- o
o
O-
o
-o
(I)
fO
Q-
O)
ro
3
CD
oo'o»r~
-------
CD
00
•<*•
CO "*•
CO "-
O CD
•<*-
CJ>
LU
o
_j ic
U CJ
o
O _J
Z CJ
I— I
Z CJ
o o
UJ Z
CO LU
oo-ode
en
oo-on1
o
o
o
co
en
o
to
CD
c
-a
c:
3
o
co-
c
*r-
o
•
e e |-^
H
O
UJ
e i
* o
^
e ••
ee ee •
^^•k C^»
e e ee« •
eee ee> GEE
® e 0 e &
m ce
®eec ex
• /
/)
m •> /
• <•) /
• eeee e /
eee* /
« e /
/
e ecv> e /
a>ee ee e '
• ee U*8
—
8
•
• ••*
t—
d
8°
~*
S
oo-ode oo'odz 00-0^2 oo-ot'z obTo^3 oo-odz oo-odi oo-odi oo-o»'r
ooo-.oi* (SM313U) saniiiid
Q
C
rtJ
O)
s_
03
s-
cu
ex
flj
1—
•
1
=i
QJ
•r—
1 1
I I
25
-------
October 4, 1976 0623-0827 MST
Neutral conditions were observed throughout the mission (Figures A-7
and A-8). Spirals and transects were performed at 2.5 and 5.8 km
(Figure A-5). The SOp instrument was not operational.
TABLE A-2
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 4, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0550 50 OVC 320/05
0855 50 SCT 150 SCT 300/10
2. Three-minute a , B .: 88 m/ 34 m/ 3 cases/ 2.5 km
453 m/ 113 m/ 3 cases/ 5.8 km
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: =1911 m/ 2.5 km/ —
4. oz, Spiral, B$cat: 168 m/ 6.0 min/ 2.5 km
108 m/ 4.6 min/ 2.5 km
151 m/ 5.0 min/ 2.5 km
92 m/ 4.7 min/ 2.5 km
89 m/ 3.0 min/ 2.5 km
96 m/ 5.2 min/ 5.8 km
51 m/ 3.0 min/ 5.8 km
118 m/ 7.2 min/ 5.8 km
60 m/ 4.1 min/ 5.8 km
106 m/ 4.1 min/ 5.8 km
26
-------
TRANSECTS
TRANSECT
SPIRALS
r^
Figure A-5. Sampling Locations^ October 4, 1976.
27
-------
Figure A-6. Plume, October 4, 1976.
28
-------
8
cn
rn
LO
oo
CM oo
co LO
o cn
CM
UJ LO
2= O
t—<
I— UJ
CJ
o
CJ
O
LU
CO
CJ
o
_J
CJ
O
2
LU
e®
»e e
eedte
eeee eaje
o e s)
8
oO-
oo
O
o
g
d.
8°
§
00
0^3 00-0^3 00'0>r3 00'033 00
ooc-.OI*
adz
00-0^1 oo'o»i oo'oar'
cu
JQ
O
+0
O
o
CO
CO
C\J
CD
E
O
oo
O
a.
s
0)
Q
TJ
CU
i-
"3
CU
a_
a>
CO
3
cn
29
-------
r-
01
LU
CJ
o
o
_i
CJ
C±> CD
UJ Z
00 LU
4?«
9^® €^f^
LO n © 4^
^^uuGBJy
* ^Kjff ^u
CsJ «D e
CM LO
CO f^
Or^
i i i i i i i i
t—
oQ-
C3Q
O
1
o
Q
CM
r"*
1
CM
LU °2
OJ
OJ
CO
o
t*
CO
O5
•1—
c
3
O
C/1
•t->
8
00'
*d-
s-
O
o
00'023 00'003 00'081 00'091 00'OH
o
CL
-o
C
30
-------
October 5, 1976 0556-0823 MST
Stable conditions were observed throughout the sampling period. The
S02 instrument was not operational. Spirals and transects were made through
the plume at various altitudes 3.0 km from the stack.
TABLE A-3
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 5, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0550 W10X* 150/05
0850 100 BRKN CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 10.7 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 12.7 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 10.7 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2042 m/ 3.0 km/ ~
4. Three-minute a , Bp/, .: 290 m/ 90 m/ 7 cases/ 3.0 km
y sea L
5. oz, Spiral, Bscat: 107 m/ 3.0 min/ 3.0 km
81 m/ 1.5 min/ 3.0 km
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0758 1950 244 3
2040 246 3
0829 1950 229 5
2040 229 5
* Indefinite, 1000 ft. obscured.
31
-------
Figure A-9. Sampling Locations, October 5, 1976.
32
-------
Figure A-10. Plume, October 5, 1976.
33
-------
O
LD
CO
—• CM
CD "^
O CD
CM
CD
LU
O
LU
CJ
O
CD
LJ
CD
_J
LJ
CD
CD CD
LU 2
OQ LU
e ee
6E> €)Bt>€) ©0 O€)
e eee-
_ ee»
oee
ff
eee
e eeee«
leeee
o_
OQ
o
M
IX
O
'on DO-oh oo'oiz oo'oh 00-002 OO-OBT oo-odi oo-oci oo-os'i0
coo.,01" (§y3i3W) aonnna
V£>
r^
en
in
O)
.a
o
•p
o
o
co
o
-o
c
o
+J
c
'I—
o
re
-------
CD
O
CD
ID
O
O
LU
CD
CM
LO
O
CD
O
CJ
CD
_l
LJ
a
LU
CJ
o
_J
LJ
CD
-z.
a
z
LU
a
o
_ ee e e
e e e e^e* e »
e e° eP e ®
.1
e «»
e e
ee
ee
oo- ot7 DO- oiz oa-023 oa-oi's oo-ooi DO
OM-^ i* (
OGl OO-OSl OO-oZl 00-091°
VD
r^
(Ti
LO
0)
J2l
o
+J
o
o
Lf)
r~^
o
to
C31
ZJ
o
o
CL
s
ai
Q
ta
O)
OJ
Q.
CJ
OJ
s-
01
35
-------
October 7, 1976 0619-0826 MST
Clear skies, light winds and stable conditions were noted throughout
the sampling period (Figures A-15 and A-16). Multiple spirals followed
by traverses at the height of the plume centerline were made at 1.5 and
4.4 km east-southeast of the stack (Figure A-13).
TABLE A-4
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 7, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0654 CLR CLM
0955 CLR CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 10.2 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 9.4 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 12.4 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2250 m/ 1.5 km/ 20.5 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 359 m/ 112 m/ 3 cases/ 1.5 km
575 m/ 91 m/ 6 cases/ 4.4 km
Three-minute a , B ..: 299 m/ 47 m/ 3 cases/ 1.5 km
y scat
556 m/ 74 m/ 6 cases/ 4.4 km
5. az, Spiral, S02: 59 m/ 3.5 min/ 1.5 km
38 m/ 3.5 min/ 1.5 km
40 m/ 3.0 min/ 1.5 km
65 m/ 4.3 min/ 4.4 km
60 m/ 4.0 min/ 4.4 km
61 m/ 1.2 min/ 4.4 km
6. a , Spiral, B ./. 45 m/ 1.3 min/ 1.5 km
66 m/ 3.5 min/ 1.5 km
41 m/ 3.5 min/ 1.5 km
70 m/ 3.3 min/ 4.4 km
68 m/ 2.6 min/ 4.4 km
61 m/ 1.3 min/ 4.4 km
55 m/ 0.9 min/ 4.4 km
63 m/ 4.0 min/ 4.4 km
36
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0725 1950 046 5
2250 307 6
0755 1950 051 3
0825 1950 023 6
2250 020 7
0855 1950 055 4
2250 315 1
37
-------
Figure A-13. Sampling Locations, October 7, 1976.
38
-------
Figure
A_14. Plume, October 7, 1976.
39
-------
o
CD
^-i [>
CD 00
CM
LU
CD
LU
CJ
O
CJ O
O
C±)
Z CJ
CD O
LU
DO LU
o
o
J
<
)
)
J
)
)
•1
]
r
J
oo-u
3 00- IE
0
OO O
3 00-12
0<
e
Q
Q
.—-
'3 00-117 DO' id
M0.,OT«« (Sd31
0
o°
3 00-16
3W) 300
Q0«eoo
I OOMfl
mid
o © 0 e
u
i oo- u
^oo®
1
o
o
g
i
o
40
1
O
O
o
1 00-I9I1
01
ai
JD
o
+J
o
o
oo
o
CO
o
CD
CD
LU
r-
00
^r
C\l
CD
LU
LJ
O
_1
CJ
LU
00
CJ
o
_J
CJ
Q
LU
4
)
J
00- Tfr
°eo
e oe
e o
z oo'ie
0
eo
(
0
2 00' d
o
e
0
O O
G
0°
O
3 OOMTZ 00' 1C
0
e
00
^/
H
O
Ul
(0
o
U)
i/>
o
in
o
i oo-ui oo-isT
CE
O
o
Q.
O)
Q
-a
s:
fO
O)
s-
to
a>
o.
OJ
un
-------
'00
LD
co
r-
— •
CD
CM
01
o
o
1— UJ
21
V i — i
CJ 1—
O
CJ CJ
o
C±) _J
Z CJ
1 — 1
Z (±>
Z Z
1—4 t— H
O Q
UJ Z
00 UJ
oo- 1>
^^'•EII
2 oo- ie
PU&'6^0M$
2 OOMZ
C^V- -C^J^J
EJOe/Wl^nT
3 OOMT
0°°'
QE>
2 DO' TO
e
0
ft®
£}
G 0
J^'
2 00- 16
eOo'
«
.&>
ff&
T 00-T8
n^e«e#ed
ngEM) tr
1 00' U
.jDeod1*^
> jr"
1 OQ'19
^
- o
oQ-
OQ £
N CD
"T c
-o
c
O 3
° 0
(O t/)
11 i i
. —
OM1MOT« (9y313W)
oo-iv
B°e
^/
z oo- ie
eo
b on
^
Z 00-12
° JP°°
• u *V)
o o <
^
e e ,
a
° ^
2 oo-uz oo-id
ooo^OT* (9H31
> 0
(P O
^ — o
V
\-
UJ
Z
a
(A
-
c
2 oo- id
3W) 3QH
e
w W o
ee
1 OO'H
1I11H
^
o
d°° ^ ,
o
^
5
o
§
CD
(O
8
8
I OO'UT 00'19'f
cc
o
O
Q.
OJ
Q
-o
C
fO
ai
s-
41
-------
October 8, 1976 0624-0856 MST
Clear skies and stable conditions were observed during the mission.
Multiple spirals and transects were made at 1.5 and 3.7 km east of the
stack.
TABLE A-5
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 8, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0556 CLR CLM
0850 CLR 080/04
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 12.2 X 109 ug/s
0700-0800 5.8 X 109 yg/s
3. Center!ine Height/ Distance/ Concentration: -2200 m/ 1.5 km/ 3.3 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02*. 471 m/ 126 m/ 3 cases/ 1.5 km
346 m/ 67 m/ 4 cases/ 3.7 km
Three-minute a. B__ .: 503 m/ 100 m/ 3 cases/ 1.5 km
y sea t
259 m/ 71 m/ 2 cases/ 3.7 km
5. az, Spiral, S02: 43 m/ 3.8 min/ 1.5 km
63 m/ 5.5 min/ 1.5 km
49 m/ 3.0 min/ 1.5 km
83 m/ 3.6 min/ 1.5 km
122 m/ 4.3 min/ 1.5 km
97 m/ 4.5 min/ 1.5 km
102 m/ 5.0 min/ 3.7 km
72 m/ 4.5 min/ 3.7 km
75 m/ 2.7 min/ 3.7 km
55 m/ 3.4 min/ 3.7 km
6. az, Spiral, B t: 55 m/ 4.0 min/ 1.5 km
73 m/ 5.0 min/ 1.5 km
78 m/ 4.0 min/ 1.5 km
55 m/ 2.0 min/ 1.5 km
57 m/ 2.7 min/ 3.7 km
52 m/ 3.4 min/ 3.7 km
42
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST)
0725
0755
0825
0855
Height (m MSL)
1950
2010
1950
2010
1950
2010
1950
2010
Direction (°)
228
232
229
226
224
225
229
234
Speed (m/s)
7
6
9
8
9
9
8
6
'•<;:/&-y..;vSi^e: . . '"«$
,:•**
Figure A-17. Plume, October 8, 1976.
43
-------
Figure A-18. Sampling Locations, October 8, 1976.
44
-------
en
CD
C\J
CD
O
LU
CD
CO
O
CJ I—
CD
_j ^r
CJ CJ
C±> _J
:z cj
z CD
LU
DQ
a
z
LU
e
e e
we s>
•DflD
E ee
e e e
-e—»-
QL.
§°
§
g
oo• ooe 00-0^3 00-0^3 oo-ot'z oo-_p^3. og-_pd3 _ jiq-odi 00-0^1 oo-oVi"
ooo-iO^ *
00
i.
0)
J3
o
-M
O
O
CM
^O
O
to
en
•u
c
o
a.
S
OJ
T3
C
»o
(U
0-
(U
O>
45
-------
en
O
LO LO
00 --
O CD
LO
LU
OD
O
LU
o
o
o
_j
LJ
(±1
C±l CD
LU Z
DO LU
\
GB
e e e
e
ee
f&
-^V
oo-ode ocrodz
oo-oz 00-0^3 oo-odz 00-0^1 00-0^1 oo-o*!0
30niIilH
CO
s-
d)
o
o
;~ i/o
IT)
00
o
CO
CD
-o
E
a
o
o
Q.
cu
Q
-a
c
to
CD
s-
3
4->
fC
s_
O)
Q.
OJ
o
CM
cu
en
a
o
§
§
<£
8°
46
-------
October 12, 1976 0645-0839 MST
Stable conditions were replaced by neutral conditions during the
mission. Transects were made at various altitudes 2.7 km northeast of the
stack (Figure A-21).
TABLE A-6
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 12, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0550 CLR 150/03
0950 200 BRKN 360/04
2. Plant Emissions, SO^: Not available.
3. Center!ine Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1859 m/ 2.7 km/ 3.9 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 511 m/ 206 m/ 5 cases/ 2.7 km
Three-minute a , Bscat: 532 m/ 217 m/ 5 cases 2.7 km
5. CTZ, Spiral, S02: 85 m/ 2.1 min/ 2.7 km
99 m/ 5.0 min/ 2.7 km
120 m/ 8.5 min/ 2.7 km
6. az, Spiral, Bscat: 48 m/ 0.7 min/ 2.7 km
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0730 1860 243 4
1950 256 3
0800 1860 251 4
1950 256 3
0900 1860 225 8
1950 228 6
47
-------
Figure A-21. Sampling Locations, October 12, 1976.
48
-------
Figure A-22. Plume, October 12, 1976.
49
-------
a
o
BEGINNING CLOCK TIME 064505
ENDING CLOCK TIME 065340
""fc.oo
4.00 6.00
OflT (tC)
8.00
10.00
Figure A-23. Temperature Sounding, 0645 MST, October 12, 1976.
50
-------
o
D
BEGINNING CLOCK TIME 083418
ENDING CLOCK TIME 083919
.00
4.00 6.00
OflT (1C)
8.00
to.oo
Figure A-24. Temperature Sounding, 0834 MST, October 12, 1976.
51
-------
October 13, 1976
0638-0835 MST
Stable conditions produced a fanning plume (Figure A-27 and A-28).
Multiple spirals, each followed by two traverses at the height of the center-
line were made at 2.3 and 6.6 km.
TABLE A-7
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 13, 1976
Butte Weather:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Plant Emissions, SO^:
Three-minute a , S02:
Three-minute a ,
scat
Spiral, SO
Spiral, B
scat'
Winds Aloft:
0551 150 SCT 160/04
0850 150 SCT 200 OVC 060/03
S00: Not available.
489 m/ 139 m/ 5 cases/ 2.3 km
651 m/ 119 m/ 4 cases/ 6.6 km
510 m/ 116m/ 6 cases/ 2.3 km
645 m/ 258 m/ 4 cases/ 6.6 km
150 m/ 5.5 min/ 2.3 km
143 m/ 3.8 min/ 2.3 km
110 m/ 5.0 min/ 2.3 km
140 m/ 3.9 min/ 2.3 km
115 m/ 2.5 min/ 2.3 km
125 m/ 3.2 min/ 6.6 km
115 m/ 3.2 min/ 6.6 km
Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°)
0730 1950 250
2100 260
0800 1950 230
2100 287
0830 1950 269
2100 305
Speed (m/s)
4
5
3
1
2
2
52
-------
r\ TRANSECTS
^
^
11/20 1 2 3
NM
Figure A-25. Sampling Locations, October 13, 1976.
53
-------
Figure A-26. Plume, October 13, 1976.
54
-------
o
Q
en
8
Ol
LO
CM
CO
CO
CO
O
LU
CJ
CD
_J
CJ
CD
CD
LU
O
O
CD
^r
CD
O
LU
21
CJ
O
_J
CJ
CD
z
Q
z
LU
cu
8°
8
.ID
00
OCfe OO'OSZ 00-093 DO10*7 00'023 00-003 OO'Ogi 00-091 00'
O00.,0l* (Sy3i3W) 30niIilB
oti00
o
o
00
oo
en
c
-a
c
o
CA
c
-------
October 14, 1976 063-0819 MST
Neutral conditions were observed at and above stack height with a
stable layer below at the start of the mission (Figure A-30). North-
northeasterly flow was bringing the plume over the saddle approximately
1.5 km south-southwest of the stack. Impaction was occurring in the vortex
that had formed to the lee of the saddle, approximately 1.7 km from the
stack. Moderate to severe turbulence was experienced. Spirals were made
over the saddle and over the area of fmpaction. S02 concentrations of
0.4 ppm were measured within 30 m of the saddle and 0.6 ppm as low as
15 m above the impaction area. At approximately 0715 MST, the wind shifted
and the plume was advected over the valley to the east of the stack.
TABLE A-8
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 14, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0554 CLR 130/05
0850 CLR 360/07
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 11.4 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 6.2 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 12.2 X 109 yg/s
3. o , Spiral, S02: 87 m/ 5.0 min/ 1.5 km
83 m/ 1.8 min/ 1.7 km
122 m/ 4.3 min/ 1.5 km
4. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0730 1770 010 6
1950 022 4
0800 1770 346 8
1950 356 3
56
-------
Figure A-28. Sampling Locations, October 14, 1976
57
-------
Figure A-29. Plume, October 14, 1976.
58
-------
o
r-
00- OZ
£ 00-00
•E
£ OQ-Of
xcoooo
Z 00- OS
ooo-,OT«
e®
•e ec
ODD
Z OO'Or
r c M ^ i
«K»
oeeo SE
e
Z 00- 0<
3WJ 300
000
•> e e
«>
an
z oq-oo
liny
I)
e
o
0
Z 00- 0(
co eo
eeoe
0
1 00-09
10
o
i/>
S
o
CM
"*
o
r
CTi
o.
Q
JD
O
-M
O
O
Od
<£>
o
D)
OO
CxJ 00
CD •-'
O LO
CO
'JLJ JO
^- CD
LU
U h-
O
U U
O
CD _l
Z LJ
CD a
LU ~2L
CO LU
o
ex
QJ
Q
03
a>
s_
3
4->
03
£-
O)
EL
(U
O
CO
I
-------
October 15, 1976
No data were collected on this date. However, Figure A-31 is included
in this report as an example of extreme fanning under stable conditions.
Mechanical turbulence can be noted in this weak stable flow.
Figure A-31. Plume, October 15, 1976.
60
-------
October 19, 1976 0629-0851 MST
This flight was conducted under clear skies, light winds and stable
conditions (Figures A-34 and A-35). One spiral was made 1.5 km northeast of
the stack. This was followed by 12 transects at altitudes ranging from 2040
to 2070 m MSL. A single spiral, followed by two traverses, was made 2.5 km
northeast of the stack. The wind then shifted and five spirals each followed
by two traverses at the indicated height of the centerline were made 3.8 km
southeast of the stack (Figure A-32). Figure A-33 was taken near the end of
the mission.
TABLE A-9
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 19, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0550 CLR 150/05
0850 CLR CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 9.9 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 4.8 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 8.2 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2075 m/ 1.5 km/ 25.7 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO,,: 143 m/ 40 m/ 11 cases/ 1.5 km
212 m/ 58 m/ 2 cases/ 2.5 km
334 m/ 115 m/ 10 cases/ 3.8 km
5. a , Spiral, SO^: 47 m/ 1.7 min/ 1.5 km
56 m/ 3.0 min/ 2.5 km
60 m/ 3.0 min/ 3.8 km
32 m/ 2.5 min/ 3.8 km
58 m/ 3.0 min/ 3.8 km
48 m/ 3.0 min/ 3.8 km
63 m/ 4.0 min/ 3.8 km
61
-------
6. oz, Spiral, Bscat: 44 m/ 2.5 min/ 3.8 km
53 m/ 3.0 mtn/ 3.8 km
61 m/ 3.0 mtn/ 3.8 km
50 m/ 3.0 min/ 3.8 km
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0730 1950 336 1
2020 206 6
62
-------
Figure A-32. Sampling Locations, October 19, 1976.
63
-------
Figure A-33. Plume, October 19, 1976.
64
-------
oo-oac
g
,.,01*
00-0*1
oo
rn
en
<\j
UD
a
CNJ
on
LU
LJ I—
O
_J X.
LJ LJ
O
(±» _l
-Z. LJ
UJ Z"
DC _J
o
o
oo- o(/e
OO'O^E OO'Qt'z
8°
en
s_
O)
.0
O
•t->
O
O
Ol
CSJ
VD
O
CO
en
c
C.
3
O
o^
-M
C
•i— •
O
o
•o
OJ
S_
CU
Q.
01
oo
-------
OO'OOe 00-08Z 00-093 OO'OrZ OO'OZZ OO'OOZ 00-081 00-091 00'OH
LO
OD
•
o
o
GO
CO
•*
CO
o
10
sr
jf-.-
-o
sz
o
LD
LJ
u i—
o
_j ic:
o o
o
C5 CD
LU 2
OQ LU
oo-oaz
ooo • i
OO1 0*7
01*
QO'QTZ
00' 003 OO'oTl
30niIllH
cr
g°
QO'091 00'0»l'
O
O)
Q
re
O)
s-
=3
4->
re
-------
October 20, 1976 0904-1122 MST
Stable conditions persisted throughout the sampling period (Figures A-37
and A-38). Multiple transects were made through the plume at the approximate
center!ine height at 1.6 km. Multiple spirals were made through the plume at
4.8 km. Each was followed by two traverses at the height of plume centerline
(Figure A-36).
TABLE A-10
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 20, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0850 CLR 130/03
1150 CLR 290/05
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0930-1030 15.8 X 109 vg/s
1030-1130 10.2 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2000 m/ 4.8 km/ 9.5 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 301 m/ 51 m/ 12 cases/ 1.6 km
320 m/ 87 m/ 10 cases/ 4.8 km
Three-minute a , Bsc£(t: 328 m/ 39 m/ 12 cases/ 1.6 km
315 m/ 47 m/ 10 cases/ 4.8 km
5. az, Spiral, S02: 37 m/ 2.0 min/ 1.6 km
50 m/ 3.0 min/ 4.8 km
38 m/ 1.8 min/ 4.8 km
62 m/ 2.9 min/ 4.8 km
61 m/ 1.9 min/ 4.8 km
24 m/ 1.2 min/ 4.8 km
23 m/ 3.2 min/ 4.8 km
6. az, Spiral, Bscat: 58 m/ 3.0 min/ 4.8 km
29 m/ 1.8 min/ 4.8 km
61 m/ 2.9 min/ 4.8 km
55 m/ 1.9 min/ 4.8 km
24 m/ 1.2 min/ 4.8 km
67
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height On MSL} Direction (°) Speed On/s)
0730 1950 237 3
0800 1950 218 5
0830 1950 245 8
0900 1950 237 4
0930 1950 259 4
1030 1950 031 11
1100 1950 145 5
1130 1950 225 4
68
-------
Figure A-36. Sampling Locations, October 20, 1976.
69
-------
00-ofz
CD
LO
O C\J
CD O
O CD
O
UJ m
51 °
h—I
(— UJ
5=
CJ I—
O
CJ CJ
O
O _J
Z LJ
i—i
Z (±1
O Q
LJ 2
OQ UJ
00-091'
OO1
00'
OQ'
o
o
en
o
CM
0)
JD
O
O
O
o
-------
OO'Of
z DO-DEE oo-oz1
tf°
.-
•B
z oo-oi'z oo-od
joo.,01* ISN31
8
£
0
•f*
r
2 00-06
3W) 300
A.
J"
[I
I 00-08
1I11H
«•
J"-""
•••^
o
1
o
o ~*
1
oQ-
-Q
-------
October 21, 1976 0658-0838 MST
Initially, stable conditions existed to approximately 2300 m MSL with
near neutral conditions above (Figure A-42). By 0838 MST, near neutral
conditions existed from 1900 to 2700 m MSL, while a stable layer existed
between 1800 and 1900 m MSL. The plume was fanning at the beginning of the
mission (Figure A-40). Later, the plume was lofted into the near neutral
layer above 1900 m MSL (Figure A-41).
TABLE A-11
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 21, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0550 CLR 150/03
0850 200 THN BRKN CLM
2. Plant Emissions: 0600-0700 13.5 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 13.5 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 18.2 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2316 m/ 1.6 km/ 46.2 ppm
4. Three-minute o , S02: 279 m/ 106 m/ 18 cases/ 1.6 km
491 m/ 70 m/ 6 cases/ 6.4 km
Three-minute a , Bscat: 298 m/ 111 m/ 19 cases/ 1.6 km
485 m/ 54 m/ 6 cases/ 6.4 km
5. 02, Spiral, S02: 95 m/ 4.3 min/ 6.4 km
72 m/ 3.3 min/ 6.4 km
49 m/ 3.2 min/ 6.4 km
az, Spiral, Bscat: 100 m/ 4.3 min/ 6.4 km
85 m/ 3.3 min/ 6.4 km
50 m/ 3.2 min/ 6.4 km
6. az, Cross Section, SO,,: 70 m/ 53 min/ 1.6 km
a , Cross Section, B .: 76 m/ 53 min/ 1.6 km
72
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height Cm MSL) Direction (°) Speed
r\—t n *-v t *\ t- »-s s\*\ ^ y"»
0740 1950 233 2
0810 1950 249 4
0840 1950 249 6
0940 1950 229 5
2310 246 9
73
-------
Figure A-39. Sampling Locations, October 21, 1976.
74
-------
Figure A-40. Plume, October 21, 1976.
Figure A-41. Plume, October 21, 1976.
75
-------
o
o
CM
CO
CO
CO CD
ID CM
O CM
LU
00-002 00-081 OO'OS
DO-006 00-08Z 00'0«00-0/Z
CD
LU
LJ \—
O
LJ LJ
O
L!D o
LU -Z.
CD LU
oo'ooe oo'odz oo-o^ oa-ovj oo-ozz 00-002 oo'
coo.,oi* (sy3i3ui 3animu
u
CM
f-
(U
JD
O
^->
o
o
CXD
CO
vo
o
to
en
-a
c:
O
CO
O
Q_
Q
-a
(U
S-
QJ
Q.
OJ
CM
^~
I
-------
o
o
BEGINNING CLOCK TIME 083311
ENDING CLOCK TIME 083806
o
o
CO.
OJ
o
o
.00 6.00 8.00
OflT (1C)
10.00
12.00
Figure A-43. Temperature Sounding, 0833 MST, October 21, 1976.
77
-------
October 22, 1976 0816-1035 MST
Stable conditions associated with a radiation inversion were observed
near the stack height throughout the mission. A near-neutral layer was
immediately above the tope of the stack (Figures A-46 and A-47). These
conditions resulted in a lofted plume (Figure A-45). Multiple transects were
made 3.0 km northeast of the stack in order to construct a cross section of
the plume. Multiple spirals followed by transects at centerline height were
made 5.0 km northeast of the stack.
TABLE A-12
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 22, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0555 CLR 160/03
0850 CLR CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0700-0800 13.0 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 15.1 X 109 yg/s
0900-1000 16.1 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2714 m/ 3.0 km/ 5.5 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02*. 336 m/ 112 m/ 9 cases/ 3.0 km
340 m/ 38 m/ 6 cases/ 5.0 km
ihree-minute a. , B,.,.: 361 m/ 187 m/ 9 cases/ 3.0 km
y scat
358 m/ 62 m/ 6 cases/ 5.0 km
5. az, Spiral, Bscat: 41 m/ 2.7 min/ 5.0 km
6. az, Cross Section, Bg ,: 139 m/ 39 mfn/ 3.0 km
78
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0740
0810
0840
0910
0940
1010
1950
2520
1950
2520
1950
2520
1950
2520
1950
2520
1950
2520
216
251
214
273
222
262
211
253
211
266
209
259
5
3
4
3
3
4
4
3
4
6
9
5
79
-------
p
1 1/2 0
Figure A-44. Sampling Locations, October 21, 1976.
80
-------
V-N „
Figure A-45. Plume, October 22, 1976.
81
-------
\J
*•
ee r?
eeee
eee e
eee ee
ee
e eee
e eeee
ee e
eee
00 e
CO ee
«— » f*"*'
CO CM ee
O"~^ n
^~^ 1 i ~ 1 I I I I I
0
*!
i
o—-
0~
" 1
oQ-
o»o
o
i
a
*
-•"
CM
LU CO
i— <
1— LiJ
ST
V^ i— (
(_) 1—
O
—i XI e^oe1
C_> O 0 eeeee >^
•^ r i « ee /
^. (_J e e /
*"* e /
i S e ee / fe
Z Z e ' O
, , , . ««ee ,
•o
(O
-------
VD
r-.
CTl
8
CM
oo
0)
J3
O
+J
O
O
CO
O
CO
CO CD
O CO
.— LO
CO
UJ O
oQ-
oo
o
in
ro
CO
o
cr>
c:
o
oo
LJ
o
_i ^
LJ LJ
CD
O _J
2 LJ
O Q
LU 2
QQ LU
oo-ode 00-083
OO'OfZ 00-0^2 00-002 00-081
30nllil«
00-0^1
0°
o
o
a-
at
Q
-o
c
(C
c;
s_
3
•M
(O
O)
Q.
a>
•=J-
-i
cu
s-
83
-------
October 26, 1976 0650-0850 MST
Neutral conditions were observed (Figure A-50). A cross section was
constructed 1.4 km east of the stack. In addition, multiple spirals, each
followed by two transects at plume centerline height, were conducted 5.3 km
southeast of the stack (Figure A-48).
TABLE A-13
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 26, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0553 50 BRKN 120/04
0850 80 SCT CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 9.1 X 109 yg/s
0730-0830 9.7 X 109 yg/s
0830-0930 5.8 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: =2100 m/ 1.4 km/ 19/ 1 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO^: 151 m/ 90 m/ 4 cases/ 1.4 km
289 m/ 90 m/ 9 cases/ 5.3 km
Three-minute a , Be.at: 143 m/ 107 m/ 4 cases/ 1.4 km
y scat
5. az, Spiral, S02: 75 m/ 3.0 min/ 5.3 km
65 m/ 2.3 min/ 5.3 km
94 m/ 3.8 min/ 5.3 km
81 m/ 5.5 min/ 5.3 km
65 m/ 2.3 min/ 5.3 km
6. a , Spiral, B t: 64 m/ 2.3 min/ 5.3 km
61 m/ 2.3 min/ 5.3 km
84 m/ 3.8 min/ 5.3 km
84
-------
Figure A-48. Sampling Locations, October 26, 1976,
85
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST)
0745
0849
Height (m MSL}
1950
2100
1950
2100
Direction (°)
299
299
315
304
Speed (m/s)
7
9
5
7
Figure A-49. Plume, October 26, 1976.
86
-------
o
o
CT>
O
0
vo
CJ
s_
0)
JD
O
4J
O
O
a.
8°
vo
o
UD
•3-
CD
O
LU
CD
in
o
o
H- LU
z:
^L —•
CJ I—
O
_J iC
CJ CJ
o
o _l
Z CJ
LU ~Z.
OQ LU
00'Ooe 00'083 00-093
ooc-
.,01*
00-OZ3 00-003 00-081 00'091 OO'fltT1
o
O-
s
(U
Q
c
fO
(U
Q-
o
un
3
C71
87
-------
October 27, 1976 0614-0805 MST
Stable conditions were observed near the stack height throughout the
mission (Figures A-53 and A-54). An abortive attempt was made to construct
a cross section 19 km northeast of the stack. A cross section was constructed
3.4 km east northeast of the stack (Figure A-51).
TABLE A-14
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 27, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0555 CLR 160/03
0850 CLR CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 14.0 X 109 yg/s
0730-0830 6.6 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2256 m/ 3.4 km/ 2.6 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 514 m/167 m/13 cases/3.4 km
5. Three-minute a, , B,.,,,^: 471 m/141 m/9 cases/3.4 km
y SCaL
6. a , Cross Section, B .: 117 m/42 min/3.4 km
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0745 1950 240 5
2250 269 7
0815 1950 236 3
2250 288 6
88
-------
1 1/2 0
Figure A-51. Sampling Locations, October 27, 1976.
89
-------
Figure A-52. Plume, October 27, 1976.
90
-------
o
D
o
o
•
o
OQ_
o
o
o
CO.
CO
^ O
0°
OJ
COO
I—CVJ
I—I
O
OQ,
O
O
•
O
CQ_
O
O
BEGINNING CLOCK TIME 064702
ENDING CLOCK TIME 065205
o
o
CD
-------
o
o
o
CO
o
o
o
CO.
CJ
o
o
o
CO.
-------
October 28, 1976 0641-0845 MST
Moderate, appparently katabatic, flow generated stable conditions at
stack height (Figures A-58 and A-59). The plume was frequently observed
impacting upon the surface within 1 km of the stack (Figures A-56 and A-57).
Turbulent conditions made measurements in the vertical difficult. Transects
were made through the plume at 0.8, 1.0, and 2.8 km.
TABLE A-15
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 28, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0650 250 SCT 160/05
0950 250 SCT CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 14.6 X 109 ug/s
0730-0830 12.4 X 109 yg/s
0830-0930 11.6 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1827 m/ 0.8 km/26.0 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 327 m/220 m/8 cases/0.8 km
228 m/ 57 m/5 cases/1.0 km
447 m/165 m/4 cases/2.8 km
5. Three-minute a , B,.,.: 270 m/94 m/8 cases/0.8 km
y scat
271 m/83 m/5 cases/1.0 km
446 m/190 m/4 cases/2.8 km
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0747 1830 223 10
1950 239 6
0817 1830 227 10
1950 229 8
0847 1830 221 10
1950 222 8
93
-------
PARTIAL CROSS SECTION
TAILINGS POND
PARTIAL
CROSS SECTION
ALONG ROAD
PARTIAL
CROSS SECflON
^=4^=1=1=4=4=!
Figure A-55. Sampling Locations, October 28, 1976.
94
-------
Figure A-56. Plume, October 28, 1976.
Figure A-57. Plume, October 28, 1976.
95
-------
<£>
CO
Tj- ID
CD (^
O LO
ee e e
ec
e e
ee
o
o
§
00-
oo
00
OJ
O)
O
o
to
VD
O
in
C7>
c
-o
c
iLl
CJ
o
LU
LJ
O
O Q
UJ Z
00 UJ
e
689 © ©
oo-jt'z 00-3^3 00-3^3
O
O-
Q
-o
(O
O)
s-
ro
cu
Q-
1
CO
tn
QJ
s-
3
CD
96
-------
1C
r-.
o o»
CO
If CO
00 CD
O LO
8
.03
I
O ^
CM'
oQ-
qo
CO
CVJ
J_
O)
xa
o
•p
u
o
CO
o
1/1
CD
-o
E
3
O
UJ
LJ I—
o
_i ^:
u LJ
CD
O _J
Z CJ
(±» 0
LU Z
CD LU
oo-ziz QO-Z& oo'z? oD-zz oo-zi oo-
coo.,01* (SH313W) 30niIJnu
OO'Zi.1 00'39t
o
Q-.
Q
-o
C
CO
OJ
3
CO
S-
OJ
Q-
i
CTi
tn
3
01
97
-------
October 29, 1976
0640-0827 MST
Early in the mission, stable conditions were observed below stack
height and neutral conditions existed above (Figure A-62). By the end of the
mission, neutral conditions existed above and below stack height. Only a
thin stable layer remained, which was based at approximately 1700 m MSL
(Figure A-63). A cross section was constructed 3.1 km southeast of the
stack. Multiple spirals followed by transects through the plume at the
height of the center!ine were made 5.5 km southeast of the stack.
TABLE A-16
SUMMARY OF MISSION, OCTOBER 29, 1976
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
Butte Weather: 0551 CLR 210/04
0850 70BRKN 200BRKN 320/04
Plant Emissions, SO^: Not available
Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2225 m/3.1 km/19.0 ppm
Three-minute a
,
Three-minute a
y,
a , Cross Section,
a , Cross Section
50
B
t
az, Spiral, Bscat:
Winds Aloft: Time (MST)
0750
0820
0850
262 m/64 m/8 cases/3.1 km
453 m/170 m/2 cases/5.5 km
235 m/64 m/8 cases/3.1 km
476 m/187 m/2 cases/5.5 km
63 m/24 min/3.1 km
75 m/24 min/3.1 km
110 m/4.7 min/5.5 km
Height (m MSL) Direction (°)
1950 257
1950 256
2220 276
1950 260
2220 277
Speed (m/s)
1
1
10
1
4
98
-------
SPIRALS
TRANSECTS
Figure A-60. Sampling Locations, October 29, 1976.
99
-------
Figure A-61. Plume, October 29, 1976.
100
-------
10-OCfe 00-082 00'
oo-ovz
(9U
'ilf
fill
T_ bo-oat oo-ogi oo-on'
01
ai
Cd
S-
O)
-Q
O
-)->
u
o
o
•*
-------
oo-oo
e oo- od
3 00*09
• a
3 00' Of
•r.OT-
•
» •
Z 00-02
' (SN31
^B
— •••
•
Z 00 '0(
3U) 300
^^^J
1
Z 00-08
iind
0
"
I 00' OS
1
8
LIO
1 1
8"
, ••»
J/>*-^
1
»-
a.
8°
.<£>
1
g
i 00' on'
CD
C\J
CO
c\j cn
oo c\j
o i>
CSJ
LU CO
5T O
t—t
I— LU
CJ I—
o
_i ic:
u u
o
O D
LU 2
DO LU
a
a
oo-oae
oo-ogz
00-0/3
OOO'.Ol*
OO'OZZ
OO'Otfz OD'
3QniIllh)
vo
i^
01
cn
O
O
oo
CM
00
o
T3
O
+J
o
Q_
•
a»
C3
T3
a>
s-
(O
d)
Q_
O)
CO
VD
I
O)
O)
OO'O^l DO'O/r*
1Q2
-------
November 1, 1976 0652-0759 MST
At the start of the sampling period, near neutral conditions below stack
height coupled with stable conditions above (Figure A-67) produced fumigation
conditions (Figure A-65). At approximately 0720 MST, a wind shift occurred
and fumigation was no longer observed. A partial cross section was constructed
2.0 km northeast of the stack and another was attempted 2.0 km southeast of
the stack. High winds, moderate turbulence and a shifting plume made sampling
difficult during the latter part of the mission.
TABLE A-17
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 1, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0653 50BRKN 150BRKN 210/11
0850 40BRKN 100 OVC 320/10
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 11.5 X 109 yg/s
0730-0830 13.4 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2140 m/2.0 km/16.1 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 222 m/91 m/12 cases/2.0 km
5. Three-minute a , Bsca-: 222 m/55 m/11 cases/2.0 km
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height Cm MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0727 1770 269 5
1950 268 7
2130 272 2
0800 1770 349 3
1950 315 6
2130 307 13
103
-------
PARTIAL CROSS SECTION
ARTIAL CROSS SECTION
11/20 1 2 3 4
Figure A-64. Sampling Locations, November 1, 1976.
104
-------
Figure A-65.
Plume Under Fumigation Conditions,
November 1, 1976.
Figure A-66. Plume, November 1, 1976.
105
-------
QD
e
e
O)
o
CO
o
g°
00-otzz oo-09rz oo-oedz oo-oooz oo-ozgi oo-o*di oo-09/.i oo-osdi 00-0091'
(9d3i3W) aonnnu
10
r-~
01
Ol
>
o
ID
VD
O
in
cn
in
LT)
O
O-
cu
Q
O)
O)
Q.
ai
3
CD
00-0091
106
-------
o
U)
3 oo-09i7 oo-oed
z oo-'obl
flEBEW
2 00- 03^
SH313W)
l
00 0
i oo- o>a
aonnr
0«
GOMOK)
r» ee
1 00-09L
IB
e
e
mm
1 00-089
0 • «•
«•> o> o
«
01
2-70 3.10
r ( ic)
November 1 ,
0 H-"
m £
CM
LO
0
O
O) •>
i oo'ooei"4 o>
'r—
-o
c
3
O
O
Q.
Q
T3
E
fO
O)
s_
03
0)
Q-
O>
CO
•i
S-
3
cn
LL!
OO'DZefl 00*0t«8l 00*09^1 00*0891 00*0091"
•" 3oniiiid
107
-------
November 3, 1976
0645-0842 MST
Neutral conditions above stack height and stable conditions below
(Figure A-71 and A-72) produced a lofted plume throughout the mission
(Figure A-70). Cross sections were developed at 1.0, 1.8, and 2.4 km
southeast of the stack (Figure A-69).
TABLE A-18
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 3, 1976
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Butte Weather: 0950 20
Plant Emissions, SO^: 0530-
0630-
0730-
0830-
Centerline Height/ Distance/
SCT
0630
0730
0830
0930
50 SCT 200BRKN 330/04
10.4 X 109 ug/s
9.9 X 109 yg/s
13.9 X 109 ug/s
9
Three-minute a
Three-minute a , B,.,.:
y SCa u
Three-minute a , B- . :
y scat
a , Cross Section, SO^:
a , Cross Section, B .:
147
204
238
150
204
238
150
231
243
61
80
81
92
12.1 X 1(T vg/s
Concentrations: 2286 m/1.0 km/25.5 ppm.
m/34 m/7 cases/1.0 km
m/60 m/10 cases/1.6 km
m/90 m/12 cases/3.0 km
m/34 m/7 cases/1.0 km
m/60 m/10 cases/1.6 km
m/90 m/12 cases/3.0 km
m/34 m/8 cases/1.0 km
m/99 m/11 cases/1.6 km
m/111 m/11 cases/3.0 km
m/25 min/1.0 km
m/55 min/ 1.0 km
m/55 min/1.6 km
m/33 min/3.0 km
108
-------
Figure A-69. Sampling Locations, November 3, 1976.
109
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST)
0655
0725
0825
0855
Height (m MSL)
1950
2280
1950
1950
2280
1950
2280
Direction (°)
235
302
240
226
297
226
300
Speed (m/s)
5
6
3
6
5
4
4
Figure A-70. Plume, November 3, 1976.
110
-------
o
o
oo-oo
e oo-os
z oo- og
«
e
Z OO'Ot-3 00-031
ooo-iOl* (SH31
•» o
»
Z 00'0(
3W) 300
3 00- Of
mid
e
e
1 OO'O!
o
en
O
M
O
(O
O
eo
i oo-ovP
Q_
Q
en
oo
OJ
• ^ JD
co
en
LO
^
CD
LD
LD
C\J
LO
UJ
UJ
CJ
o
LJ
O
_)
CJ
(±1 Q
LU Z
CD UJ
00-OOE
00-093 00-0*3 00-033 00-Q03 OO'OSl
O00.,oi» (sy3i3W) 3aniniH
o
OO
o
Q-
QJ
D
ra
01
S-
S-
OJ
Q-
O)
3
CD
in
-------
o
o
oo
1 — 1
oo
00 00
00 CM
O
oo- oc
e oo-ofl
z oo-os
Jj
^r
r
e«
mf
t~
z oo-Wz 00-0^3 oo- oc
MI)., OT« (SH313W) 3Qn
*•
_f
f
z oo- od
line
rf
r
I OO-OE
•
(.p
r-^
8 "
CO «N
— s-
o ^
h!" s
. 0
Q. Z
0° -
0 1—
"* 2:
00
« CO
8 °
i oo-ovP ^
CD
^1—
-o
c
3
0
j t/y
\ +>
LU
00
LU
CJ \—
o
CJ CJ
o
Z CJ
I—I
-ZL (±1
2 Z
»—i i—i
O Q
LU ~ZL
CD LU
oo-ode
00-003 00'081
3orumy
-
0)
Q
-a
c:
(O
ro
S-
Q)
CL
QJ
CM
<
O)
CD
112
-------
November 4, 1976
1040-1325 MST
Stable conditions were noted throughout the sampling period (Figure A-75
and A-76). A cross section was developed 1.6 km southeast of the stack.
Multiple spirals followed by traverses at center!ine height were made 5.0 km
southeast of the stack (Figure A-73). Table A-19 summarizes the results
of the flight.
TABLE A-19
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 4, 1976
1.
2.
Butte Weather:
3.
4.
5.
6.
0950
1355
100
80
BRKN
BRKN
CLM
200
OVC 170/04
Plant Emission, S02: 0930-1030 12.8 X 10* yg/s
1030-1130 12.0 X 109 yg/s
1130-1230 14.0 X 109 yg/s
1230-1330 13.1 X 109 yg/s
Centerline Height/Distance/Concentrations: 2347 m/1.6 km/11.1 ppm
Three-minute a
,
J
Three-minute a
y' scat-
Cross Section,
Cross Section.
Spiral, S02:
Spiral, SO
Spiral, SO
Spiral, SO
Spiral
2
2:
2:
, S02:
Spiral, Bscat:
Spiral, B.
Spiral, B
Spiral, B
az, Spiral,
SO,
scat'
'scar
scat:
scat'
259 m/63 m/13 cases/1.6 km
249 m/44 m/9 cases/5.0 km
291 rt/78 m/15 cases/1.6 km
267 m/47 m/10 cases/5.0 km
107 m/40 min/1.6 km
113 m/40 min/1.6 km
53 m/1.6 min/5.0 km
86 m/2.7 min/5.0 km
59 m/2.5 min/5.0 km
90 m/2.2 min/5.0 km
48 m/2.3 min/5.0 km
60 m/2.5 min/5.0 km
65 m/2.4 min/5.0 km
86 m/2.7 min/5.0 km
60 m/2.5 min/5.0 km
84 m/2.2 min/5.0 km
113
-------
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height Cm MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/sl
0930 1950 217 5
2340 288 12
1000 1950 217 8
2340 281 12
1030 1950 211 9
2340 276 16
1100 1950 210 6
2340 293 8
1130 1950 223 7
2340 285 10
120Q 1950 219 4
1230 1950 265 3
2340 288 9
1300 1950 301 3
2340 300 9
114
-------
/—SPIRALS
11/20 1 2 3 4
Figure A-73. Sampling Locations, November 4, 1976.
115
-------
Figure A-74. Plume, November 4, 1976.
116
-------
CD
LO --1
O CO
.-. O
O
UJ "^
CJ h-
o
_J ^
o o
o
C5 _J
2 LJ
O O
UJ Z
00 LoJ
to
r>-
cr>
s-
c
if—
o
117
-------
8
CT>
"d-
i-
O
cn
LO
LO
CD 00
CO "*
^ 00
o
i,, en
LU
O
o
LJ CJ
o
C5 _J
Z CJ
(±) Q
UJ Z
QQ LU
o
o
00-OOe 00-0{f300-0^3 00-OV3 00-023 00' 00*3 00'0^1 OD7
3QniIllU
00-D»'r
un
o
n
to
CD
-a
c
a
o
•fj
o
Q.
0)
Q
QJ
QJ
O.
a>
i—
eC
OJ
CD
118
-------
November 5, 1976 1230-1312 MST
Neutral atmospheric conditions were initially observed. These were
replaced by near-isothermal conditions as katabatic flow produced downwash
conditions (Figures A-78 and A-79). The portable S0? monitor was placed
2.9 km northeast of the stack (Figure A-77). Two cross sections were
developed in this area.
TABLE A-20
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 5, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0950 120 SCT HI OVC CLM
1350 120 SCT HI OVC CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 1130-1230 12.9 X 109 yg/s
1230-1330 13.4 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1805 m/2.9 km/10.5 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 279 m/132 m/12 cases/2.9 km
5. Three-minute a . Br ,.: 241 m/86 m/8 cases/2.9 km
y SCOT;
6. az, Cross Section, SO^: 95 m/61 min/2.9 km
7. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
1130 1950 234 5
1200 1950 267 6
1230 1950 305 6
1300 1950 285 9
119
-------
TRANSPORTABLE
/S02 MONITOR
/ . '' / «,L
CROSS SECTIONS;
11/20 1 2 3 4
NM
Figure A-77. Sampling Locations, November 5, 1976.
120
-------
Figure A-78. Plume, November 5, 1976.
121
-------
8
oo-oan oo-oaaz oo-ooaz 00-0261 oo-ot-di
3aninid
00-0091'
o
CD
O CsJ
on —*
en
n
LO
QJ
n
O
CTi
O
CO
in
C7>
c
•I—
-o
c
3
O
oo
o
Q.
O>
rO
£_
S_
01
Q.
01
cn
o>
s_
CD
•r™
Lu
oo-os^TDO-009r
122
-------
November 8, 1976 1230-1350 MST
Neutral conditions were observed during the mission. Cross sections
were developed 0.8 km northeast and 1.7 km southeast of the stack.
TABLE A-21
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 8, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 55 BRKN 120 BRKN 340/05
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 1030-1130 6.7 X 109 ug/s
1130-1230 10.8 X TO9
1230-1330 8.1 X 109 yg/s
1330-1430 6.0 X 109 pg/s
3. Center! ine Height/ Direction/ Concentration: 2073 m/6.8 km/ 11.8 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO,,: 186 m/ 59 m/ 6 cases/ 0.8 km
141 m/ 12 m/ 5 cases/ 1.7 km
Three-minute a , Bc • 189 m/ 70 m/ 6 cases/ 0.8 km
y scat
131 m/ 22 m/ 5 cases/ 1.7 km
5. a , Cross Section, SO^: 67 m/ 20 min/ 0.8 km
54 m/ 15 min/ 1 .7 km
6. Winds Aloft:
Time (MST)
0930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1200
Height (m MSL)
1950
2070
1950
2070
1950
2070
1950
2070
1950
2070
1950
2070
Direction ( )
314
310
305
296
287
289
296
299
296
310
289
304
Speed (m/s)
4
5
3
5
4
4
4
5
5
3
3
2
123
-------
Figure A-80. Sampling Locations, November 8, 1976.
124
-------
'
Figure A-81. Plume, November 8, 1976.
125
-------
0
1C
O
LO
O
CO CM
CM CM
.-i ro
CO
bJ _J
LU 2
QO LU
ID
r^
01
CO
S-
cu
O)
>
O
O
en
CO
00'083 00•093
.- . - 00-032 00-002 00-081
O.,0l« (S8313U) 30niinb
00-0^1
o
I/)
o
Q.
QJ
Q
-o
E
to
QJ
OJ
CL
O)
CM
CO
I
O)
i-
3
C7>
126
-------
November 9, 1976 1208-1310 MST
Neutral stability was observed throughout the mission (Figures A-85
and A-86). Cross sections were developed at 0.8 and 1.7 km. Low emissions
and moderate winds made sampling difficult.
TABLE A-22
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 9, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 1150 MST 30 SCT 200 THN BRKN 330/06
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 1030-1130 4.1 X 109 yg/s
1130-1230 1.7 X 109 yg/s
1230-1330 4.8 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1973 m/ 1.7 km/ 2.0 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 213 m/ 86 m/ 2 cases/ 0.8 km
Three-minute a , B0^,.: 163 m/ 65 m/ 4 cases/ 0.8 km
y scat
5. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (u) Speed (m/s)
1200 1950 230 2
1980 238 2
1230 1950 265 4
1980 269 4
1300 1950 207 1
1980 227 1
127
-------
ACROSS SECTIONS
1 1/2 0
Figure A-83. Sampling Locations, November 9, 1976.
128
-------
*-'™
Figure A-84. Plume, November 9, 1976.
129
-------
GO
CO
o cr>
CM —' O Q
Q_ UJ ^.
CO QD LU
oo-
cn
5-
O)
JO
O)
>
o
CO
o
CM
to
01
00-ZOZ 00-261 00-
gyaiau) aoninib
OO'Ztl 00-Z9T
OOO'I
o
CL
2
-o
c:
to
OJ
Q.
O)
in
CO
•i
OJ
3
CD
130
-------
3 00-3^
" ™ ~~~^v8fSt
eeE)OTB0B
f*
z (gy'Ii
a
f
C00D G^
EC SB
7 00-36
3M) 30n
e€KH
e
I 00'3fl
HUB
e
0*
•BKEK)
J
£*
f
o
r-
o
CTl
5-
O)
JD
I
O
to
D)
o
on
o
Q.
Q
-a
E
(O
CL)
i-
s-
cu
Q.
cu
i-D
CO
et
O)
00-29 f°
131
-------
November 10, 1976 0918-1055 MST
The plume was observed impacting upon elevated terrain approximately
6.7 km southwest of the stack. At the beginning of the mission, near
isothermal conditions existed at and above stack height and lapse conditions
below (Figure A-90). By the end of the mission, neutral conditions existed
both above and below the top of the stack and the plume was no longer at
the surface (Figure A-91). At the start of the mission, the portable S02
monitor had been placed on the hillside in the area of impaction. A series
of traverses was made over the monitor by the helicopter at altitudes
ranging from 21 to 37 m AGL. Next, a cross section was developed 1.6 km
from the stack. A cross section was then made over the transportable
monitor. The plume was no longer hitting the hill at this time. Table A-23
summarizes the mission.
TABLE A-23
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 10, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0850 10 SCT 28 SCT 40 OVC CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0800-0900 11.8 X 109 ug/s
0900-1000 8.8 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2134 m/ 1.6 km/ 28.4 ppm
Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2160 m/ 6.7 km/ 3.5 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO,,: 159 m/ 26 m/ 6 cases/ 1.6 km
834 m/ 225 m/ 7 cases/ 6.7 km
Three-minute cr , B „,.: 152 m/ 23 m/ 8 cases/ 1.6 km
y scai
5. a , Cross Section, S02: 75 m/ 19 min/ 1.6 km
a , Cross Section, EJ .: 85 m/ 19 min/ 1.6 km
z scat
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0930 1950 014 6
2130 008 5
1000 1950 014 7
2130 014 5
1030 1950 Oil 5
2130 012 3
132
-------
Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
1100 1950 037 4
133
-------
Figure A-87. Sampling Locations, November 10, 1976.
134
-------
Figure A-88. Plume, November 10, 1976.
Figure A-89. Plume, November 10, 1976.
135
-------
CTI
S-
0)
00
s
o
CO
05
=3
O
+•>
sr
•r*
O
§-
cu
-o
(O
O)
(U
Q.
00-507
OOC-.OI*
oo-6ffi
30niIllH
oo-ssr'
(U
i-
3
CD
136
-------
C\J
o
LO
LO
O
LO
LU ^
51 '-"
t—H
\— LU
LJ t—
O
_J ^s±
CJ CJ
O
Z CJ
t—1
z O
O Q
LU Z
CO LU
see
e e
Q_
OQ
oo-eea
DD'SSI
IQ
r-.
01
o
s_
>
o
in
in
o
C/J
CD
c:
-M
C
o
D.
CU
Q
„ n5
0)
s_
3
-P
fO
S-
-------
November 11, 1976 0700-0955 MST
Stable conditions (Figure A-95) coupled with low wind speeds resulted in
the plume impacting upon elevated terrain approximately 11 km southwest of
the stack. A series of low-level traverses were made at altitudes ranging
from 2256 to 2454 m MSL along the windward side of the hill. The large
values of a that were observed were because the low momentum plume was
J
splitting and going around either side of the hill. A maximum SOp value of
12.5 ppm was observed between 30 and 18 m AGL. At approximately 0815 MST,
the wind shifted and the plume began to travel in a northwesterly direction.
A cross section was developed 1.9 km from the stack.
TABLE A-24
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 11, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0656 CLR CLM
1050 200 SCT 310/4
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 16.3 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 18.8 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 15.6 X 109 yg/s
0900-1000 15.6 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2195 m/ 1.9 km/ 45.3 ppm
Center!ine Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2316 m/ 10.8 km/ 13.9 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 222 m/ 120 m/ 5 cases/ 1.9 km
691 m/ 70 m/ 7 cases/ 10.8 km
5. a , Cross Section, SO^: 60 m/ 20 min/ 1.9 km
a , Cross Section, B .: 58 m/ 20 min/ 1.9 km
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0722 1950 136 2
2190 121 2
2310 099 1
0752 1950 165 2
2190 160 2
138
-------
Winds Aloft: Time (MSL) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0822 1950 183 3
2190 156 5
2310 162 2
0852 1950 177 3
2190 163 4
2310 163 3
0922 1950 182 2
2190 192 3
2310 179 3
0952 1950 174 2
2190 188 2
2310 177 2
139
-------
Figure A-92. Sampling Locations, November 11, 1976.
140
-------
Figure A-93. Plume, November 11, 1976.
Figure A-94. Plume Impaction, November 11, 1976.
141
-------
o
o
00-OOe 00-083 00-092 00-OVZ 00-OZ2 OO'OOZ OO'OSl
" 3onnnH
8
CD
CM
*-, r-
r- LO
o OD
00-091 00-OM'
CTI
s_
o>
_a
>
o
r---
o
c
•I—
-o
c
3
O
LU
o
_1 ^
LJ CJ
O
O _1
Z CJ
LU Z
CD LU
o
o
0°
o ***
cr
go
•ocfe
00-08E
OO'OS
00-OfrZ
ooo , 0 I *
OO
'O^Z
oo-odz OOM
3QniIilH
00-091
oo-ovi
O
O-
a>
o
CO
a>
s_
+J
(O
(U
D-
IT)
ai
s-
142
-------
November 12, 1976 0719-0955 MST
The plume was observed impacting upon elevated terrain approximately
8.7 km south-southwest of the stack (Figure A-98). Stable conditions, near
isothermal, (Figures A-99 and A-100) and light winds were observed. Two
cross sections were developed over the portable S02 monitor at approximately
8.7 km and at 1.2 km. Traverses were also made at 31 km. Center!ine
concentrations as high as 4.8 ppm S02 were observed at 31 km. The nephelometer
data were questionable.
TABLE A-25
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 12, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0651 CLR CLM
1050 CLR 330/4
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 15.3 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 11.9 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 19.4 X 109 yg/s
0900-1000 16.7 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2347 m/ 1.2 km/ 37.9 ppm
Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2408 m/ 8.7 km/ 14.6 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 202 m/ 67 m/ 8 cases/ 1.2 km
505 m/ 155 m/ 11 cases/ 8.7 km
758 m/ 359 m/ 2 cases/ 31.0 km
5. a , Cross Section, SO^: 60 m/ 55 min/ 1.2 km
100 m/ 22 min/ 8.7 km
6. CTZ, Spiral, S02: 43 m/ 4.4 min/ 7.5 km
143
-------
7.
Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL)
0720 1950
2340
2400
0751 1950
2340
2400
0820 1950
2340
2400
0850 1950
2340
2400
0920 1950
2340
2400
0950 1950
2340
2400
Direction (°)
140
031
041
169
034
032
163
044
055
160
053
063
173
075
088
147
067
082
Speed (m/s)
3
3
3
2
3
3
1
2
2
0
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
144
-------
CROSS SECTION
Figure A-96. Sampling Locations, November 12, 1976.
145
-------
Figure A-97. Plume, November 12, 1976.
Figure A-98.
Plume Under Stable Conditions,
November 12, 1976.
146
-------
UD
»—i
CD
^H O
o *sr
0 en
see
e
0
in
Od.
o>O
CTi
CVJ
S-
O)
.a
01
CO
O)
rs
o
1— LU
z:
V i— - 1
CJ I—
o
| y
LJ CJ
O
CD |
d^. C )
1— 1
.
^^ CO
Z— ^
.<£_
»— * 1 — (
L_J 1 — J
LU 2
CD LU
oo- od
O ' — ^
9
e> m
a ece
• •>
K
o
UJ
z
mm u
^.
(A
r!O
I
O
.tn
i
s5
• *••
_V\ - — .
1 —
a:
go
.m
i
O
o
^
e 00-0^3 OO'Oiz OD'Ot'2 DO' 0^3 OO'Ddz 00' odl 00' 0^1 OO'Dt't'
w.,.,01* (SH313U) 30niIllH
o
CL
a>
Q
^
c
(O
OJ
3
(O
s_
C1J
CL
£
t—
t
CD
O-i
1
^*^
147
-------
LO
LO CO
CD ^r
O LO
LO
LU 5?
LU
CJ
O
CJ
O
LU
CD
CJ
O
CJ
O
LU
oo_
CM
.tn
I
00-OOe 00-0^3 00-093 00-Oil QQ'Qtl 00-od3 00-081 00-031 OO'OVI
01
Osl
S-
O)
LO
CT>
O
O
to
QJ
Q
-O
c
(O
O)
3
(O
o.
Ol
o
o
O)
CD
148
-------
November 13, 1976 0716-0930 MST
Stable conditions were observed during a flight (Figure A-103). Multiple
traverses and spirals were made 9.6 km northeast of the stack. In addition,
a zigzag pattern was flown up the plume at approximately the height of the
plume center! ine, 2073 m MSL. Beginning at 1.6 km from the stack, the
helicopter flew through the plume at an angle 45° to the axis. As soon as
the aircraft left the plume, it executed a 270° turn and re-entered the
plume at the same location. This was done until a distance of 32 km was
reached.
TABLE A-26
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 13, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0652 CLR 160/05
1052 CLR 040/03
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 11.3 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 10.3 X 109
0800-0900 14.1 X 109 yg/s
0900-1000 18.1 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2069 m/ 9.6 km/ 16.7 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO,,: 528 m/ 6^ m/ 7 cases/ 9.6 km
5. az, Spiral, S02: 28 m/ 3.1 min/ 9.6 km
az, Spiral, S02: 32 m/ 3.3 min/ 9.6 km
oz, Spiral, S02: 36 m/ 3.8 min/ 9.6 km
az, Spiral, S02: 39 m/ 3.3 min/ 9.6 km
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0800 1950 219 8
2070 227 10
0830 1950 193 14
2070 208 9
0900 1950 207 6
2070 215 9
0930 1950 212 12
2070 215 7
149
-------
Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
1000 1950 222 9
2070 223 13
1030 1950 225 7
2070 224 11
150
-------
SPIRALS
TRANSECTS
Figure A-101. Sampling Locations, November 13, 1976.
151
-------
Tables A-27 and A-28 summarize the zig zag flight down the plume.
Values for CTy were determined by the relationship that 2.15 a is the
distance from centerline to 1/10 of center!ine. The results were then
adjusted using a simple cosine relationship. At distances greater than
5.5 km the plume was fragmented and an exact determination of a was
difficult. Y
* *• *.»*>»>
Figure A-102. Plume, November 13, 1976.
152
-------
TABLE A-27
DISTANCE VS. OBSERVED S02 MAXIMUM
Distance (km)
0.7
1.8
3.0
4.2
5.5
11.1
13.1
17.1
25.8
S02 Maximum (ppm)
15.6
42.0
11.5
3.27
4.80
2.65
1.70
3.06
2.46
Distance (km)
0.7
1.8
3.0
4.2
5.5
11.1
17.1
25.8
TABLE A-28
DISTANCE VS. a (SOg), TRANSECT (m)
153
-------
o
o
o
O
O CJ
o
Q
LU
OQ
CM
* — i
to
r-
o
LU
^^••S^, -Jf^
VL-, _•>
^•I^Mrf*^
CD
LO
rr>
i i i i i i i i
o
.M
1
g
04
CM
1
f — \
1^,
O
A
00
Dl
TD
0
OQ
00-0623
oo-oetz OO-OSOE oo-olet oo-oeat oo-om oo-oen 00-0291
ID
t^
en
S-
o
O
o.
OJ
Q
o
i
0)
154
-------
November 15, 1976 0727-0918 MST
Strong winds caused a bentover plume (Figure A-105). Vortices occasionally
formed on the lee side of the stack causing impaction in the smelter area
(Figure A-106). An attempt was made to construct cross sections in the vicinity
of the impaction area over the tailings pond immediately to the east of the
smelter and over the transportable SO^ monitor 3 km northeast of the stack.
The temperature probe was not operational. In addition, high background
levels of particulates made the interpretation of the nephelometer data
questionable. Table A-29 summarizes the mission. No determination of az
was possible.
TABLE A-29
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 15, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0652 100 SCT CLM
0950 60 BRKN 030/5
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 16.9 X 109 yg/s
0730-0830 12.2 X 109 yg/s
0830-0930 16.0 X 109 yg/s
0930-1030 17.4 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1798 m/ 1.8 km/ 22.6 ppm
4. Three-minute a , SO,,: 240 m/ 117 m/ 10 cases/ 1.8 km
Three-minute a , S02: 255 m/ 95 m/ 4 cases/ 3.0 km
5. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
073° 1800 236 9
1950 258 3
0803 1800 235 10
1950 249 6
0833 1800 233 14
1950 240 14
0903 1800 251 9
1950 265 10
0933 1800 237 8
1950 250 14
155
-------
CROSS SECTION
SECTIONS'
Figure A-104. Sampling Locations, November 15, 1976.
156
-------
Figure A-105. Plume, November 15, 1976.
Figure A-106. Plume, November 15, 1976.
157
-------
November 16, 1976
0723-0843 MST
Stable conditions below stack height coupled with neutral conditions
above (Figure A-110), initially produced a lofted plume (Figure A-108). By the
end of the mission (Figure A-lll), stable conditions observed at stack height
coupled with a superadiabatic layer below produced fumigation through the
layer. The surface was insulated from the plume by a stable layer throughout
the flight. Moderate to strong turbulence was experienced at the juncture of
the stable and unstable layers. Higher wind speeds were measured below stack
height than near stack height.
TABLE A-30
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 16, 1976
1,
2,
3.
4.
Butte Weather:
Plant Emissions
0650
0953
S02:
55 BRKN
45 SCT
0600-0700
0700-0800
0800-0900
0900-1000
1000-1100
100 BRKN 350/08
100 BRKN 350/08
13.9 X 109 yg/s
13.4 X 109 yg/s
18.1 X 109 yg/s
18.5 X 109 yg/s
15.6 X 109 yg/s
Center!ine Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1798 m/ 1.5 km/ 37.4 ppm
Three-minute a , SOo:
Three-minute a , B t:
Three-minute a , $02:
Three-minute a. B,.,, .:
y SCa L
Three-minute a , S02:
Three-minute a , B .:
Three-minute a , $02'.
*/
Three-minute a , B t:
Three-minute a , S02:
Three-minute a , B .:
144 m/ 68 m/ 3 cases/ 1.3 km
190 m/ 109 m/ 4 cases/ 1.3 km
141 m/ 17 m/ 7 cases/ 1.5 km
130 m/ 39 m/ 8 cases/ 1.5 km
133 m/ 28 m/ 6 cases/ 2.6 km
149 m/ 80 m/ 7 cases/ 2.6 km
260 m/ 87 m/ 6 cases/ 6.4 km
324 m/ 54 m/ 6 cases 6.4 km
279 m/ / 1 case/ 9.7 km
267 m/ / 1 case/ 9.7 km
158
-------
a , Cross Section, SCL: 61 m/ 14 min/ 1.5 km
az, Cross Section, SO^,: 53 m/ 19 min/ 2.6 km
a , Cross Section, B .: 65 m/ 19 min/ 2.6 km
Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0726 1800 242 16
1950 249 16
0756 1800 248 12
1950 267 6
0830 1800 247 7
1950 252 6
0900 1800 236 15
1950 239 10
159
-------
TRANSECTS
Figure A-107. Sampltng Locations, November 16, 1976.
160
-------
Figure A-108. Plume, November 16, 1976.
Figure A-109. Plume, November 16, 1976.
161
-------
e e
o
•
_IM
CM
I
cn
0>
JO
>
o
O
CM
CO
CM CO
r- CM
O CO
CM
UJ £
s: °
h—<
I— UJ
CJ \—
o
_i x:
CJ CJ
o
CD _i
2 CJ
O o
UJ 2
CD LU
,cn
i
3
.en
OO'OV-23
ob-oedz oo-oodz oo-oz^i oo'o*1^ oo'09i!i oo-os^i
30niIi"IB
CM
r~
O
in
en
o
or
o
Q.
CU
X>
E
(O
O)
i.
0>
CL
O
I
3
O1
162
-------
1C
r^
01
IE 084058
see© e
eocene
CD e
rn
i
o
w
•
CM
' i i i i I i i i i
GO
O
c
•5
o
to
+->
c
•r-
O
CL
s-
o>
JD
O>
OO
O
Q
-a
c
(O
S-
O)
Q-
S-
3
163
-------
November 17, 1976 0718-0912 MST
At the beginning of the mission, stable conditions existed below stack
height with neutral conditions above (Figure A-115). By the end of the
mission, stable conditions existed both above and below stack height
Figure A-116). Strong winds were observed with downwash conditions
(Figures A-113 and A-114). Cross sections were developed at 2.5 and
6.0 km.
TABLE A-31
SUMMARY OF MISSION, NOVEMBER 17, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0653 50 SCT 120 SCT 200 SCT 170/04
0950 100 SCT 250 BRKN CLM
2. Plant Emissions, S02: 0600-0700 19.3 X 109 yg/s
0700-0800 17.2 X 109 yg/s
0800-0900 18.4 X 109 yg/s
0900-1000 20.1 X 109 yg/s
1000-1100 15.7 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1737 m/ 2.5 km 2.4 ppm
4. Three-minute a , S02: 287 m/ 87 m/ 11 cases/ 2.5 km
Three-minute a, Bc^..: 340 m/ 160 m/ 13 cases/ 2.5 km
y scat
Three-minute a , SO,,: 481 m/ 96 m/ 14 cases/ 6.0 km
Three-minute a , B .: 446 m/ 121 m/ 14 cases/ 6.0 km
5. az, Cross Section, SO,,: 113 m/ 34 min/ 2.5 km
az, Cross Section, Bscat: 142 m/ 34 min/ 2.5 km
a , Cross Section, SO^: 133 m /50 min/ 6.0 km
a , Cross Section, B .: 121 m/ 50 min/ 6.0 km
164
-------
6. Winds Aloft: Time (MST) Height (m MSL) Direction (°) Speed (m/s)
0726 1740 232 15
1950 239 6
0756 1740 229 11
1950 226 31
0826 1740 224 16
1950 221 16
0926 1740 229 8
1950 242 3
0956 1740 228 18
1950 222 17
1026 1740 225 6
1950 233 28
1156 1740 234 15
1950 248 22
165
-------
1 1/2 0
1 2
NM
Figure A-112. Sampling Locations, November 17, 1976.
166
-------
Figure A-113. Plume, November 17, 1976.
Figure A-114. plume, November 17, 1976.
167
-------
00
rn
CD
o —'
CM
|_J_J '•
t—-1
h- LiJ
ZI
CJ I—
_j ic:
CJ LJ
QQ LU
e
®
©e>
e
e
*e
CD
O
ee
V
10
r^
01
at
a
c
tZ
168
-------
CTl
s-
(U
>
o
o
o
•t
01
-o
c
o
o
a.
-o
c
03
a»
•3
*->
to
CD
d.
3aniin«
00-0891 00-0091*
0)
169
-------
December 3, 1976 0740-1010 MST
Stable conditions due to subsiding air tFtgures A-119 and A-120) coupled
with strong flow produced downwash conditions (Figure A-118) and occasional
plume impaction within 2.0 km of the stack. A cross section was developed
1.7 km east-southeast of the stack. In addition, multiple spirals and traverses
were made 6.3 east-southeast of the stack.
TABLE A-32
SUMMARY OF MISSION, DECEMBER 3, 1976
1. Butte Weather: 0651 120 SCT 250 SCT CLM
Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730 21.3 X 109 yg/s
0730-0830 13.9 X 109 yg/s
0830-0930 16.8 X 109 yg/s
0930-1030 12.6 X 109 yg/s
3. Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 2042 m/ 1.7 km/ 23.0 ppm
4. Three-minute 0 , S02: 185 m/ 33 m/ 12 cases/ 1.7 km
Three-minute o , Bscgt: 227 m/ 95 m/ 11 cases/ 1.7 km
Three-minute a , S02: 400 m/ 75 m/ 11 cases/ 6.3 km
Three-minute a , B .: 389 m/ 49 m/ 11 cases/ 6.3 km
5. a,, Cross Section, B „,.: 114 m/ 34 min/ 1.7 km
Z SCal,
6. az, Spiral, S02: 115 m/ 3.1 min/ 6.3 km
a , Spiral, S02: 107 m/ 3.4 min/ 6.3 km
a , Sprial, S02: 108 m/ 4.0 min/ 6.3 km
az, Spiral, S02: 115 m/ 4.8 min/ 6.3 km
a , Spiral, B .: 117 m/ 3.1 min/ 6.3 km
a , Spiral, Bscat: 114 m/ 3.4 min/ 6.3 km
a , Spiral, Bc .: 76 m/ 2.4 min/ 6.3 km
Z SCa t
az, Spiral, B$cat: 134 m/ 4.8 min/ 6.3 km
7. Winds Aloft: NOT AVAILABLE
170
-------
Figure A-117. Sampling Locations, December 3, 1976.
171
-------
V
Figure A-118. Plume, December 3, 1976.
172
-------
o
to
o>
I
VD
r^
CT)
CO
0)
JQ
o
O)
a
r-
CM
o
•«r
r-
o
ee>
aCL.
tNQ
o
o
in
O)
c
LU
CJ I—
o
—I XL
CJ CJ
CD
CD _J
•z. o
»— *
•z. o
O O
LU 2!
QQ LU
o
•4J
o
o.
-o
(O
a>
-M
-------
8
en
O
O
CO
o oo
o *-•
,-H O
UJ O
C_)
CD
CJ
LU
CD
CJ
CJ
z
»—i
a
LJ
oQ.
oo
eg
i
oo'o»3 oo-oez 00-033 oo-org 00-002 co'oei oo-osi oo-oti oo-osr'
ooB.,oi* (sy3i3W) 3onim«
CO
u
a>
a
00
o
o
ta
o>
E
•r-
-o
C
O
o
O-
£
o
T3
c
(O
a)
t
-------
December 8, 1976
0744-0945 MST
Near neutral conditions were initially observed up to approximately
2000 m MSL with stable conditions attributed to subsidence above. By the
end of the mission, the layer of subsiding air had built down to near the
surface (Figures A-122 and A-123). Strong southwesterly flow was observed
throughout the flight. Downwash conditions were noted. Cross sections were
attempted at 2.6 km near the area of impaction and at 7.4 km over the
portable S02 monitor.
TABLE A-33
SUMMARY OF MISSION, DECEMBER 8, 1976
1,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Butte Weather: 0750 HI SCT
1054 HI SCT
Plant Emissions, S02: 0630-0730
0730-0830
0830-0930
0930-1030
340/04
300/03
20.8 X 109 yg/s
15.9 X 109 yg/s
9.9 X 109 yg/s
9.7 X 109 yg/s
Centerline Height/ Distance/ Concentration: 1860 m/2.6 km/ 4.6 ppm
Three-minute 0 , S02:
J
Three-minute a , B .:
Three-minute a , S00:
y 2
Three-minute a , B .:
550 m/ 204 m/ 8 cases/ 2.6 km
461 m/ 90 m/ 5 cases/ 2.6 km
674 m/ 174 m/ 18 cases/ 7.4 km
537 m/ 124 m/ 10 cases/ 7.4 km
No determination of a possible.
Winds Aloft: Time (MSL) Height (m MSL) Direction (°)
0820 1860 238
1950 241
Speed (m/s)
15
14
175
-------
Figure A-121. Sampling Locations, December 8, 1976.
176
-------
8
CT)
on
00
^
r-
o
£
ri
00
LO
rr\
•cir '
^
0
LU
e
§
|*-
J0*
8
! 1 1 1 1 I 1
.00
1
0
o
Q
g
0
o
n
en
*r—
-o
c
3
O
4->
C
*r^
0
S
oo-ogi1? oo'oo'dz oo-oorfs oo-oz^i oo-on?i oo-o9t'i OO-OB^I oo-oogr
3onuiib
CO
cu
Q>
o
O)
Q
-o
O)
+J
(O
0)
CL,
C\J
CM
OJ
CD
LL.
177
-------
CO
TI- 00
en o
o LO
-<3-
LU E?
\— UJ
CJ I—
o
_J "XL
LJ LJ
CD _J
Z LJ
Z (±1
CJD a
LU z:
00 LU
e _o>
0°
e e
«>
e )
O
o
8
Q_
8°
§
o
o
OD'03^1
CE
.O
3aniinu
oo'oedi oo • 0091'
U7
O1
A
00
s_
0)
(J
O)
o
CO
o
(/I
c
-a
E
3
O
OO
o
o.
I
Q
(O
0)
S-
-------
APPENDIX B. DATA ADJUSTMENT
In addition to the routine adjustments that are applied to output
data based on pre- and post-flight calibration and pre-, and post- and
in-flight zero and span, instrument time response and averaging time
were considered when processing these data.
Instrument response adjustments are applied in the following manner:
Testing has determined that the nephelometer has a first-order linear
response. Figure B-l is an example of such a response to a step function.
INPUT
TIME LAGS TIME
Figure B-l. Example of First-Order Linear Response.
The TECO-43 instrument was tested and was found to have second-order
linear response characteristics. Figure B-2 is an example of the response of
such an instrument to a step function input.
t
-INPUT
TIME LAG'*' TIME-
Figure B-2. Example of Second-Order Linear Response.
179
-------
In general, when neglecting time lag, the relationship between input
concentration, x,-n» and output concentration, xOU4. is:
xin = xout + ^=1 ai
For a first order system:
dt1
xin = xout + T
dx
out
1 dt
and for a second-order linear system:
X
xin - xout
T2)
OUt
where T, and i~ are time constants.
dt'
(1)
(2)
(3)
Figure B-3 is an example of the response that a first-order
instrument would have to a Gaussian input.
Xmax-
GAUSSIAN INPUT
OUTPUT
Figure B-3. Response of a First-Order Instrument to a Gaussian Input.
180
-------
For a Gaussian input,
xin - *max e
(4)
and
xout xo e
1 + erf
2?.
Tl
2a
(5)
where
X0 = f (xmax> a, TJ), a constant.
Note: Referring to Figure B-3 for a linear first-order system and a
Gaussian input,
A = Inflection point in output corresponding to xmax»
B = Maximum output value where xOU4. = x,-n» ancl
C = Exit point from plume. The output is an exponential fall
from this point, and from this point onward.
out
for t>tc.
(6)
In order to determine input concentrations from output concentrations,
we must:
A. Determine T,
B. Compute Derivatives, dxol|t/dt
181
-------
1. To determine TJ, we plot in xout (after subtracting background)
vs. time and consider the linear portion of output decay (See Figure B-4).
B
LINEAR PORTION
NOISE
TIME (t)
Figure B-4. Example of Exponential Decay for First-Order Linear System.
The slope of the linear portion is equal to -!/T,.
An analysis of 99 transects and 17 spirals that were randomly selected
and plotted gave the following time constants for the nephelometer (Bscat)
for each maneuver: T$ . gl = 3.74s ± 0.60s and Ttransect = 4.11 ± 1.43s.
2. To compute the derivative, dxout/dt, we note that:
dln>
x~Ht
and
(7)
(8)
The expected form of In xOU4. from a Gaussian input as shown in equation (5)
can be transformed into a polynomial in time by converting exp and erf
into their respective infinite series representations.
In
-------
Plume parameters are also presented based on SOo measurements. The
TECO-43 SOo monitor was found to have a response that is linear and second
order. Therefore,
d2x
= x
out
and using the log transformation,
jl + tTj + T2)
lnx
out,
do)
dtc
d Inx
xin ~ xotit
out
dt
T1T2
(d 1nxout\
V dt )
d2lnx
out
dt
(11)
This equation requires knowledge of both the slope and the curvature of
the output. The in-flight testing of the instrument accomplished on October
12, 1976, established that TJ = 1.60s and T,> = 10.5s. These results were
based on 16 tests. It is recognized that the use of the second derivative
increases the probably error by a factor of approximately two. The
numerical technique used for computer processing of the data to solve
the differential equations for x is the "Method of Milne," (Wylie, 1958).
In general terms: y. = f (t.) and t« - t-, = t3 - t« = At. For a fit
involving N data points, if n is the point at which we want to compute
ar'
For n=l
= T2SF" ('25yl + 48y2 ' 36y3 + 16y4 - 3y5}
.For n=2
For 2
-------
APPENDIX C. SAMPLING TIME
The measured peak concentrations downwind from the source increased with
a decrease in sampling time because the apparent plume width, as measured for
short time periods, was not affected by plume meander. To place centerline
concentrations, xmav> onto a common time basis for comparison with other
max
literature tabulations, we have adjusted our values. The maximum concen-
tration for an elevated release with no reflections is xma = Q/2ira o IT,
IltClX Jr *~
where o- and o_ are functions of distance, x, and averaging time, t, and Q is
the emission rate. The rate that xm,^ decreases with averaging time is
max
assumed to be proportional to t~p, where -p is a constant. If we
assume: ay gz
6t >> fit
for stable and neutral cases, then o- must increase with averaging time as tp
for short averaging times. Turner (1969) has suggested that p should be be-
tween 0.17 and 0.20 for sampling times less than two hours. We have used
0.165 as used by Turner in his workbook example and adjusted the measured
values of cr to a base time of 3 minutes.
The helicopter traverse measurements correspond more closely to an in-
stantaneous plume (real time measurement) than the time average usually con-
sidered.
For example, considering a Gaussian plume and a helicopter air speed of
60 knots (.30.9 m/s), the mean sampling time within the plume may be estimated
aS: _ 4.64ay
t (s) = 2(30.9) = °'075cTy (s)
where 4.64 is the number of standard deviations which contain 98% of the area
under the Gaussian curve. Since the Gaussian plume has bilateral symmetry, a
flight through half of the plume completely defines its width. A factor of
two appears in the denominator to account for the fact that a transect through
the plume represents two independent measurements of the half plume. In
184
-------
keeping with the assumption that
at 9t
no adjustments for sampling time have been made for az. The times given for
values of az represent either the time required to spiral down through the
plume or the total time required to construct a cross section of the plume by
making a series of transects through the plume at various altitudes.
185
-------
APPENDIX D. DETERMINATION OF PLUME PARAMETERS
Software was developed to determine plume parameters by application of
the method of moments (Pasquill, 19). Given a set of corrected outputs,
input = f (time), the area under a curve of concentration vs. time,
A =
xindt (1)
x_. tdt First total moment
4. _ j in _ _ _
u " A Total area (2)
The variance of the distribution is:
2 = J in(t-t) dt _ Second total moment
0 A total area(3)
2 Jxin t2dt
a - n
The centerline concentration, xm,^> was determined by relation:
max
A
xmax ~ TK— IA\
V2 TO (4)
Numerical integration was accomplished by Simpon's rule, (Wylie, 1960).
When reflection either from a stable "lid" aloft or at the surface occurs,
it is necessary to make the assumption that we may draw a smooth curve through
the adjusted data. We then select equal vertical intervals and input values
2
of height and concentration into our computer program to determine Zo, a£ ,
xm* > ancl A- The same technique is used for spirals and cross sections.
max
Graphically, with one reflection at the surface CFigure D-l), we can see the
problem as transferring the area under the curve due to surface reflection to
a Gaussian curve having equal area and the proper configuration.
186
-------
-TANGENTAL
X SURFACE
Figure D-l. Example of a Surface Reflection.
Considering the equation for Gaussian distribution, while neglecting the hor-
izontal displacement term,
A /L-n 2
Q
x =
We may write:
1
x = —IT
1-K
e
2 ^
and
2HZ
0.
X =
1 + e
(5)
(6)
(7)
We may now replot as normal distribution, x1
1+e-2HZ/a2
(8)
187
-------
In order to replot, we choose values of Z , centerline height, and a that
will give equal areas as compared with our original adjusted output curve.
The complete process used to adjust our plume with a reflection is as
follows:
1. Draw a smooth curve through our adjusted data.
2. Choose equa> intervals of height and input to our computer program
2
to obtain ZQ, CTZ , xmax> and A.
3. Replot data.
4. Assume ZQ and az that will give us a Gaussian plume having the same
area as our plume in step 3.
5. Choose values of x' and Z and input to our computer program to
obtain Z and a . If Z and a are similar to step 4, stop. If not, repeat
step 4.
Plume parameters are once again determined by the method of moments. A
second method of determining xmau for S0~ is to assume that the S00 and B,.,.
max f. f- scat
plumes have identical shapes. Then if Acn and AR are the respective
iU2 Bscat
areas under the output curves of SOp and B ,:
A A
rQ "D
2 _ scat (12)
xmax S00 xmax scat
or
cn SO, xmax scat
S02 B _2
B
scat
188
-------
APPENDIX E. DISCUSSION OF DATA
The following statistical analysis has been made in order to test the
validity of our data: In the absence of loss of SOp by scavenging or chemical
transformation, the maximum SO- concentration, x> at the plume center! ine is:
X =
(1)
X
Q
z
u
where:
center!ine concentration
emission rate (yg/s)
horizontal dispersion coefficient (m)
vertical dispersion coefficient (m)
wind speed (m/s).
The equation can be written as:
R =
(2)
where R is the ratio of measured emission to estimated emission when x.
? >
a , u, and Q are accurate and have random measurement errors, the measurements
should scatter about unity. On 17 occasions, all of the parameters were
available to determine R. Values of R are tabulated and presented in Table E-l
The following statistics have been calculated:
the mean of R, R" = 2.11
the standard deviation of R, CTR = 2.35
the geometric mean of R, M = 1.87
the geometric standard deviation of R, CVR ~ 1.92.
189
-------
TABLE E-l
VALUES OF R
Rank Ratio (R)
1 0.70
2 0.92
3 1.13
4 1.20
5 1.24
6 1.46
7 1.60
8 1.72
9 1.88
10 1.89
11 2.30
12 2.30
13 2.93
14 3.46
15 3.46
16 3.63
17 4.05
190
-------
Since the five parameters of equation (1) are independent, the values of
R may be lognormally distributed. A test for lognormality is the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) Test. Plotting the values of R on log probability
paper at frequencies, f = rank/N + 1, where N is the total number of samples,
17, the data are fit by a lognormal distribution with the experimental geo-
metric mean, GR", and the standard deviation, CTQR (Figure E-l). The maximum
deviation in terms of frequency between the data and the line is 0.06 (0.945
- 0.885) which is the KS statistic. As can be seen from Table E-2 of KS
statistics, the statistics are significant at a level much higher than 20% and
the distribution cannot be rejected as a fit.
The geometric mean of 1.87, as opposed to 1.00, indicates that there may
be a large bias in one of the five measurements. Since the ratio R is the
product of five measurements, the geometric standard deviation should be the
square root of the sum of the squares of the standard deviation of the five
measured quantities.
CM
7.0-
6.0_
5.0 _
4.0 _
3.0-
2.0 _
GR = 1.87
CTR = e 650e = 1.917
*KS
MAX
SN(x) - 0.885
= (0.945 - 0.885) = 0.06
F*(X) = 0.945
0.02 0.05 0.10 0.150.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
FREQUENCY = RANK/N+1
0.800.85 0.90 0.95 0.98
Figure E-l. Equation (1) vs. Frequency.
191
-------
TABLE E-2
TABLE OF CRITICAL VALUES OF KS
Sample
Size
N
Level of Significance in KS =
0.20 0.15 0.10
0.169 0.177 0.189
|F*(x) - SN
0.05
0.200
I "w \ I
\ A, / \
0.01
0.235
*The values of KS given in the table are critical values as-
sociated with selected values of KS. Any value of KS which
is greater than or equal to the tabulated value is signifi-
cant at the indicated level of significance. These values
were obtained as a result of Monte Carlo calculations, using
1000 or more samples for each value of KS. F*(x) is the
model value and S,.(x) is the observed value.
If there were no errors in any of the measurements, the geometric stan-
dard deviation would be 1.0. The difference between the actual standard
deviation and 1.0 gives the total error in the measured quantities and equals
the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual errors. Of the
five quantities making up R, only the errors for the emission rates cannot be
estimated. However, these may be calculated. The following errors are es-
timated for the other parameters:
u is measured by double theodolite and should be on the order of ±20%.
a is measured from transects and should be on the order of ±20%.
o is determined from a complex analysis of spiral or transect data and
should be on the order of ±35%.
X is determined by another complex analysis and should be on the order of
±35%.
If we assign the remaining error to Q scatter, then
a2 = (0.917)2 - (0.2)2 - (0.2)2 - (0.35)2 - (0.35)2, or aQ = 0.72.
The apparent lognormal distribution of these data tends to indicate that
the experiemental errors are random. The geometric mean of 1.87, as opposed
to 1.00, indicates that there may be a large bias in one of the five measure-
ments. The parameters x» a, a , and u are estimated to have a precision on
192
-------
the order of 25%. The analysis of the raw data which produces these para-
meters would underpredict and overpredict equally often and therefore would
not cause a significant btas of the geometric mean of R from 1.00. The
emissions, Q, could have a btas since they are estimated for an hourly period
and large upward excursions for shorter periods are possible during periods of
charging or blowing. Although the analysis shows an unexpectedly large
deviation from unity, the lognormality of these data indicate that the es-
timated uncertainties of ± 25% for the plume parameters are not unreasonable.
An inspection of the vertical and horizontal dispersion coefficients
(Figures E-2, E-3, and E-4) obtained from helicopter measurements immediately
points out two facts: the rapid dilution near the source (The Pasquill-
Gifford curves are included for comparison] and the large amount of scatter of
the data. The large amount of scatter points out the problem of calculating
dispersion in complex terrain. An attempt has been made to stratify these
data by categorizing the data to various parameters. The first involved
identifying the coefficients as to atmospheric stability near stack height
from helicopter-obtained soundings (Figures E-2, E-3, and E-4). Both measure-
ments from the nephelometer and S02 instrument are included. It is evident
that due to the complexity of the terrain such a stratification had little
meaning. In fact, the average rate of horizontal diffusion associated with
stable conditions was more rapid than for the neutral cases. An attempt to
stratify the data by wind speed was unsuccessful as was the height-of-plume
rise.
We next investigated the physical processes that produced thermal sta-
bility. To facilitate data processing, the average a and a values obtained
from the two instruments, if both were operational, were used in subsequent
analyses. In addition, the average a values at a given distance for a given
mission were used.
Three types of thermally stable conditions were identified. The first
was a result of the fact that the smelter is on the eastern slope of the
continental divide. Westerly flow (a preferred direction) frequently results
in the formation of a subsidence inversion at stack height. The flight of
October 7, 1976 is one of the many examples of this type of flow. The second
and rather rare type is associated with a strong nocturnal inversion coupled
193
-------
STABLE
• NEUTRAL
30.0
2.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
15.0
25.0
Figure E-2 Horizontal Dispersion Coefficients vs. Downwind Distance.
194
-------
400
300
250
200
_ 150
^
CO
100
£ 90
co 80
g 70
° 60
bN 50
40
30
25
20
15
10
LEAST
SQUARES
FIT (ALL DATA)
STABLE
NEUTRAL
i i i I i i
0.80.91.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.07.08.09.010.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure E-3. Vertical Dispersion Coefficients Determined from Cross Sections
vs. Downwind Distance.
195
-------
500
400
300
250
200
150
C/D 100
^ 90
i 80
70
50
30
25
20
15
10
y
Z L_
™rr
NEUTRAL
LEAST
SQUARES FIT
(ALL DATA)
STABLE
NEUTRAL
1.0 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure E-4. Vertical Dispersion Coefficients.
196
-------
with nearly calm winds. In this type of stable condition, large dispersion
coefficients are generated as the plume slowly meanders over a large area as
little downwind advection occurs. The observations taken at 1.5 km on
November 8, 1976 are an example of this case. The third stable type is the
classical radiation inversion with associated weak flow. Observations taken
on November 11 and 12 are examples of this type of inversion. Due to the fact
that over half of the sampling days had westerly winds, the data was broken
into two categories, the first being flow from the mountainous area to the
west of the stack and the second being all other flow. This attempt was some-
what productive in that stratification of the a data was obtained (Figures E-
5, and E-6). However, the stratification of o values was less than satis-
factory (Figure E-7).
Next, the a values associated with westerly flow were broken down as to
those cases where a subsidence inversion, as determined by temperature and
dewpoint data, was present at plume height and those cases where no such in-
version was present. A marked stratification of a data was now achieved.
The average case where a subsidence inversion was formed due to katabatic flow
from the Mount Hagen area exhibited diffusion rates measurably greater than
the averages of the other two cases.
Figure E-8 is a graphical presentation of the complexity of the topo-
graphy in the immediate vicinity of the smelter. It is apparent that flow
from any of the octants will result in adiabatic expansion or compression over
hundreds of meters and a resultant departure from stability classification
estimates based on insolation, cloud cover, and wind speed. In addition, even
a casual inspection of the undulatory nature of the terrain will result in an
appreciation of the complexity of flow patterns in the vicinity of the smelter.
It is noted that westerly flow should result in a katabatic flow.
In addition, other nonturbulent processes associated with airflow patterns
in complex terrain which produce divergence and stretching play an important
role in plume dispersion (Fosberg, et al. 1976). These cannot be calculated
with our limited wind data. The effects of wake turbulence in the lee of this
stack having an 18.3 m diameter also would enhance initial dilution.
197
-------
CO
200.
150.
100_
90.
t/t uu-
1 70.
b 60.
50.
40.
30.
*= WESTERLY FLOW, NO SUBSIDENCE
• = WESTERLY FLOW. SUBSIDENCE
• = OTHER FLOW
# •
1.0
I T I I I I I I I
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.09.010.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (km)
Figure E-5.
a Values Stratified by Wind Direction, Spirals.
GO
0
»—
% 100.
i 90.
S 80_i
! 70.
b 60-
50.
l II
0.8 0.9 1.0
* WESTERLY FLOW, NO SUBSIDENCE
• WESTERLY FLOW, SUBSIDENCE
• OTHER DATA
I I I I I I I Ti
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.08.09.010.0
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (k ml
Figure E-6. a Values Stratified by Wind Direction, Cross Sections.
198
-------
GO s
co
co eo 3=
LU LU t
^*o
II II II
*• •
I I I
3 O O O CJ
3 O O O O
n oo r-
fC
s-
OO
in
-------
5 km 4
10123
5 km
2000
5 km
Figure E-8. Topographical Cross Sections in the Vicinity of the
Stack.
200
-------
The effects of increased surface roughness and the associated increase in
the rate of diffusion have been observed by McElroy and Pooler (1968) and
Start, et al. (1975), and calculated by Liu and Durran (1977). The tendency
for more rapid dilution in complex terrain than predicted by Turner for flat
terrain has been reported by Bowne (1974) and Whaley and Lee (1977).
201
-------
APPENDIX F. UPPER LEVEL WINDS
Double theodolite wind observations were, in general, made at 30-minute
intervals during the times when the helicopter was sampling. Figure F-l
shows the approximate location of the three pibal pads. Pad A was used
on a routine basis. The location of the second pad was determined by wind
direction, i.e., the base line was selected that would be as perpendicular
to the flow as possible. The distance AB - 344.34 m and AC = 402.84 m.
The orientation of base line AB was 268.15° and AC, 31.15°. These directions
were based on sightings of the north star. The data have been processed on
a CDC-6400 computer using a program written by NOAA personnel assigned to
ERDA-Las Vegas, Nevada, using a method by Thyer (1962). In this report,
winds are given for each flight for 1950 m, the stack height is 1934 m, and
near the height of the plume centerline. A complete set of wind data is
on file at this office.
202
-------
150 1 Z 3 4 5
KILOMETERS
Figure F-l. Location of Pibal Pads.
203
-------
APPENDIX G. PLANT EMISSION ESTIMATES
Hourly emission estimates were made by the Technical Support Section of
Region VIII, EPA (O'Boyle, 1977). The following formula was used in
making these estimates: Total sulfur = Roasting + Converter + Base
emissions - Acid plant.
1. Roasting: (Ibs/hr) was calculated by multiplying the tons of
roaster charge per hour (t/hr) read from the Anaconda operating records by
the pounds of sulfur emitted per ton of charge (Ibs S/t chg), which was
estimated from the daily roasting sulfur emissions. These in turn were
calculated from Anaconda records of daily roaster charge tonnage of sulfur
in the roaster charge and product (calcines).
2. Convertor Blowing: (.Ibs/hr) was calculated by multiplying the
connector blowing minutes during the hour (min/hr) which was obtained from
company records by the average pounds of sulfur emitted per converter blowing
minute Obs/min). This was estimated by describing the total sulfur in the
matte for the period November 1 through November 17, 1976, by the total
converter blowing minutes during that period.
3. Base Emissions: The sum of average hourly sulfur emission rates
was obtained by interpolating plots of daily electric furnace emissions
and 4-day running averages of daily estimates of the reverberating furnace
emissions. These estimates were made from reverberating and roaster charge
weights and the analyses of these charges, calcines, and mattes for sulfur.
4. Acid Plant: Thr intake of the acid plant (120 Ibs/hr) was
calculated by multiplying the acid plant operating minutes during an hour
by the pounds of sulfur intake by operating minute. This constant was
calculated from plant operating data for October, November, and December
1976 and February 1977.
204
-------
The results of these calculations of sulfur emissions were then used to
3
calculate SC^ emissions in yg/m to make them compatible with other parameters.
205
-------
APPENDIX H. COMPUTATION OF STABILITY CLASSIFICATIONS
If one desires to compare the reported values of a and a with the
values associated with the various stability categories as suggested by
Turner (1969), Butte surface weather is provided in the description of each
flight. An estimate of surface wind speeds may be obtained from the pibal
wind data. To further assist in the determination of stability classifi-
cation, the following information concerning insolation has been obtained
from the Smithsonian Tables for Anaconda, Montana (Table H-l).
TABLE H-l
TIMES OF DAYLIGHT AND SOLAR ELEVATION
Daylight (1 hour after sunrise)
October 1, 1976, 0636 True Solar Time (1ST)
November 1, 1976, 0721 TST
December 1, 1976, 0756 TST
Solar Elevation
October 1, 1976, 32° at 0938 TST
November 1, 1976, 19° at 0944 TST
December 1, 1976, 15° at 0924 TST
Table H-2 presents Turner's stability categories in six classes. Class A
is the most unstable class, while class F is the most stable. Night extends
to one hour after sunrise. The neutral class can be assumed for overcast
conditions for night or day. Slight insolation corresponds to solar
elevations from 15° to 35°.
206
-------
TABLE H-2
KEY TO STABILITY CATEGORIES*
Surface Wind
Speed (m/s)
<2
2-3
3-5
5-6
>6
Day
Incoming Solar Radiation
Strong
A
A-B
B
C
C
Moderate
A-B
B
C-D
D
D
Slight
B
C
C
D
D
Nu
Thin OVC
or
>4/8 Low
E
D
D
D
jht
<3/8
Cloud
F
E
D
D
*
See page 206 for explanation of classifications,
207
-------
APPENDIX I. COMPARISON OF
-------
APPENDIX J. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES
Calibration for the Sikorsky-58 helicopter instruments was organized to
ensure valid data with a minimum of loss. Zero and span gas calibrations
were performed before and after each mission. In addition, zero air readings
were taken during the course of each flight. These were combined to determine
instrument drift during the sampling period. This information was used to
determine the adjustment due to drift at any specific instance during the
flight.
The span gases used to calibrate the REM ozone and Andros carbon monoxide
instruments were diluted through a Bendix Dynamic Calibration System. The
source of zero grade dilution air was the Aadco pure air generator. Span gas
used to calibrate the Teco S02 instrument was fed dtrectly into the intake
port of the instrument. The MRI nephelometer was calibrated with Freon gas as
prescribed by the manufacturer. The Cambridge temperature/dewpoint monitor
was calibrated using precision resistors.
The span gases (Scott-Marrin SCL mixtures in aluminum cylinders) that
were used in the calibration of the SCL instrument were tested for concentra-
tion by the wet pararosanailine method presented by the Federal Register, 40
CFR, Part 50, Part 53, Subposts A, B, and C, Volume 38, No. 197, October 12,
1973. All calibrations were conducted by contract personnel of the Lockheed
Electronics Corportation.
209
-------
Table J-l presents the results of titrations made to determine cylinder
concentrations.
TABLE 0-1
SULFUR DIOXIDE CYLINDER HISTORIES
1. Scott Marrin (SM), S02 Cylinder #11394, Used October 1 - 12, 1976:
Date of Analysis
04/20/77
runs)
SM Value
98.3 ppm
LEC* Value
97.67**
% Difference
-0.64
% Precision
1.78 (3
2. SM Cylinder #CC 214, Used October 13 - November 9, 1976:
Date of Analysis SM Value LEC Value % Difference % Precision
10/10/76 39.1 ppm 38.5 ppm 1.60
03/14/77 39.1 ppm 38.7 ppm** -1.07
Single Run
1.56 (3 runs)
3. Scott Marrin S02 Cylinder #CC 218, Used November 18 - December 9, 1976:
Date of Analysis SM Value LEC Value % Difference % Precision
10/10/76 39.2 ppm 38.47 ppm -1.85
03/18/77 39.2 ppm 40.7**ppm -3.65 |
Single Run
1.90 (3 runs)
* Lockheed Electronics Corporation.
**Value used for calibration purposes.
210
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing]
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/4-78-054
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
AIRBORNE MEASUREMENTS OF A COPPER SMELTER PLUME IN
MONTANA. The Anaconda Company, Anaconda, Montana
October 1 - December 9, 1976.
EPORT DATE
September 1978
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Frank G, Johnson, David T. Mage, and Norman J. Cimon
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1AD606
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Las Vegas, NV
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/07
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
A field study was conducted during October 1 to December 8, 1976 to measure
parameters of the effluent plume of The Anaconda Company's copper smelter,
Anaconda, Montana. Plume parameters were observed with a helicopter-borne air
quality monitoring system. This data report presents plume heights, plume
horizontal and vertical dispersion, and plume centerline concentration, and
low-altitude sulfur dioxide concentrations over areas of plume impaction.
Nephelometer and SO- data have been adjusted to account for instrument response
times.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI field/Group
Copper
Air pollution
Environmental surveys
Helicopters
Sulfur dioxide
Smelter
Plumes
The Anaconda Company
Helicopter air quality
measurements
Anaconda, Montana
Plume dispersion
Environmental monitoring
04B
07B
17H
20F
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
230
SECURITY CLASS/'
UNCLASSIFIED
Thti page)
22. PRI
CAM1
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 - 684-008/1902-M, 2025. 9-1
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Information Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Special Fourth
Class Rate
Book
If your *ddi*M It Incorrect, picas* change on MM abov*
lab*l; tear off; and return to the abov* addnM.
If you do not dnlrt to continue receiving lfitt tecnteal report
**rt*», CHECK HERE Q Mar off label, and return It to th*
abov* addrau.
EPA-600/4-78-054
------- |