P/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 7
25 Funston Rd.
Kansas City, Kansas 66115
907/9-83-005
Environmental Services Division
August, 1983
Evaluation Of
Ambient Air Quality
In The State Of Missouri
Based on Monitoring Data Through 1982
EPA REGION VII IRC
069122
-------
EVALUATION OF AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI
Prepared by
Thomas T. Holloway, Ph.D.
Environmental Monitoring and
Compliance Branch
August 1983
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VII
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
25 Funston Road
Kansas City, Kansas 66115
816-236-3884
FTS: 926-3884
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents an evaluation of recent ambient air quality in Missouri,
based on 1981 and 1982 monitoring data for the criteria pollutants [Total
Suspended Particulates (TSP), Sulfur Dioxide (SO?), Carbon Monoxide (CO),
Nitrogen Dioxide (N02), Ozone (Oq) and Lead (Pb)J. Trend evaluations are
based on five years of data, 1978-1982. All monitoring data used were
retrieved from the Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data (SAROAD) system.
The report presents the following information in graphical form:
- Recent air quality and trends
- Boundaries of designated non-attainment areas
- Spatial scale of representativeness and data completeness by monitor
- Population within designated non-attainment areas.
Tabular summaries in the Appendices show the numerical data on which the
graphics are based.
The findings and recommendations of the evaluation can be summarized in
three categories: Attainment/Non-Attainment Designations; Areas of Air
Quality Concern; and Monitor Operation.
A. Attainment/Non-Attainment Designations
The evaluation of ambient air quality based on recent monitoring data
finds attainment status designations to be generally consistent with
recent data in most parts of the State. Recommendations are made in the
report to consider attainment status changes in some locations for TSP and
CO. Those recommendations, which are summarized in Table 5 of Section
XIV, recognize improvements in air quality in some locations and possible
air quality impairments in other locations. The State has recently
requested redesignations from primary non-attainment to secondary
non-attainment for TSP in Kansas City, St. Joseph and St. Louis; and
from primary non-attainment to attainment for 03 in Kansas City. Those
requests are under review by the Air Branch of EPA, Region VII.
B. Areas of Air Quality Concern
Relatively few serious air quality problems are found in Missouri, based
on the monitoring data available in SAROAD. The areas which have recently
posed human health concerns (because the primary NAAQS's were exceeded)
are summarized in the following paragraphs.
Exceedances of the alert level and violation of the eight-hour primary
standard were observed in 1981 and 1982 at one site.
0 CO in Independence
Violation of the primary standards was observed at the following sites
in 1982 (or in the last year of operation, if 1982 data were not available).
-------
0 TSP in St. Joseph (Pump Station South) and in St. Louis (four
sites which did not meet siting criteria for monitors intended to
represent neighborhood-sized geographical areas).
0 S02 in West Alton (attributed to point source impact from the
Wood River Power plant in Illinois).
0 03 in the St. Louis Area (305 Weidman Road, Clayton, Water Department,
and 8227 South Broadway).
Violation of the primary standards was observed at the following sites before
1982, but the 1982 data showed no violations.
0 S02 - Sugar Creek
0 CO - St. Ann
0 03 - Kansas City Area (most sites) and St. Louis Area (Ferguson,
Jefferson County, St. Ann and West Alton)
Two of the above areas are the focus of Section XII, which gives brief
background information for each site, presents pollution roses for the
monitors which recorded violations of the standard, and evaluates possible
causes of the high concentrations observed. The pollution roses provide
an additional perspective which may be useful to the efforts of the State
and local agencies in ensuring that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
are met.
C. Monitor Operation and Siting
Reviews of the monitoring data and the precision and accuracy data
generally reflect conscientious efforts by the State and local agency
personnel. Recommendations are made for the following items:
0 Establishing a downtown CO monitor in Kansas City.
0 Re-establishing TSP monitoring in three areas of St. Louis.
0 Increasing the number of precision checks and monitor audits
performed by the State and local agencies.
0 Increasing the number of samples collected at the existing
collocated monitors.
0 Including the lead monitoring data collected near the lead
smelters in the SAROAD data bank.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report draws on the work and talents of several people In addition
to the author.
State and local agency personnel collected, processed and reported
the monitoring data which forms the basis of this evaluation. Based on
their first-hand experience at the monitoring locations, they have also
provided valuable insights into local conditions, both in cooperative
discussions and in formal reports which they have prepared. We appreciate
their help.
Jeff Wandtke, of EPA Region VII, who has a special ability to coax
useful data and graphic output from reluctant computers, provided data
retrievals and map production runs in a consistently timely manner.
Carl Hess, of the Computer Sciences Corporation, wrote the software
to translate air quality data and emissions data into symbols for the
maps in the text. That software is now available from Region VII.
Mick Daye, the Regional Meteorologist for EPA Region VII, provided
the meteorological data for pollution roses and useful, objective
insights into the utility and the limitations of pollution roses.
Barbara Nichols of EPA Region VII typed the manuscript. Rob Ireson of
Systems Applications, Inc., developed software which we requested for
computing population estimates for designated non-attainment areas.
Tim Matzke of the Environmental Results Branch, OMSE, EPA Headquarters,
provided coordination for the funding of that software.
The unique contributions of each of those individuals to this project
are gratefully acknowledged.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction 1
II. Graphical Evaluation Procedures 2
A. Monitoring Data Maps 4
B. Pollution Roses 6
III. Data Description - Information Sources, 7
Limitations and Analysis Procedures
A. Ambient Air Monitoring Data 7
B. Precision and Accuracy 7
C. Trends 7
D. Scale of Representativeness 9
E. Attainment Status Designations 9
F. Data Completeness 9
G. Meteorological Data 10
H. Pollution Roses 10
I. Population Data 12
IV. Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) 14
V. Sulfur Dioxide (S02) 26
VI. Carbon Monoxide (CO) 31
VII. Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) 35
VIII. Ozone (03) 39
IX. Lead (Pb) 43
X. Precision and Accuracy 45
XI. Trends 49
XII. Further Evaluation of Selected Areas 50
A. TSP in St. Louis 50
B. CO in the St. Louis Area 53
XIII. Population Exposure 62
XIV. Summary and Recommendations 64
Appendix A - Tabular Summaries of Data 67
Appendix B - Statistical Evaluation of Trends 99
Appendix C - Population Exposure Estimates 104
Appendix D - NADB Data Completeness Criteria 125
-------
INDEX OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table Page
1 Summary of National Ambient Air Quality Standards 3
and Alert Levels
2 Legend for Ambient Monitoring Data Maps 5
3 Summary of TSP Recommendations 17
4 Particulate Point Sources Within 10 km of 322 Catalan 56
Emitting Over 100 tons/year
5 Population Estimates Within Designated Non-Attainment 63
and Unclassified Areas
6 Recommendations Regarding Attainment Status Changes 65
Al Ambient Air Monitoring Data 70
A2 Precision and Accuracy Estimates for Ambient Air Moni- 85
toring Data
A3 Attainment Status Designations 98
Figure
1 Sample Pollution Rose and Monitor Location 13
2 TSP in St. Louis (322 Catalan) 51
3 Historical Wind Rose - International Airport, St. Louis 52
4 Topography Near 322 Catalan 54
5 Particulate Point Sources within 10 km of 322 Catalan 55
Emitting over 100 tons/year
6 CO in St. Louis (St. Ann) 58
7 Topography near the St. Ann Monitor 59
8 Aerial View of the St. Ann Monitor 60
9 1977 Traffic Volumes - St. Louis County 61
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Services Division of EPA Region VII prepares an
annual evaluation of ambient air quality for each State within the
Region. The evaluation report serves as a basic reference document
which summarizes the following information for the State:
0 recent monitoring data
0 current attainment and non-attainment area designations
0 air quality trends
0 ambient monitor locations
0 population
0 data completeness
0 monitor scales of representativeness
0 precision and accuracy estimates
Data summaries are presented both in graphical form (on maps) and in
tabular form.
While the format and evaluation methods are similar to the FY-82 report,
two new features have been added this year. First, pollution roses have
been constructed, subject to data availability, to aid in identifying
possible sources of high pollutant concentrations. (The description of
data analysis procedures in Section III.H of this report highlights the
nature and limitations of those roses.) Second, population estimates
within specific non-attainment areas have been calculated. (The population
density maps on which those calculations were based are included as
Appendix C).
The evaluation is based on information available as of March 31, 1983.
That information includes non-attainment area designation changes which
were made during 1982. Ambient monitoring data for 1981 and 1982 are
included for all pollutants. In addition, since the ozone standard is
based on a three-year average, 1980 data are included for ozone.
-------
II. GRAPHICAL EVALUATION PROCEDURES
A primary goal of the Clean Air Act is the protection of public health
and welfare through the attainment and maintenance of National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS's). Those standards have been set for six
"criteria pollutants" [total suspended particulates (TSP), sulfur dioxide
(S02), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), nitrogen dioxide (N02) and
lead (Pb).] Before the standards were set, studies of the effects of
each pollutant were carefully reviewed and evaluated. Primary standards
are designed to protect human health, and are required by law to provide
a margin of safety in order to protect sensitive segments of the popula-
tion. Secondary standards protect public welfare (crops, building
materials, animals, etc.). Numerical values of those standards are
given in Table 1.
The regulations which implement the Clean Air Act require that public
announcement be made and that measures be taken to reduce pollutant
emissions when the ambient concentration exceeds the alert level for
that pollutant. Numerical values for these alert levels are also
given in Table 1.
The evaluation of air quality presented in this report is based on the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. So that the results of the
evaluation may be readily seen, the body of the text is designed around
graphic presentations which summarize a wide variety of air quality
information. Those presentations include pollution roses and maps.
Detailed numerical data summaries, from which the graphical summaries
were prepared, are included as appendices to the report.
The maps show:
0 the boundaries of designated non-attainment and unclassified
areas,
0 the locations and scales of representativeness of ambient
monitors,
0 the comparison of ambient data with the standards,
0 the specific standard(s) exceeded (if any) at each site,
0 the statistical trend observed at each site (subject to data
availabil ity), and
0 data completeness (relative to the National Aerometric Data
Branch data summary criteria.)
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND ALERT LEVELS
POLLUTANT
Particulate
Matter
Sulfur
Dioxide
Carbon
Monoxide
Nitrogen
Dioxide
Ozone
Lead
AVERAGING
TIME
Annual
(Geometric Mean)
24-hour*
Annual
(Arithmetic Mean)
24-hour*
3-hour*
8-hour*
1-hour*
Annual
(Arithmetic Mean)
1-hour
24-hour
1-hour**
Calendar Quarter
PRIMARY
STANDARDS
75 ug/m3
260 ug/m3
80 ug/m3
(0.03 ppm)
365 ug/m3
(0.14 pom)
10 mg/m3
(9 ppm]
40 mg/m3
(35 ppm)
100 ug/m3
(0.05 ppm)
0.12 ppm
(235 ug/m3)
1.5 ug/m3
SECONDARY
STANDARDS
150 ug/m3
1300 ug/m3
(0.5 ppm)
(Same as primary)
(Same as primary)
(Same as primary)
(Same as primary)
ALERT
LEVEL
375 ug/m3
800 ug/m3
(0.3 ppm)
17 mg/m3
(15 ppm)
1130 ug/m3
(0.6 ppm)
282 ug/m3
(0.15 ppm)
0.2 ppm
(400 ug/m3)
* Not to be exceeded more than once per year, for primary and secondary standards.
** Not more than 1.0 expected exceedance per year, three-year average.
-------
The above items are illustrated in the legend to the maps (Table 2).
The following paragraphs explain in detail the interpretation of the maps.
For convenience, an extra copy of the legend, a map with county names,
and a map of population density by county are inserted unbound at the
back of this report.
A. Monitoring Data Maps
For each monitor, the symbol location on the map shows the monitor
location. The symbol size displays the scale of representativeness of
the monitor - microscale, middle scale, neighborhood scale, urban scale
or regional scale. Symbol shading indicates data completeness. If
the data did not meet the completeness criteria described in Section III.F
in any one year evaluated, an open symbol "0" is shown. If the data
met the criteria in each year included in the evaluation, a filled
circle is shown. The symbol color presents the comparison of recent
monitoring data with the NAAQS's. Green indicates no violation of the
standards. Blue depicts violation of the secondary standard, but no
violation of the primary standard. Red highlights violation of the
primary standard. If the alert level was exceeded during the years
evaluated, a red flag is placed on top of the symbol. If any violation
of standards was observed, annotations next to the symbol specify which
standard(s) was (were) violated. Red annotations specify primary
standards, while blue annotations specify secondary standards. Where
the primary and secondary standards are identical, only the primary
standard is shown. Possible annotations include A, Q, 24, 8, 3 and 1,
signifying annual, quarterly 24-hour, 8-hour, 3-hour and 1-hour standards,
respectively.
The boundaries of the designated non-attainment areas and unclassified
areas are shown as lines on the map. Red solid lines outline primary non-
attainment areas, blue solid lines outline secondary non-attainment areas,
and dashed lines show unclassified areas. Consequently, if the attainment
status designations are consistent with recent data, red monitor symbols
should appear only in red-outlined areas, and blue monitor symbols only
in blue-outlined areas.
For monitors which have recorded sufficient data during the five years
from 1978 through 1982, trends are presented as an additional annotation.
The trend labels and their respective symbols are: increasing trend (t),
probable increasing trend (~), no trend (-), probable decreasing trend
(v), and decreasing trend (-(•). For pollutants which have only short-term
standards (CO and 03), the trend presented is for the 90th percentile
hourly concentrations observed each month over those five years. For
N0£, which has only an annual standard, the trend presented is for the
monthly average concentrations. For pollutants which have both short-term
and long-term standards (TSP and S02), two trend symbols are presented.
The first symbol is for long-term averages, the second for 90th percentile
concentrations. For lead, lack of sufficient data precludes trend
analysis at this time. Further details of the trend analysis procedure
are given later in this report (Section III. C).
-------
TABLE 2
LEGEND FOR AMBIENT MONITORING DATA MAPS
Boundaries
I I
Primary Nonattainment Area
Secondary Nonattainment Area
Unclassified Area
Monitor Symbol Colors and Flag
* No Violation of Standard
* Violation of Secondary
Standard
* Violation of Primary
Standard
T Exceedance of Alert Level
Annotation for Standards Violated
A
Q
24
Annual Primary Standard
Quarterly Primary Standard
24-hour Primary Standard
24-hour Secondary Standard
8-hour Primary Standard
3-hour Secondary Standard
1-hour Primary Standard
Annotation for Trends
t Increasing Trend
A Probable Increasing Trend
— No Trend
V Probable Decreasing Trend
4, Decreasing Trend
(Where two trend symbols are
shown, the first is for long-term
averages, the second for 24-hour
observations.)
Monitor Symbol Sizes
Microscale
c . Middle Scale
0
Neighborhood
Scale
Urban Scale
Data Completeness
$' Data met completeness
criteria each year.
0 Data did not meet complete-
ness criteria one or more
years.
ij Regional
•'' Scale
-------
B. Pollution Roses
In areas where the NAAQS's have been exceeded, pollution roses can be
useful in evaluating possible sources of high pollutant concentrations.
Those roses show the wind speeds and the directions from which the wind
blew when high pollutant concentrations were monitored in the ambient
air. The longest arms of the rose point toward the locations of
possible causes of the high concentrations. Section III.H discusses
the meaning, construction, and limitations of the roses. Because of
their inherent limitations, the roses do not provide positive identifi-
cations of the definitive causes of elevated concentrations. They do,
however, provide useful indications of possible causes.
-------
III. DATA DESCRIPTION - Information Sources, Limitations and Analysis
Procedures
The evaluation procedure described above requires detailed examination
of various kinds of data from various sources. The following paragraphs
describe the information sources, the limitations and the analysis pro-
cedures for the necessary data.
A. Ambient Air Monitoring Data
A network of ambient air monitoring stations has been established by
the State of Missouri, as required by 40 CFR §58.20 and §58.30. The
network includes not only the required National Air Monitoring Stations
(NAMS) and State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), but also a
number of Special Purpose Monitoring Stations (SPMS) designed to address
short-term monitoring needs or special situations of interest to the State
or local agencies. The monitor locations shown in the graphical presenta-
tions of this report were obtained from the site file of the Storage
and Retrieval of Aerometric Data (SAROAD) system.
The ambient data used in this report were obtained from the SAROAD
data base. A copy of the SAROAD Quick Look Summary is included as
Table Al of the Appendix. The recorded values were compared with the
alert levels, the primary standards and the secondary standards for
graphical display on the maps. Data for 1981 and 1982 were used in the
analysis of recent air quality for all six criteria pollutants. Since
the ozone standard is based on a three-year average, 1980 data were
also included for ozone. For the analysis of trends, five years of
data (1978 through 1982) were used.
B. Precision and Accuracy
Each organization which reports air monitoring data is required to
calculate and report 95 percent probability limits for precision and
accuracy for all NAMS data collected after January 1, 1981, and for
all SLAMS data collected after January 1, 1983. Those probability
limits, which are calculated using specific equations from 40 CFR 58
Appendix A, summarize the results of quality control checks which those
same regulations require. The meaning of the probability limits and
the procedures for performing the quality control checks are discussed
below in Section X.
The precision and accuracy reports available in SAROAD as of April,
1983 are provided as Table A2 of the Appendix.
C. Trends
The trend analyses were performed on data from 1978 through 1982, using
the same statistical procedure as in prior years. That procedure
calculates the Sen non-parametric statistic, using the NADB*TRENDRUN
programs on the UNIVAC computer associated with the National Aerometric
Data Branch (NADB). The Sen statistic is described in more detail in
Appendix B.
-------
The analysis procedure can be visualized as follows. From all the data
for a given month, one single value is computed. The monthly values
are adjusted to account for seasonal variation. Each month's adjusted value
is compared with the value for every preceding month in the measurement
period. Next, for each month, tallies are made of how many preceding
months' values were higher and how many were lower than the month in
question. Those tallies are then summed to give grand totals of months
with higher readings and months with lower readings. Those two grand
totals are compared using the Sen statistic to determine whether or
not a statistically significant trend existed. Appendix B gives the
detailed step-by-step procedure, including the mathematical equation
for the Sen statistic. That appendix also provides a sample calculation.
The values used for each month were selected as follows. Two trend
calculations were performed for TSP. For the first calculation, the
value used for a month was the geometric mean of all values measured
during the month. For the second calculation, the value used was the
90th percentile 24-hour concentration for all concentrations measured
during the month. (Because of the small number of samples each month,
the 90th percentile concentration is also the maximum concentration.)
Two calculations were likewise performed for S02« The first used the
monthly arithmetic mean, the second the 90th percentile 24-hour concen-
tration. For N02, the monthly arithmetic mean was used. For CO and
03, which have only short-term standards, the value used was the 90th
percentile 1-hour concentration. Since final lead monitor siting criteria
were not promulgated until late 1981, with deadlines for monitor siting
in 1982 and 1983, historical lead data from sites meeting those criteria
are scarce. Therefore, trend analyses were not performed for lead.
As noted above, the trend evaluations for short-term high concentrations
use 90th percentile concentrations, rather than maximum concentrations.
The reason for that choice is that the 90th percentile values give more
stable trend estimates, and minimize the bias which would result from
extreme values caused by data handling errors, unusual weather conditions,
etc.
Since the trend evaluation uses a statistical technique, unrepresentative
results could be obtained if a limited amount of data were used. Mini-
mum criteria chosen were at least 50% complete data for the five years
1978-1982, and at least 75% complete data for at least three of those
years. These criteria disallowed trend evaluation at many monitoring
sites.
The results of recent pollution abatement actions may not be reflected
in the five-year trend analysis, since concentration increases early in
the time period could mask recent short-term improvements. As mentioned
before, the trends are based on 1978 through 1982 data. The data used
in reviewing attainment or non-attainment of the NAAQS's, however,
cover only the periods 1980-1982 for ozone and 1981-1982 for the other
pollutants.
-------
D. Scale of Representativeness
Spatial Scales of Representativeness are described in 40 CFR Part 58,
Appendix D. The scale of representativeness identifies the size of an
air parcel around a monitor which is homogeneous in terms of pollutant
concentrations, population density and geographical features. The
scales pertinent to the present analysis are, in order of increasing size:
microscale (part of a city block); middle scale (a few square blocks);
neighborhood scale (a few square kilometers); urban scale (the size of
an entire city); and regional scale (several hundred to several thousand
square kilometers, generally in rural areas). The air quality analysis
includes the scale of representativeness for each monitor in order to
depict the expected geographical extent of the concentrations monitored.
The scales of representativeness for the monitors were obtained from
the Missouri Air Quality Monitoring Network Description, which was
prepared by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
E. Attainment Status Designations
The designations of attainment, non-attainment and unclassified areas are
found in 40 CFR §81.326. The designations used in the analysis are
included as Table A3 of Appendix A. Because of the logistics of graphics
preparation, a cut-off date of March 31, 1983 was used. The map
presentations show boundaries for non-attainment areas and unclassified
areas, obtained from those designations. In cases where the wording
of 40 CFR §81.326 does not provide specific boundaries, the boundaries
were obtained from maps which the state submitted to EPA with the
designation requests. Where non-attainment or unclassified area
boundaries follow county lines, those lines on the map do not
precisely coincide, in order that both lines can be clearly seen.
In some cases, larger discrepancies in the boundaries are evident,
because the county boundaries in the ZMAP computer mapping system
are not exact.
F. Data Completeness
If monitoring data for a site are incomplete, they may give a distorted
picture of air quality. Annual or quarterly averages calculated from
incomplete data may be biased either high or low, making comparisons
with long-term NAAQS's uncertain. Where the NAAQS's are based on short-
term averages (1 , 3, 8 or 24 hours), incomplete data may reduce the
number of detected exceedances of the standard. For all such pollutants
except ozone, any bias resulting from incomplete data would make short-term
air quality appear better than it actually was. For ozone, the standard
is based on "expected exceedances," which consider both the number of
measured exceedances and the time period over which they were measured,
in order to project the number of exceedances expected for a full year
of monitoring. Therefore, incomplete ozone data could make the air
quality appear either better or worse. For the analysis presented in
-------
this report, the data are considered "complete" if they include
enough observations (reported as valid) to meet the minimum NADB data
requirements for calculating average concentrations. (Sites which
do not meet these criteria are indicated by a question mark in Table Al
of Appendix A. The criteria are summarized in Appendix D.) Those
criteria are applied by the NADB to pollutants which have NAAQS's based
on annual or quarterly averages (TSP, S02, N0£ and Pb). For CO and 03,
however, annual averages are not computed by the NADB. For those two
pollutants, a minimum criterion of 75% complete data for the entire
year is chosen for the analysis in this report.
G. Meteorological Data
Construction of wind roses or pollution roses requires wind speed and
direction data. The ideal is to have meteorological instrumentation
at the pollutant monitoring site. Data collected by such instrumentation
would be stored in SAROAD.
However, the air monitoring regulations do not require meteorological
date collection, and most SLAMS sites in Missouri do not include wind
measurements. In those cases, data from a nearby National Weather
Service station are used. The pollutant monitoring station and the
meteorological station are identified for each pollution rose presented.
H. Pollution Roses
The pollution roses presented in this report are diagrams which
summarize wind speeds and wind directions during periods when elevated
pollutant concentrations were observed. The term "elevated pollutant
concentrations" implies a threshold concentration, which must be selected
as appropriate for the specific pollutant and averaging time of interest.
For example, TSP has three different standards, as shown in Table 1:
a) a primary standard of 75 ug/m3, annual geometric mean concen-
tration;
b) a secondary standard of 150 ug/m3, 24-hour concentration,
not to be exceeded more than once per year; and
c) a different primary standard of 260 ug/m3, 24-hour concen-
tration, not to be exceeded more than once per year.
For sites exceeding the annual primary standard, only days with concentra-
tions over 75 ug/m3 will contribute to the exceedance, so only those
days are included in the pollution rose. The resulting rose indicates
possible sources of chronic, moderately elevated TSP concentrations.
Where sites also show exceedances of the 24-hour secondary standard, a
pollution rose constructed from only those days when TSP concentrations
exceeded 150 ug/m3 could indicate different or fewer sources of those
higher concentrations.
10
-------
The following threshold values were used in constructing the pollution
roses in this report:
For TSP - Days with TSP concentrations above 75 ug/m^, for sites
exceeding the annual primary standard.
For CO - Hours with CO concentrations above 10 mg/m^ for sites
exceeding the eight-hour standard. (Only those hours
could contribute to eight-hour averages above the
standard.)
The following steps were followed in constructing pollution roses:
1. The times (days or days and hours) when pollutant concentrations
exceeded the threshold concentration were identified. That information
was obtained from the raw data (daily or hourly concentrations) in
SAROAD.
2. The wind speed and wind direction were retrieved for each of
the times identified in Step 1. On-site meteorological data are preferred,
if available. Otherwise, National Weather Service data from a nearby
station may be used, with the understanding that the separation between
the weather station and the pollutant monitoring station introduces
uncertainty into the interpretation of the pollution rose.
3. The weather data were summarized by ranges of wind speeds
(e.g. 1-3 mph) and ranges of wind directions (e.g. 15-45°). The frequency
of occurrence was then computed for each combination of speed range and
direction range.
4. The rose was plotted, using different bar widths and shading
patterns for each wind speed range.
Interpretation of a pollution rose considers not only the wind directions
displayed, but also the wind speeds and significant pollutant sources
in the vicinity of the monitor. If the rose is strongly directional
(one or two arms much longer than the others), influence of a single
point source or a small cluster of sources is indicated. A more diverse
directional pattern would indicate inflence by line or area sources or
by several point sources located in various directions from the monitor.
As stated earlier, if off-site meteorological data are used, uncertainty
in the meaning of the pollution rose is introduced. The following
three factors tend to increase that uncertainty:
a) short observation times,
b) large distances between the pollutant monitoring site and the
weather station,
c) large variations in terrain between the pollutant monitor and the
weather station.
11
-------
Therefore, due caution should be exercised and the advice of the Regional
Meteorologist should be sought in interpreting roses constructed from
off-site weather data.
Uncertainty of a different type is introduced where a resultant wind speed
and direction are used to represent winds for a 24-hour period for a
TSP pollution rose. Wind shifts of more than 90° are common over the course
of a day. The high pollutant concentrations may occur during only
a part of the day, when the wind direction may be different from the
resultant direction. In that case, the time resolution of pollutant
monitoring data is not sufficient to detect that effect. Therefore,
these pollution roses can provide only preliminary indications of
probable sources of high concentrations.
The following description of the attached pollution rose (Figure 1)
illustrates the evaluation process. The rose was constructed from
on-site weather data for hours during which the CO concentration exceeded
10 mg/m3. With very few exceptions, wind speeds were low (below 3 mph)
when those concentrations were observed. From the spread of the directional
pattern, a single point source is probably not the cause of the elevated
concentrations. Rather, an area source or a line source would be
expected. At the bottom of the diagram, the monitor location is shown,
along with the adjacent freeway. Considering the location, wind speeds
and wind directions, vehicle traffic on the freeway is indicated as the
probable cause of the elevated concentrations.
I. Population Data
Population data are used in two contexts in the report. First, a
map of population density by county is provided at the back of the report.
That map is based on 1980 population data which was obtained directly
from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Second, population exposure
estimates are presented in Section XIII for non-attainment areas, based
on 1970 census data which are available at a higher level of spatial
resolution. Those estimates were produced by Systems Applications,
Inc., using block group and enumeration district population data,
and were scaled to approximate 1978 values using county-level growth
factors. Appendix C describes the procedures used for those calculations.
12
-------
Figure 1(a). Sample Pollution Rose
0-1
1-3 *
J
Wind Speeds (M.P.H.)
N
Percent of hours over threshold
and with indicated wind speed
•nd direction
,,,,»,, I I I
sx «>x
Figure 1(b). Monitor Location for the Rose of Figure 1(a).
13
-------
IV. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES (TSP)
The TSP monitoring network in Missouri includes numerous monitors in
Kansas City, St. Louis, Springfield, and St. Joseph, plus monitors in
several of the smaller cities throughout the State. This review will
focus first on the smaller cities in the out-state areas, where the monitor
symbols on the State map are uncrowded. The focus will then shift to the
Inset maps, where information for the larger cities is presented. The
review is based on the data shown in Table Al of Appendix A. The State
has noted that on April 4, 1981, high TSP concentrations were monitored
over a wide area of eastern Missouri, and has correlated those observations
with a wide-spread dust storm. Those concentrations are included in Table Al,
since EPA does not have a policy of deleting such data points. We acknowledge,
however, that for several stations in the table, one of the 1981 exceedances
is attributed by the State to that dust storm.
With two exceptions, data from neighborhood scale or regional scale monitors
in the out-state areas show no violation of the particulate standards
during 1981 or 1982. Herculaneum showed two exceedances of the secondary
standard in 1981. One of those exceedances is attributed by the State
to the dust storm. New Madrid showed three exceedances of the secondary
standard in 1981. Neither site showed any exceedances in 1982.
Data from two middle scale monitors show violation of the secondary standard.
The monitor in Hannibal shows three exceedences of that standard in each
year, 1981 and 1982. One monitor in Mexico shows two exceedances of the
secondary standard in 1982 only.
Trend evaluation data from the out-state areas shows no monitors with
increasing concentrations. Most monitors show decreasing trends, an encouraging
observation.
The following comments highlight the detailed analyses presented on the inset
maps. The abbreviations PNA and SNA are used for "primary non-attainment
area" and "secondary non-attainment area," respectively, based on current
designations.
Kansas City - The current designations of non-attainment areas in Kansas
City show a PNA in the central part of the city, and a larger SNA encompassing
most of the city. Monitoring data throughout the city show no violation
of the primary standards at any of the monitors in the city during 1981
and 1982. Two monitors show violation of the secondary standard in 1981.
The monitor at the downtown airport shows three exceedances of the secondary
standard, and the one on North Brighton Road shows two exceedances. The
trend evaluation shows decreasing concentrations at nearly all monitors in
the area. Recommendations have been made by the Environmental Services
Division for removing the PNA designation and for reducing the size of the
SNA.
St. Joseph - Current designations of non-attainment areas in St. Joseph
show a PNA surrounded by a larger SNA. Monitoring data for 1981 and 1982
are in basic agreement with those designations. Data from one monitoring
14
-------
site in the PNA show confirmed violations of the 24-hour secondary standard
in 1982 and an apparent violation of the annual primary standard in that
same year. That site was established in mid-year, however, so the geometric
mean is based on the partial year of data which could be collected (22
observations). The site in the eastern part of the SNA shows violation of
the secondary standard in 1981. Data from the two northernmost sites show
no recorded violations of the standards in either year. Of those two
sites, only the one at 8th and Edmond met the data completeness criteria in
both years. Based on that site, some reduction in the size of the non-attainment
areas could be considered. While only one monitor shows sufficient historical
data for trend analysis, that site does show decreasing concentrations.
Data from the other monitors in the area were less than 50 percent complete
during 1982. High priority should be given to ensuring data completeness.
Springfield - Data throughout the Springfield area show no violations of
the standards in 1981 or 1982. Trend evaluation data generally show no
trend or decreasing trend. Therefore, the current designation of the
entire area as attainment is consistent with the recent data.
St. Louis - Because of the large number of closely-spaced symbols on parts
of the St. Louis area map, three insets are provided, each showing a pro-
gressively smaller area. Current designations show a PNA consisting of a
strip approximately two miles wide along the Mississippi River, and an SNA
including the remainder of St. Louis city. Significantly larger non-attain-
ment areas have been designated across the state line by the State of
Illinois.
Data from most monitors within the city limits show violation of the annual
primary standard in 1981, but no exceedances of either standard in 1982.
Trend evaluations show statistically significant improvements in air
quality over the period 1978-1982 at most of the current monitoring sites
in the city. Four monitors were discontinued in 1981 (Shreve at 1-70,
River des Peres, Water Department and 322 Catalan). These monitors had
shown high concentrations in 1981, but did not meet all of the monitor
siting criteria specified in the regulations for neighborhood scale sites.
Monitoring is conducted at other sites in the vicinity of 322 Catlan. The
absence of monitoring data from the other three areas leaves uncertainty in
the assessment of current air quality in those areas.
Since two years of data free of violations of the standards are generally
required to redesignate an area from non-attainment to attainment, redesig-
nation of most of the PNA is not recommended at this time. Since data from
the designated SNA showed violation of the primary standard in 1981 and
prior years, consideration should be given to redesignating parts of that
area to a PNA if those concentrations recur. Data from St. Louis County
(outside the designated SNA) showed marginal violations (two exceedances)
of the secondary standard at each of several sites in one of the two years
covered by this evaluation. Those violations occurred in 1981 at the
Bellefontaine Neighbors, Ferguson and Berkeley sites, and in 1982 at
the 305 Weidman site. Therefore, expansion of the designated SNA may
also need to be considered. The size of both the PNA and the SNA should be
re-evaluated when the 1983 data are available.
15
-------
In order to provide a broader perspective of air quality in the St. Louis
area, a brief summary of the Illinois data is provided for the three border
counties in the metropolitan area. Those data show violations of the
annual primary standard in both 1981 and 1982 in East St. Louis and at most
sites in Granite City. Data elsewhere in the area showed no violations of
primary or secondary standards in 1982, though the Alton and Wood River
sites recorded violations in 1981. Trend information became available
after the maps were prepared. Only one site (2301 East 23rd in Granite
City) showed an increasing trend. All others showed decreasing trends or
probable decreasing trends.
TSP Synopsis and Recommendations
The recent TSP monitoring data show improvements in air quality in some
parts of the state. Redesignation of areas from non-attainment to attainment
is recommended in those cases. Data from St. Louis provide an incomplete
picture of air quality. While no violations of the standards were observed
in 1982, monitoring was not performed in some areas where violations were
possible. Recommended changes in attainment status designations are summarized
in Table 3. In each case, we recommend that the decision be based on the
ambient monitoring data, plus all supplemental information available. The
state has recently requested redesignations in Kansas City, St. Joseph and
St. Louis. Those requests are under review by the Air Branch of EPA Region VII.
16
-------
TABLE 3
Summary of TSP Recommendations
Kansas City Remove the primary non-attainment designation.
Reduce the size of the secondary non-attainment area.
St. Joseph Continue efforts to ensure the completeness
of data collection.
Consider reducing the size of the non-attainment
areas.
St. Louis Area Add monitors which meet siting criteria in three
areas which have previously shown violations.
Re-evaluate the size of the designated primary
and secondary non-attainment areas when the
1983 data are available.
17
-------
k~H
r^
h—«
y.
18
-------
}
r'
\
AMHIKXT TSP DATA
19
- COLUMBIA AREA
-------
AMBIENT TSP DATA - KANSAS CITY AREA
20
-------
—I
INJ
cf
AMBIENT TSP DATA - MEXICO AREA
-------
o ; 4
AMBIENT TSP DATA - ST.JOSEPH AREA
o o
o o
Oi,
o
o-, -
AMBIENT TSP DATA - SPRINGFIELD AREA
22
-------
AMUIKXT TSP DATA
23
ST.LOUIS AKKA
-------
0
Oi.
*» 24 -. -
©A 24
MBIENT TSP DATA - ST.LOUIS AREA
-------
0 -I A
\
\
0 :
V/-' * r /
f
" > "
A
1
r;n
^r T y c
J i J I I 1 K.
A
", rrn ••
A .
A T ) v
• '* ii' X :. , -
x J, A V A J .i
25
-------
V. SULFUR DIOXIDE (S02)
Monitoring for sulfur dioxide is conducted in Kansas City, St. Louis,
Springfield, Bixby, and New Madrid. No areas of the State have been
designated as non-attainment for S02- Monitoring data from the Kansas
City area show violation of the 24-hour primary standard at one site
(Sugar Creek) in 1981, but no violations in 1982. Furthermore, the
violations were attributed to one large industrial source, which has
since ceased operation. Data from Springfield showed no violations
of the standard. The annual average concentrations observed in that
area run less than one-half the standard. Data from Bixby show one
exceedance each of the 24-hour primary standard and the three-hour
secondary standard in 1982. While that does not constitute a violation
of the standard, it does indicate a situation which bears observation
in future years. Data from New Madrid show no violation of the standards,
based on the very limited data available in SAROAD. The annual average
based on those limited data was approximately three-fourths of the standard.
The State has recently supplied a more extensive summary of data from that
site, showing a mean concentration of .010 ppm (one-third of the standard).
That average was based on 91% complete data since the time of monitor
installation.
No data were submitted to SAROAD for any continuous monitors (S02, CO,
or 03) in St. Louis City during 1981 and most of 1982. During that time
period, a number of problems were experienced with operation, calibration
and quality control procedures for all of the continuous monitors. Through
special efforts of State and local agency personnel, including extensive
planning and guidance from Jim Beers of the MDNR, operation of continuous
monitors has been restored and appropriate quality control procedures have
been implemented. Although the lack of data during those two years leaves
large gaps in the picture of recent air quality in the area, the outlook
for collection of reliable data in the future has brightened considerably.
Data from other parts of the St. Louis area show no violation of the standards
in St. Louis County. However, the monitor at West Alton in St. Charles
County recorded six exceedances of the 24-hour primary standard and 13
exceedances of the three-hour secondary standard in 1982. Data from previous
years had shown no violation of the standard at that site. A study of S02
concentrations and concurrent wind directions was conducted by Richard Tripp
of the Environmental Services Division, EPA, Region VII. That study showed
that the high concentrations occurred only with winds from the east, and
concluded that the probable cause was industrial emissions near Wood River.
The State of Missouri analyzed the high concentrations, including wind
data, patterns of vegetation damage, and stack heights and magnitudes
of point source emissions in their analysis. They identified emissions
from the Alton Box Board plant as the most probable cause of the high
concentrations.
Trend analysis data are fascinating at the West Alton site because they
seem contradictory at first glance. As mentioned in section III.C, two
trend calculations were performed for S02« The first was based on monthly
26
-------
average concentrations, and shows an increasing trend during the period
1978 through 1982. The second calculation was based on 90th percent!le
concentrations measured during each month. That calculation shows a de-
creasing trend in high concentration values normally observed during that
time. The composite picture presented by the two trend evaluations is one
of increasing average concentrations, with less variation in concentrations
(less extreme fluctuations).
Trend data from the other monitoring sites in the St. Louis area show an
increasing trend in the average concentrations at the Ferguson site (located
south-southwest of the West Alton site), and decreasing trends in both
average and 90th percentile concentrations at the other monitoring sites.
Data from nearby Illinois sites show no violations of the standards in 1981
or 1982. Those sites show decreasing trends, with one exception. The
Cahokia site shows no statistically significant trend. Since the East
St. Louis site recorded concentrations near the standard in 1981, that area
bears continued observation in future years.
27
-------
28
-------
VHHV AIL) SVSMVM - VJA'CI ?!()S XXHIHKY
\
-------
YHMV siiions - viva ?:os
J
\
T .11!
j
-------
VI. CARBON MONOXIDE (CO)
Carbon monoxide monitoring is conducted in the Kansas City and St. Louis
areas only. Monitoring data from Kansas City show no violation of the
standard at two monitors, (the Parvin Road and Bannister Road monitors)
but several exceedances of the eight-hour primary standard each year
at another monitor (Independence). That monitor showed one exceedance
of the alert level in each year 1981 and 1982. The CO monitoring network
in Kansas City does not, however, include any monitors in downtown Kansas
City. Since the lack of that monitor leaves a major gap in the CO monitoring
network for the area, its establishment should be given high priority.
Audits performed during 1982 on the monitor in Independence showed the
monitor to be operating satisfactorily at that time. In view of the high
concentrations observed at that site, we recommend that the State give
consideration to redesignating a portion of the Kansas City area to non-
attainment for CO.
In the St. Louis area, a primary non-attainment area has been designated,
bounded by Interstate 270 and the Mississippi River. Monitoring data in
that area show no violation of the standards in St. Louis County, except
at one monitor. That monitor (St. Ann) observed four exceedances of the
eight-hour standard in 1981, but no exceedances in 1982. While the 1982
data from that monitor submitted to SAROAD were incomplete, the 1982
SLAMS report shows no violation of the standard, based on 93% complete data.
All sites which had enough data for trend evaluation showed decreasing
concentrations. Based on the monitoring data available, a reduction in the
size of the non-attainment area within St. Louis County is recommended. As
was noted in Section V, no data from CO monitoring in St. Louis City are
present in SAROAD for 1981 and most of 1982. The current network description
lists five sites where CO monitoring has been re-established.
Data from the three CO monitors on the Illinois side show no violations of
the standards in 1981 or 1982. No statistically significant trends were
observed at any of those three sites.
31
-------
CO
ro
-------
CO
o
u
^••~
*>*
x
u?
-------
1
/
•
\ ;
r
i
AMBIENT CO DATA - ST.LOUIS AREA
O H
-------
VII. NITROGEN DIOXIDE (N02)
Monitoring for nitrogen dioxide is conducted in the Kansas City and St. Louis
areas only. The data show no violation of the standard at any of the sites.
Trend evaluation data are mixed. Some sites show increasing trends, others
decreasing trends. Average concentrations observed in the Kansas City
area generally range below one-third of the standard. Concentations
in the St. Louis area (Missouri and Illinois) generally range below one-half
the standard. As noted in Section V, no N02 data from St. Louis City were
reported for 1981 and most of 1982. The current network description indicates
that N02 monitoring has been resumed at two sites in the City.
35
-------
r ,T ~ ^ - - *•-,;-("•'
,.!_, >• Vi V. » ' - ^^ ^ .. I i Ci i .
-------
-------
r
F N'02 DATA - ST.LOUIS ARKA
38
-------
VIII. OZONE (03)
Ozone monitoring is conducted in the metropolitan areas of Kansas City,
Springfield, and St. Louis. A background concentration site is operated
in the Mark Twain national forest in southeast Missouri.
Ozone is formed by a complex photochemical reaction among non-methane
hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, and oxygen in the atmosphere. The
reaction time is measured in hours. During that time, the wind usually
carries the pollutants tens of miles from the locations where the precursors
were emitted. Therefore, ozone concentrations measured at a point some 25
to 50 miles downwind of the city may indicate a need for emission reductions
throughout the city. Consequently, the following ozone evaluations focus
on entire metropolitan areas, rather than on limited areas around specific
monitors. Furthermore, the inset maps for Kansas City and St. Louis include
data from both sides of the state line, in order show that broader perspective.
Kansas City - Monitoring data from Kansas City show violation of the ozone
standard at two monitors located downwind of the city, based on the prevailing
summer wind direction. A closer look at the data in Table Al of Appendix A
show that those violations occurred in 1980. Data for 1981 and 1982 showed
no more than one measured exceedance at each site each year. Based on
the 1981-82 data, coupled with documented hydrocarbon emission reductions,
redesignation of the Kansas City area to attainment has been requested by
the State agencies of Kansas and Missouri. That request is under review
by the Air Branch of EPA, Region VII.
St. Louis - Monitoring data from the St. Louis area show violation of the
ozone standard in multiple years at several sites on both sides of the
state line. Trend evaluation data at most sites show a decreasing trend.
However, two sites (West Alton and East St. Louis) show increasing trends.
The number of exceedances observed in recent years (less than ten per year
at any one site) shows an improvement over prior years. However, the
designation of the area as non-attainment for ozone is still currently
appropriate. As was noted in Section V, no ozone data from St. Louis City
were reported for 1981 and most of 1982. The current network description
shows resumption of ozone monitoring at four sites in the City.
39
-------
-------
\
0
\ /
V
/
UIHIKXT 03 DATA - KANSAS CITY ARKA
41
-------
T ^ T . - -. ( : „ , -r, ,('-.
.1,^ ' ... • Vi ( \) .... V .1 ^ C^i
x
\
i
-------
IX. LEAD (PB)
The State map for lead shows monitoring data from two locations in St. Louis
County. Those monitors were established in 1982, and recorded observations
for approximately one-fourth of that year. The State ambient air monitoring
network description lists the following additional monitors: two in the
Kansas City area; two in the St. Louis area; and one each in Herculaneum,
New Madrid, St. Joseph, and Columbia. No data were reported for 1982 from
those monitors. Special purpose monitoring studies conducted in earlier
years around the lead smelters in the State showed concentrations above the
NAAQS in Herculaneum (St. Joe Lead) and in Iron County (AMAX). The operation
of two long-term SLAMS lead monitors near each of the three smelters has been
implemented by the State. In addition, monitoring is currently conducted
by the smelters at several sites. We encourage the State to enter the data
from all of those sites into SAROAD.
43
-------
frfr
-------
X. PRECISION AND ACCURACY
For continuous monitors (CO, S02, N02> and 03), the regulations of 40 CFR
Part 58, Appendix A require precision checks in order to assess precision
for each pollutant, and audits in order to assess accuracy.
Precision checks are performed by introducing a gas of known concentra-
tion into the analyzer, and comparing the concentration reading from the
monitor with the known concentration of the gas. These checks are
required every two weeks, and involve one gas concentration. Audits
likewise involve comparison of known gas concentrations with the analyzer
readings. Audits are more extensive than precision checks, requiring at
least three different concentrations of gases. Audit of each analyzer is
required annually, and audit of at least 25% of the SLAMS analyzers for
each pollutant is required each quarter.
For manual methods (TSP, Pb, S02 bubblers and N0£ bubblers), the regula-
tions require duplicate (collocated) sampling to assess precision and
audits to assess accuracy.
Each collocated sampler is operated at the same time and in the same
manner as the SLAMS monitor at the same site. The percent difference
between the two sample concentrations forms the basis for precision
estimates. For lead, analysis of duplicate portions of a single Hi-vol
filter may be substituted for collocated sampling. Audits for manual
methods differ by method. For TSP, the audits are performed by comparing
the flow rate indicated by the Hi-vol sampler to the true flow rate
determined from a flow standard. The audit frequency required for
Hi-vol samplers is the same as that required for continuous monitors.
Audit procedures for S0£ bubblers, NO^ bubblers and Pb require that the
analytical measurement process be audited. Details of those procedures
are found in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A.
Use of specific equations is required for the calculation of precision
and accuracy. Each organization which reports data is required to
calculate and report precision and accuracy estimates for all NAMS data
collected after January 1, 1981, and for all SLAMS data collected after
January 1, 1983.
Table A2 of Appendix A summarizes the precision and accuracy estimates
reported by the State during 1981 and 1982. The numbers under the
heading "YR-Q" near the left of each printout specify the year and
calendar quarter to which the precision and accuracy data apply. (For
example, 82-2 refers to the second quarter of 1982.) Composite data
for the entire year are identified as quarter number 5. (For example,
81-5 gives the estimates for the full calendar year 1981).
The accuracy estimates are arranged by concentration levels LI (low
concentration) through L4 (high concentration). Specific ranges for the
concentration levels are required by 40 CFR 58, Appendix A, as follows:
45
-------
NO?, 03, SO? (ppm) CO (ppm) TSP (cfm)
.03 to
.15 to
.40 to
.80 to
.08
.20
.45
.90
3
15
40
80
to
to
to
to
8
20 40-60
45
90
Pb (ug/strip)
100-300
600-1000
—
•« •.
LI
L2
L3
L4
The precision and accuracy estimates are expressed as 95% probability
limits, as required by the same regulations. The meaning of those
limits is illustrated by the following three examples taken from Table A2.
a. The precision data for CO in Kansas City show composite limits of
-10 and +09 for calendar year 1981 (line 81-5), based on a total of 34
precision checks. Therefore, 95% of the precision checks would be expected
to fall between 10% below and 9% above the known concentration of the test
gas used for the precision checks.
b. The accuracy data for $03 as determined by the State agency show
limits of -07 and +04 for the audits performed at concentration level 3
(column L3) during the third quarter of 1981 (line 81-3). Therefore, 95%
of the audits performed at that time at that concentration level would be
expected to fall between 7% below and 4% above the known concentration of
the audit gas.
c. The precision data for TSP in St. Louis County show probability
limits of -08 and +14 for the third quarter of 1981 (line 81-3), based on
25 valid collocated data pairs. Therefore, 95% of the concentrations
measured by the collocated sampler would be expected to fall between 8%
lower and 14% higher than the corresponding concentrations measured at the
same time by the SLAMS monitor at the same site.
The following observations are drawn from Table A2.
Multiple Agencies - In the precision data reports for all of the reporting
organizations, the number of valid collocated data pairs is listed as zero
for 1982. That is likely an error in interpreting the information requested,
rather than an error in the procedure for performing control checks. The
number of valid collocated dated pairs reported in 1981 generally ran about
half of the number expected for complete operation of both collocated and
SLAMS samplers. No precision and accuracy data were reported for lead
during 1982 for any of the agencies in the State, except St. Louis County.
Precision and accuracy assessment was required for the lead NAMS monitors,
beginning July 1, 1982. The required reporting would cover the third and
fourth quarters of 1982 only. While the St. Louis County data have been
46
-------
supplied by the State, temporary delays have prevented their listing in
the standard SAROAD Precision-Accuracy Report (Table A2 of Appendix A).
Those delays are being resolved now.
State Agency - The number of TSP audits performed by the State agency in 1981
and 1982 met the requirements of 40 CFR 58, Appendix A for auditing NAMS
monitors. Beginning January 1, 1983, those regulations require an annual
audit of each SLAMS monitor. That increased requirement likewise increases
the number of audits which the State agency should perform. The precision
and accuracy data for ozone reflect conscientious performance of the required
precision checks and audits. The precision and accuracy data for S02, CO
and N0£ show that some audits and precision checks have been performed, and
that the number of precision checks has increased each quarter. The number
of audits for those three pollutants, and the number of precision checks
for S02 and NO?, met the requirements of the regulations for quality control
checks for NAMS monitors. An increase in the number of precision checks
for CO was needed to meet those requirements. Effective January 1, 1983, a
further increase in the number of audits and precision checks is needed in
order to meet the expanded requirements for SLAMS.
Kansas City - The number of audits for both TSP samplers and continuous
monitors meets the required frequency specified in the regulations. The agency
operates one NAMS continuous monitor for each of the pollutants S02, CO, ozone,
and N02. The number of precision checks in 1981 and 1982 meets the required
frequency for the NAMS monitors. An increase in the number of precision
checks will be needed to meet the required frequency for SLAMS monitors,
effective January 1, 1983.
St. Louis City - The number of audits for TSP reported in 1982 meet the
required frequency for SLAMS monitors. No precision and accuracy data were
reported for continuous monitors during 1981. Data for 1982, which have
very recently been reported, reflect the establishment of the required
quality control checks during the latter part of 1982.
St. Louis County - The number of audits for TSP met the required frequency
for NAMS monitors. Effective January 1, 1983, an increase is needed
to meet the more extensive requirements for audits on the SLAMS monitors.
The precision and accuracy data for continuous monitors generally show
conscientious efforts for implementing the data assessment requirements of
the regulations, well in advance of the required due dates. Only modest
increases in the number of audits and precision checks would be required to
fully meet the requirement of the regulations after January 1, 1983.
Springfield - The total number of audits for TSP was sufficient to meet the
minimum requirements for NAMS. However, audits were not reported for
the third quarter of 1982. Those audits should be conducted each calendar
quarter on 25% of the analyzers in the network. The precision and accuracy
data for continuous monitors show an effort toward implementing the precision
checks and audits in advance of the required deadline of January 1, 1983.
47
-------
In summary, the precision and accuracy data generally reflect efforts by
the State and local agencies toward meeting the data assessment requirements
of 40 CFR 58, Appendix A. For most agencies, increases in the number of
precision checks, collocated samples, and audits was needed effective January 1,
1983, in order to meet the expanded quality assurance requirements for SLAMS
monitors.
48
-------
XI. TRENDS
The results of trend analyses were presented graphically in the preceding
sections for each monitor whose data met the required completeness
criteria (described in Section III.C). The following table gives a
summary of the trend evaluations, with the last column designed to
highlight areas of concern.
Pollutant
TSP
S02
CO
°3
N02
Pb
Monitors with
Sufficient Data
Total for Trend
Monitors Analysis
61
16
8
21
10
2
42
13
6
11
7
0
Monitors with
Decreasing or
Probable
Decreasing
Trend
33
10
5
8
4
0
Monitors with
Increasing or
Probable
Increasing
Trend
1
4
0
1
2
0
Monitors with
Violations and
Increasing or
Probable
Increasing Trend
1
1
0
1
0
0
The TSP site which showed violation of a standard and an increasing trend
in geometric mean concentrations is located in Berkeley, and showed two
exceedances of the secondary standard in 1981, but not in 1982. The S0£
site at West Alton showed violations of the 24-hour primary standard and
the three-hour secondary standard in 1982. Those S02 violations are attri-
buted to impact from the Wood River Power Plant. As was noted in Section V,
the increasing trend noted was for average concentrations. The trend in
90th percentile concentrations, however, was a decreasing trend. Therefore,
the trend data at that site indicate higher average S02 concentrations,
but with less variability in those concentrations. The 03 site which showed
violations of the primary standard and an incresing trend in 90th percentile
concentrations was West Alton.
In summary, the trend analyses show more sites with improving trends
than with worsening trends. Areas of immediate concern (identified by
the combination of violations of a primary standard and increasing trends
in concentrations) were limited to S02 and 03 at the West Alton site.
49
-------
XII. FURTHER EVALUATION OF SELECTED AREAS
The following subsections examine in greater detail two areas where pollutant
concentrations exceeded the primary (health-related) standards at some time
during the period 1981-82. For those areas, pollution roses are presented
and evaluated, and brief historical backgrounds are given, in an attempt to
understand the causes of the high concentrations which were observed. At
the time the pollution rose preparation was begun, available meteorological
data included 1980 and 1981, but not 1982. Therefore, the roses are based
on air quality data and meteorological data for 1980 and 1981. Consequently,
any significant new pollutant sources or any recent pollution abatements
are not reflected in the roses. Because of the limitations discussed in
Section III.H, the roses provide indications of possible causes, rather
than concrete identifications of definite causes.
While other areas could have been selected, the areas around two monitors
in the St. Louis area (322 Catalan and 10267 St. Charles Rock Road in St.
Ann) were chosen for further evaluation. The studies of those two areas
illustrate some of the capabilities and limitations of pollution roses
for addressing specific areas of interest.
A. TSP in St. Louis
As did many other TSP sites in St. Louis City, the site at 322 Catalan
demonstrated annual geometric mean concentrations in excess of the primary
standard in 1981 and prior years. As was mentioned in Section IV above,
the site was discontinued in 1981 because it did not meet the siting criteria
prescribed in the regulations for a neighborhood scale site. Although the
the data from the site are not used by the State for determining the current
attainment or non-attainment status of the area, the data can be used in
conjunction with wind speed and direction data to indicate possible sources
of the localized high concentrations observed in the past at the site.
Figure 2 shows the pollution rose, based on wind speeds and directions
observed at the airport on days when the TSP concentration at 322 Catalan
exceeded 75 ug/m3. (Only those days could contribute to an annual geometric
mean above the standard.) That figure shows that concentrations above the
selected threshhold were observed for all wind directions, but those concen-
trations occurred most frequently with winds from the south, south-southeast,
north-northwest and west-northwest. The distance between the airport and
the monitor introduces some uncertainty in the interpretation of the wind
directions shown in the pollution rose, especially with low wind speeds.
A different kind of meteorological rose, a wind rose, is shown in Figure 3.
Two essential differences distinguish the wind rose from the pollution rose
shown in Figure 2.
0 First, the wind rose includes all wind observations, regardless of
the pollutant concentrations. The pollution rose includes only the
wind observations recorded when the pollutant concentrations exceeded
a specified threshold.
50
-------
Figure 2. TSP in St. Louis
0-3
4-7 ft-11 12-15 16
Wind Speeds (M.P.H.)
Percent of days with TSP over
threshhold and with indicated
wind speed and direction.
5%
Met. Station: International Airport
Air Quality Site: 322 Catalan
TSP>75>ug/m3
58 Observations
1980 and 1981 data
51
-------
Figure 3. Historical Wind Rose-International Airport, St. Louis
Percent of observations with
indicated wind direction.
J
5% 10%
1965-1974 Data
29215 Observations
N
52
-------
0 Second, since the data summaries used to construct the wind rose
classify wind directions in 16 directional sectors, the rose includes
16 arms, each representing a 22.5° sector. By contrast, the wind
data used for constructing the pollution rose were reported by the
National Weather Service in 10° increments. That rose presents
12 arms, each representing a 30° sector (three of the 10° directional
increments). Conversion formulas are not available for transforming
a 12-arm rose to a 16-arm rose or vice versa. Therefore, comparisons
between wind roses and pollution roses are qualitative, rather than
quantitative.
If all pollutant sources were equally spaced around a monitor, the wind rose
and the pollution rose should approximately coincide. Comparison of Figures
2 and 3 indicates that, for some wind directions, the high concentrations
occurred more frequently than would be expected from the historical wind
patterns and from a uniform distribution of pollutant sources. These
directions include south, south-southeast, north-northwest and possibly
east-northeast. Therefore, point or area source impact would be expected
from sources south to south-southeast of the monitor, north-northwest of
the monitor, and possibly east-northeast of the monitor. Figure 4 shows
topographical features in the vicinity of the monitor. (The monitor is
shown by the symbol 0 near the center of the figure.) Figure 5 shows the
locations of nearby point sources which emitted over 100 tons/year during
the time period covered by the meteorological and TSP monitoring data.
Those same sources are listed in Table 4, with the location (UTM coordinates),
the distance from the monitor, and the emissions estimate. Comparison of
Figures 2, 3 and 5 indicates possible point source impact from the Monsanto
Idaho Plant and the Carondelet Coke plant.
When the State evaluated the area around the monitor, they concluded that
unvegetated land surrounding the monitor was the largest contributor to the
high concentrations observed in 1981. Two features of the pollution rose
indicate area source impact. First, the multiple arms on the rose indicate
a wide angular spread in the location of sources. That pattern in pollution
roses is often caused by area sources. Second, many of the high concentra-
tions occurred under high wind speed conditions. Blowing dust from bare
soil would be consistent with that feature of the pollution rose.
In summary, the results of this evaluation agree with the State's findings
of significant area source impact, and also indicate possible point source
impact. The pollution roses provide a visual perspective on the TSP and wind
data. As such, they constitute one evaluation tool, which can be useful
when applied in conjunction with other evaluation tools.
B. CO in the St. Louis Area
Monitoring data collected in the 1970's showed widespread exceedances of the
CO standards in the St. Louis area. More recent data have shown no exceedances
of those standards at several sites in St. Louis County. Monitoring at
other sites was discontinued or interrupted in the early 1980's. The most
recent recorded exceedances in the area occurred at the St. Ann site, which
showed four exceedances of the eight-hour standard in 1981. The 1982 data
53
-------
•S^N^S^
Figure 4. Topography
322 Catalan
-------
SCALE OF KILOMETERS
i—i—i—i
0123
FIGURE 5. POINT SOURCES WITHIN
10 KM OF 322 CATALAN EMITTING
OVER 100 TONS/YEAR
-------
TABLE 4
Point Sources Within 10 km of 322 Catalan
Which Emitted over 100 tons/year
Emissions* Distance from
tons/year UTHE (km) UTMN (km) Monitor (km)
1. Municipal South Incinerator 253 743.0 4275.0 7.8
2. Monsanto Idaho Plant 3817 737.9 4269.9 1.0
3. Alpha Portland Cement 868 733.0 4267.5 5.4
4. Carondelet Coke 643 738.6 4268.7 .2
Monitor Location 738.4 4268.7
* Note: The Carondelet Coke estimate was calculated from the report of a
plant inspection conducted on August 13, 1981 by Del Green Associates, Inc.
The Monsanto estimate was obtained from the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources. The emission estimates for the other two plants were retrieved
from the National Emissions Data System.
56
-------
showed no exceedances. The State has claimed that the site is not representa-
tive of a neighborhood scale area, citing influence from a parking lot as
the basis for that claim.
Figure 6 shows a pollution rose for the monitor, based on wind data collected
on-site during hours when the CO concentration exceeded 10 mg/nv* (the eight-
hour primary standard). Only those hours could contribute to exceedances
of the eight-hour standard. That figure shows that the high CO concentrations
occurred predominantly under calm conditions, or with light winds from a
90° sector south of the monitor. Therefore, point or area sources south of
the monitor would be the most probable causes of the high concentrations
observed. With the preponderance of calms and light winds, sources close
to the monitor would be expected to have the greatest influence. Figure 7
shows the topographical features in the vicinity of the monitor. Figure 8
is a copy of an aerial photograph of the area. Figure 9 presents a traffic
volume map for St. Louis County, and shows high traffic volume on several
roads in the vicinity of the monitor. A review of the NEDS data shows no
CO point sources emitting over 100 tons/year within three miles of the
monitor. Based on the pattern of wind speeds and directions, traffic on
St. Charles Rock Road is the probable cause of the high CO concentrations.
However, some influence from localized sources south of the monitor may
have contributed to those concentrations.
57
-------
Figure 6. CO in St. Louis
1-3
4.7 B-11 12-15 16*
N
Wind Speeds (Kts.)
Percent of hours over threshold
•nd with indicated wind speed
and direction
Met. Station. St. Ann ..
Air Quality Site: St. Ann
C0>10mg/m3 -
94 Observations
1980 and 1981 Data
I
I
i i i i
57.
58
-------
R RESOURCES
'VIA MO 11 Si * 9
MlbS>UUKI-bl. LOUIS CO.
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
jn MI rous *' . R e,ir ap7"
S30000FEETI *fto«;-Ur-'s
> ; I »> |'.i ««-j i(0
S»TIOXAL LAMBERT-ST LO'JIS AIRPORT
,;IA|,D
-------
Aerial View of
St. Ann Monitoring Site
-------
cr>
s- >>
I— 4->
>> 3
r- O
•r- O
ra
Q «/>
O) 3
CD O
ra —1
S-
QJ •
CTi
-------
XIII. POPULATION EXPOSURE
Population exposure to elevated pollutant concentrations is difficult
to measure accurately. (People spend varying amounts of time in different
parts of a city which may have localized areas with high pollutant concen-
trations. Population estimates within such localized areas are difficult
to compute manually because that calculation requires locating and summing
the populations of numerous small, detailed geographical areas.) Previous
attempts to estimate population exposure have focused on populations of
entire counties or metropolitan areas, even though the designated non-attain-
ment areas were only portions of those counties or cities. While such
approximations are understandable, given the difficulty of obtaining and
using population data with more detailed spatial resolution, they may
greatly overestimate the populations exposed to elevated pollutant concen-
trations. A better approximation of exposed population would be a determi-
nation of just that segment of the population living within the designated
nonattainment areas. (For 03, while that number may over-estimate the
population actually exposed to high ozone concentrations, it should closely
approximate the population affected by pollution control measures.) At our
request, Systems Applications, Inc. (SAI) has developed software to estimate
the population within any given closed polygon, using the detailed census
Block Group/Enumeration District data in their computer data base. The
non-attainment areas shown on the maps in Sections IV through VIII of this
report were sent to SAI for computation of the enclosed populations. Table
5 summarizes the results of those calculations. The population density
maps from which the table was prepared are shown in Appendix C. That
Appendix also describes the calculation procedure more fully.
It should be noted that redesignations were recommended which would
reduce the size of some non-attainment areas. The populations in the
table show that significant numbers of people have benefitted from the
recent reductions in pollutant concentrations.
62
-------
TABLE 5
Population Estimates Within Designated Non-Attainment and Unclassified Areas
TSP
Kansas City
Mexico
New Madrid
St. Joseph
St. Louis
Primary
334,000
16,000
122,000
Secondary
683,000 (incl. PNA)
2,000
74,000
525,000 (incl. PNA)
Unclassified
10,000
CO
Kansas City
St. Louis
Primary & Secondary
1,200,000
Unclassified
672,000
Kansas City
MO portion
Bi-state
St. Louis
MO portion
Bi-state
Primary & Secondary
860,000
1,250,000
1,730,000
2,360,000
63
-------
XIV. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Attainment Status Designations
The evaluation of ambient air quality based on recent monitoring data
found attainment status designations to be generally consistent with recent
data in most parts of the State. Recommendations were made in the text
to consider attainment status changes in some locations for TSP and CO.
Those recommendations are summarized in Table 6. In each case, we recommend
that the State review all of the data available to them, in order to base
their decisions on the most complete information available. The State has
recently requested redesignations from primary non-attainment to secondary
non-attainment for TSP in Kansas City, St. Joseph and St. Louis; and from
primary non-attainment to attainment for 03 in Kansas City. Those requests
are under review by the Air Branch of EPA, Region VII.
B. Air Quality Concern Areas
Relatively few serious air quality problems were found in Missouri, based on
the monitoring data available in SAROAD. The areas which have recently
posed human health concerns (because the primary NAAQS's were exceeded)
are summarized in the following paragraphs.
One site (the CO Monitor in Independence) showed exceedances of the alert
level and violation of the eight-hour primary standard in both years covered
by the evaluation.
The following sites showed violation of the primary standards in 1982,
or in the last year of operation, if 1982 data were not available:
0 TSP - St. Joseph (Pump Station South) and St. Louis (4 sites which
did not meet siting criteria for neighborhood scale monitors.
Sites which meet the neighborhood scale criteria are needed
in three of those areas).
0 S02 - West Alton (ascribed to point source impact from the Alton Box
Board Plant).
0 03 - St. Louis Area (305 Weidman Road, Clayton, Uater Department,
and 8227 South Broadway).
The following sites showed violation of the primary standards before 1982,
but the 1982 data showed no violations:
0 S02 - Sugar Creek
0 CO - St. Ann
0 03 - Kansas City Area (most sites) and St. Louis Area (Ferguson,
Jefferson County, St. Ann and West Alton).
64
-------
TABLE 6
Recommendations Regarding Attainment Status Changes
TSP
Kansas City
St. Joseph
St. Louis Area
CO
Kansas City
St. Louis
Remove the primary non-attainment designation.
Reduce the size of the secondary non-attainment area.
Continue efforts to ensure the completeness of
data collection.
Consider reducing the size of the non-attainment
areas.
Re-evaluate the size of the designated primary
and secondary non-attainment areas when the
1983 data are available.
Consider designating part of the area as non-
attainment.
Consider reducing the size of the designated
non-attainment area.
65
-------
In each of the above areas, we encourage the State to determine whether or
not a long-term air quality problem exists and, if so, to identify and
address the cause(s) of the problem.
C. Monitor Operation and Siting
In two areas of the State, lack of monitoring data impedes efforts to assess
current air quality. First, a downtown CO monitor is needed in Kansas City.
Since that site is designated as a NAMS monitor and has been out of service
since 1980, it should be given high priority. Second, TSP monitors were
discontinued at four locations in St. Louis City because they did not meet
the siting criteria of 40 CFR 58, Appendix E. Each of those monitors
showed exceedances of the primary standards in 1981. The area around one
of those sites is covered by other nearby monitoring. Data are needed from
properly sited monitors in the three remaining areas in order to determine
whether or not current air quality meets the standards. Recommendations
were also made for increasing the number of precision checks and monitor
audits conducted by the State and local agencies, for increasing the number
of samples collected at the existing collocated monitors, and for including
the lead monitoring data collected near the smelters in the SAROAD data bank.
66
-------
APPENDIX A
Tabular Summaries of Data
Table Description
Al Ambient Air Monitoring Data
A2 Precision and Accuracy Estimates for Ambient
Air Monitoring Data
A3 Attainment Status Designations
67
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS USED IN TABLE Al
SITE ID
YR
REP ORG
f OBS
MAX 24-HR 1ST
MAX 24-HR 2ND
OBS >260
OBS>150
ARIT MEAN
GEO MEAN
GSD
METH
QTRLY ARITH MEAN 1ST
QTRLY ARITH MEAN 2ND
QTRLY ARITH MEAN 3RD
QTRLY ARITH MEAN 4TH
MEANS >1.5
MAX VALUES 1ST
MAX VALUES 2ND
MAX 1-HR 1ST
MAX 1-HR 2ND
OBS > 40
MAX 8-HR 1ST
MAX 8-HR 2ND
OBS >10
OBS >365
MAX 3-HR 1ST
MAX 3-HR 2ND
OBS >1300
DAILY MAX 1-HR 1ST
DAILY MAX 1-HR 2ND
DAILY MAX 1-HR 3RD
Site identification number
Year
Reporting organization
Number of observations
Highest value recorded in a 24-hour period
Second highest value recorded in a 24-hour period
Number of observations greater than 260
Number of observations greater than ISO
Arithmetic mean
Geometric mean
Geometric standard deviation
Method
First quarter arithmetic mean
Second quarter arithmetic mean
Third quarter arithmetic mean
Fourth quarter arithmetic mean
Number of quarterly means greater than 1.5
Highest value recorded for the year
Second highest value recorded for the year
Highest value recorded in a one-hour period
Second highest value recorded in a one-hour period
Number of observations greater than 40
Highest value recorded in an eight-hour period
Second highest value recorded in an eight-hour period
Number of observations greater than 10
Number of observations greater than 365
Highest value recorded in a three-hour period
Second highest value recorded in a three-hour period
Number of observations greater than 1300
Maximum hourly ozone value for a day
Second maximum hourly ozone value for a day
Third maximum hourly ozone value for a day
68
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS USED IN TABLE Al (Continued)
VALS >.125 ME AS Number of measured values greater than .125
VALS>.125EST Number of expected violations
NBR VALID DAILY MAX Number of valid daily maximum values
MISS DAYS ASS < STD Number of missing days assumed to be less than the
standard
? The mean does not satisfy summary criteria
69
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEPOMETR1C DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER (UG/M3) MISSOURI
81-62
PAGE
METHOD: GRAVIMETRIC, 24-HOUR HI-VOLUME FILTER sAMPLE-9i
SITE ID
260030001G01
260030001G01
260200001G01
260200001G01
26CC60001G01
260260001G01
260640001F01
260640001F01
260960001F01
261040002G01
261040002G01
261120002F01
261120002F01
261120006F01
261120006F01
261120007H01
261120008F01
261600001G01
261600001G01
261640001F04
261640001F04
261840001F01
261920003F01
261920003F01
262180001H01
262180001H01
262160004HOI
262180004H01
262280005F02
262280005F02
262380002H01
262360002H01
262330003H01
262330003H01
262380004H01
262380004H01
262380006H01
262380006H01
262380010H01
LOCATION
AFFTON
AFFTON
BELLE FONTAINE
BELLEFONTAINE
BERKELEY
BERKELEY
CAMOEN CO
CAMOEN CO
CHILLICOTHE
CLAYTON
CLAYTON
COLUMBIA
COLUMBIA
COLUMBIA
COLUMBIA
COLUMBIA
COLUMBIA
FERGUSON
FERGUSON
FLAT RIVER
FLAT RIVER
GRANDVIEM
HANNIBAL
HANNIBAL
INDEPENDENCE
INDEPENDENCE
INDEPENDENCE
INDEPENDENCE
JEFFERSON CO
JEFFERSON CO
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
COUNTY
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
NEIGH ST LOUIS CO
NEIGH ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
CAMDEN CO
CAMOEN CO
LIVINGSTON CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
BOONE CO
BOOIIE CO
BOONE CO
BOCNE CO
EOONE CO
BOONE CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST FRANCOIS CO
ST FRANCOIS CO
JACKSOM CO
MARION CO
MARION CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
JEFFERSON CO
JEFFERSON CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
CLAY CO
ADDRESS
LIN FERRY ft L'BE
LIN FERRY * L'BE
605 CHAMBERS ROA
805 CHAMBERS ROA
8811 HAROLD DRIV
8811 HAPOLD DRIV
LAKE OF OZARKS
LAKE OF OZARKS
CHILLICOTHE HEAL
601 SOUTH BRENTW
801 SOUTH BRENTW
HIGHHAY B
HIGHIIAY B
511 E. WALNUT COL
511 E. WALNUT COL
POUELL DRIVE
DO'.INTOini FIRE ST
FLORISSANT VALLE
FLORISSANT VALLE
FEDERAL MILL RD
FEDERAL MILL RD
FIPE DEPT. ROOF
HANNIBAL POLICE
HANNIBAL POLICE
213 S. MAIN ST
213 S. MAIN ST
2300 N LIBERTY S
2300 N LIBERTY S
DUIIKLIN HIGH SCH
DUK'KLIN HIG'I SCH
1517 LOCUST ST
1517 LOCUST ST
5100 TROOST AVE
5100 TP005T AVE
101 LOU HOLLAND
101 LOU HOLLAND
5130 DURAtHiS RD
5130 OUR ANUS PD
4836 N BRIGHTON
REP
YR ORG *OBS
81 002
82 002
81 002
82 002
61 002
82 002
81 001
82 001
81 001
81 002
82 002
81 001
82 001
81 001
82 001
82
82
81 002
82 002
81
82
61 001
81 001
82 001
81 004
82 004
81 004
82 004
81 001
82 001
81 004
82 004
81 004
82 004
81 004
82 004
61 004
82 004
81 004
45
55
53
55
55
14
47
58
18
55
45
47
52
44
30
14
10
57
58
28
10
14
51
51
33
13
40
11
53
10
49
58
55
54
52
54
43
56
49
MAX 24-HR OBS> OBS>
1ST 2ND 260 150
98
82
223
106
236
84
264
86
126
220
109
160
120
240
94
115
52
257
194
198
130
98
165
330
131
136
93
112
326
108
160
112
107
90
157
143
176
122
167
97
81
151
101
153
82
63 1
72
95
130
99
122
94
114
67
74
38
191
145
129
129
88
165
187 1
125
95
89
107
199 1
98
138
105
94
79
152
126
135
113
152
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
1
3
1
2
ARIT 6EO
MEAN MEAN
54
48
67
52
67
55?
43
28
65?
68
54?
66
50
74?
52?
51?
29?
60
53
56?
65?
63?
78
74
69?
71?
58?
61?
62
59?
74
60
60
48
75
59
76
56
73
51
45
60
48
61
54?
38
24
59?
63
49?
61
46
68?
50?
48?
27?
53
48
47?
56?
60?
70
65
64?
68?
55?
56?
55
53?
69
56
56
45
68
54
71
51
69
6SO
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
00
m
3»
73
O
O
70
o
2s
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AERPMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER (UG/M3I MISSOURI
61-82
PAGE
METHOD: GRAVIMETRIC, 24-Hour? HI-VOLUME FILTER SAMPLED!
SITE ID
262380010H01
262380015H01
262330015H01
26c380023H01
2623P0023H01
262380031H01
262440001F01
262630002G01
262630002G01
262630003G01
26C630003G01
2630Z0006F01
263020007F01
263020007F01
263020008F01
263260001F01
263260001F01
263e80001F02
263280001F02
2633B0004F01
263740003F01
263800003F01
263800003F01
264120001G01
264120001G01
264160002F01
264160002F01
264260003F01
264Z60003F01
264C60004FC5
264260005F05
264260007F01
264260007F01
264E60008F03
264260008F03
264280006H01
264280006H01
264280007H01
264280007H01
LOCATION
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KIRKSVILLE
LEMAY
LEMAY
LEMAY
LEMAY
MEXICO
MEXICO
MEXICO
MEXICO
NEVADA
HEVADA
MEM MADRID
NEW MADRID
NORTH KANSAS CITY
PLATTE CO
POPLAR BLUFF
POPLAR BLUFF
ST ANN
ST ANN
ST CHARLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST JOSEPH
ST LOUIS
ST LOUIS
ST LOUIS
ST LOUIS
COUNTY
CLAY CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
PLATTE CO
PLATTE CO
JACKSON CO
ADAIR CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
AUDRAIN CO
AUDRAIN CO
AUORAIN CO
AUDPAIN CO
VERNON CO
VERNON CO
NEW MADRID CO
MEW MADRID CO
CLAY CO
PLATTE CO
BUTLER CO
BUTLER CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST CHAPLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
BUCHANAN CO
INDEPENDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
ADDRESS
4836 N BRIGHTON
9445 HOLMES AVE
9445 HOLMES AVE
11500 N 71 HIIY
11500 N 71 HIIY
BANNISTER POAD
SCI BLOG NE STAT
9101 SOUTH BPOAD
9101 SOUTH EP.OAD
8900 SOUTH BPOAD
8900 SOUTH EPOAD
TEAL LAKE - MEXI
COAL ft LOVE STS.
COAL ft LOVE STS.
MCMILLAN SCHOOL
JEFF ELEM SCHOOL
JEFF ELEM SCHOOL
MO CONS FOR FROT
MO CCIIS FOR PPOT
2800 HOSPITAL DR
WEATHEF7BY LAKE.C
POPLAR BLUFF REG
POPLAR BLUFF REG
10267 ST CHARLES
10267 ST CHARLES
HUY 94 (WEST ALT
HWY 94 (WEST ALT
8TH ST ft EOttOND
8TH ST ft EDMCUD
SEWER TREATMENT
PUMP STA., SOUTH
FIRE STA *6 HIB
FIRE STA *6 HIB
FARON PUMPING ST
FAP,0:i PUMPING ST
14TH ft MARKET
14TH ft MARKET
8227 SOUTH BPOAO
8227 SOUTH BROAD
REP
YR 09G
82 004
81 004
82 004
81 004
82 004
82
81 001
81 002
82 002
81 002
82 002
82
81
82
82
81 001
82 001
81 001
82 001
81 001
81 001
81 001
82 001
81 002
82 002
81 001
82 001
81 001
82 001
81 001
82
81 001
82 001
81 001
82 001
81 003
82 003
81 003
82 003
«OBS
56
55
13
58
54
34
39
58
57
56
49
40
6
51
14
52
56
45
39
39
38
40
57
54
54
52
37
57
58
41
22
40
12
38
6
103
94
75
57
MAX 24-HR OBS> OBS>
1ST 2ND 260 150
96
145
106
99
86
92
155
252
111
241
666
86
99
265
57
150
112
161
112
105
121
105
116
253
107
232
123
213
157
266
206
173
106
159
61
274
150
211
201
92
113
101
89
67
91
134
228
111
194
137
79
92
170
56
125
91
161
100
102
113
103
112
99
95
115
94
136
145
247
200
120
70
157
53
171
145
148
159
1
5
6
1 1
1 2
3
1
1
1
1
1 4
4
1
4
1 3
1
2
ARIT GEO
MEAN MEAN
50
71
70?
49
35
44?
72?
79
54
82
74
34?
56?
69
34?
64
50
80
45?
64?
59?
66
49
63
50
66
51
73
58
91?
100?
69
54?
66
35?
83
70
72
71?
47
67
66?
46
32
40?
68?
70
50
73
58
29?
48?
61
32?
60
46
68
39?
61?
56?
62
44
58
47
59
45
67
53
77?
86?
64
49?
57
31?
78
65
66
65?
GSO
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6
i.e
1.9
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.8
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER (UG/M3) MISSOURI
81-82
PAGE
METHOD: GRAVIMETRIC, Z'.-HOUR HI-VOLUME FILTER SAMPLE-?!
SITE ID LOCATION
264280010H01 ST LOUIS
264Z80010H01 ST LOUIS
264280015H01 ST LOUIS
264Z80015H01 ST LOUIS
2642B0025H01 ST LOUIS
264280025H01 ST LOUIS
264260032H01 ST LOUIS
264280032H01 ST LOUIS
264260061H01 ST LOUIS
264280062H01 ST LOUIS
264200053H01 ST LOUIS
2642C0075H01 ST LOUIS
2642C0080H01 ST LOUIS
264300006G01 ST LOUIS CO
264300006G01 ST LOUIS CO
264320003F01 STE GENEVIEVE
264320003F01 STE GENEVIEVE
264530005H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580007H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580012H01 SPRINGFIELD
264Se0015H01 SPRINGFIELD
264S80016H01 SPRINGFIELD
2645C0018H01 SPRINGFIELD
26458001GH01 SPRINGFIELD
264S80019H01 SPRINGFIELD
2645G0023H01 SPRINGFIELD
264530023H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580026H05 SPRINGFIELD
264580026H05 SPRINGFIELD
264500028H01 SPRINGFIELD
2645300C8H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580029H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580030H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580030H01 SPRINGFIELD
26'»580031H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580031H01 SPRINGFIELD
264530032H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580032H01 SPRINGFIELD
264580033H01 SPRINGFIELD
COUNTY
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
CTY
STE GENEVIEVE C
STE GENEVIEVE C
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GPEENE CO
GREENE CO
GPEENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GPEENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GPEENE CO
GP.EENE CO
GPEENE CO
GPEENE CO
GPEENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
ADDRESS
4408 DONOVAN
4408 DONOVAN
1400 SHAM 10 •' PL*
1400 SHAHNUT PLA
3500 SOUTH GRAND
3500 SOUTH GRAND
GRAND * LAC .EOE
GRAND + LACLEDE
SHREVE " 1-70
RIVER DES PERES
WATER DEPT
322 CATALAN ST.
NEHSTEAD * COTEB
305 WEIDMAN ROAD
305 WEIDMAN ROAD
ACADEMY HILL H.S
ACADEMY HILL H.S
VENTURA ft SUNSHI
900 W CHASE
GRANOVIEW GOLF C
900 E t'OIIROE
KANSAS & MT VERM
FAIRGROUNDS
FAIRGROUNDS
SILVER SPRINGS P
3012 M SEMIIIOLE
3012 M SEMINOLE
5012 S. CHAP.LEST
5012 S. CHAPLEST
GRANT BEACH PARK
GRANT BEACH PARK
FAIR GROUNDS
GPANOVIEW GOLF C
GPANOVIEM GOLF C
ZAGONY1 PARK
Z AGONY 1 PARK
S.W. MISSOURI ST.
S.W.MISSOURI ST.
SILVER SPRINGS P
REP
YR CRG *OBS
81 003
82 003
81 003
82 003
81 003
82 003
61 003
82 003
81 003
81 003
81 003
81 003
62
81 002
82 002
81 001
82 001
81 005
81
61 005
81
81 005
81 005
82 005
81 005
81 005
82 005
81 005
82 005
81 005
82 005
62 005
81 005
62 005
81 005
82 005
81 005
62 005
61 005
46
54
39
56
40
58
44
57
26
68
30
35
48
48
56
54
57
44
20
38
21
35
57
15
9
59
42
55
15
39
61
23
21
59
24
61
29
60
32
MAX 24-HR OBS> OBS>
1ST 2ND 260 150
239
91
226
117
250
121
192
143
259
239
283
232
125
218
251
114
100
247
242
84
220
244
175
68
116
200
60
305
70
84
368
126
72
90
79
89
73
91
86
169
84
206
101
138
108
175
129
137
182
217
213
103
96
201
92
99
68
114
79
78
141
142
65
90
81
59
83
53
78
102
74
71
70
71
68
62
74
81
2
2
1
Z
1
3
1 5
7
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 1
ARIT GEO
MEAN MEAN GSO
76?
49
85?
56
83?
60
87?
67
102?
89?
106?
105?
62?
53
46
61
46
52?
75?
49?
59?
68?
53
44?
58?
42
34?
46
37?
51?
54
43?
38?
37
42?
39
43?
42
48?
69? 1.5
43 2.1
76? 1.6
52 1.5
77? 1.5
56 1.5
80? 1.5
62 1.5
95? 1.5
83? 1.4
94? 1.6
95? 1.5
57? 1.5
48 1.6
38 1.8
56 1.7
42 1.6
46? 1.5
67? 1.5
47? 1.4
52? 1.6
62? 1.5
48
42?
53?
39
33?
40
35?
48?
47
38?
35?
34
39?
36
41?
39
.6
.4
.5
.5
.3
.5
.4
.4
.6
.6
.5
.5
.5
.5
.4
.5
45? 1.4
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT S.'TISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
04/19/83 NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK PAGE 10
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER (UG/M3) MISSOURI 81-82
METHOD: GRAVIMETRIC, 24-HOUR HI-VOLUME FILTER SAMPLE-PI
SITE 10
264580033H01
2645Q0034H01
264580034H01
LOCATION
SPRIHGFIELD
SPRINGFIELD
SPRINGFIELD
COUNTY
GPEENE
GREENE
GREENE
CO
CO
CO
ADDRESS
SILVER SPRINGS P
LAURA INGALLS HI
LAURA INGALLS MI
REP
YR OPG
82 005
81 005
82 005
SOBS
59
11
57
\
MAX 24-HR OBS> OBS> ARIT GEO
1ST 2I.D 260 150 MEAN MEAN
95
57
93
79
49
90
44
37?
37
41
35?
33
GSD
1.5
1.5
1.6
•-J
GO
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PAGE 16
SULFUR DIOXIDE (UG/M3I
MISSOURI
81-82
METHODS: HOURLY VALUES MEST-GAEKE COLORIMETRIC-II, conoucTiMETRic-13, COULOMETRIC-I MAX
1ST 2ND 365 1ST
118
132
200
99
121
220
365
451
143
119
123
92
66
131
152
106
92
237
130
125
140
1278
219
99
119
132
214
344
95
84
580
357
105
103
91
95
83
166
236
169
133
100
119
81
64
125
138
98
72
166
85
106
133
1255
177
57
108
110
147
189
60
68
545
335
252
334
610
286
397
406
856
1 1520
884
314
329
365
227
282
304
183
285
524
406
336
269
6 1320
673
277
252
397
655
625
350
367
3 1300
873
3-HR
2ND
245
329
418
272
235
379
831
777
631
254
312
362
183
259
216
121
263
393
325
333
211
1314
423
268
238
294
499
552
297
314
1249
830
OBS> MAX
1300 1ST
555
595
812
500
516
757
2358
1 1886
2620
555
760
665
323
453
403
396
613
786
645
584
435
13 1320
1014
524
380
569
1179
1085
603
524
1 2096
1153
1-HR ARIT
2ND MEAN HTH
534
569
590
461
490
511
1258
1677
1593
435
403
429
303
376
342
283
493
655
456
553
422
1320
962
369
351
401
812
638
550
498
1493
1040
26
22
27
20
27
43
14
37?
15?
37?
45?
19
9
17
15
59?
16?
20?
18
23
28
53
18
16?
22
20
26
35?
6
8
49
39?
16
16
16
16
16
16
14
14
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
16
16
20
20
20
20
16
16
20
20
20
20
20
20
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES MOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK RCPORT
CARBON MONOXIDE (MG/M3)
MISSOURI
81-82
PAGE 20
METHOD: NONDISPERSIVE INFRARED (NOIR) CONTINUOUS, HOURLY VALUES-H. FLAME IONIZATION-ZI
SITE ID
260030001G01
260030001G01
261040001G01
261040001G01
261600001G01
261600001G01
2621C0007F01
262180007F01
262380009H01
2623S0007H01
262380031H01
264120001G01
264120001G01
264300006G01
264300006G01
LOCATION
AFFTON
AFFTON
CLAYTON
CLAYTON
FERGUSON
FEPGUSON
IHDEPEHOENCE
INDEPENDENCE
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
KANSAS CITY
ST AHM
ST ANN
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
COUNTY
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
JACKSON CO
JACKSON CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
JACKSON CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ADDRESS
LIN FERRY t L'BE
LIN FERRY * L'BE
55 HUNTER AVE
55 HUNTER AVE
FLORISSANT VALLE
FLORISSANT VALLE
11301E.35TH ST
11301E.35TH ST
2600 HE PARVIH R
2600 HE PARVIH R
BAf'MISTER ROAD
10267 ST CHARLES
10267 ST CHAPLES
305 UEIDMAN ROAD
305 WEIDMAM ROAD
YR
61
82
81
82
81
82
81
82
81
82
82
81
82
81
82
REP
ORG
002
002
002
002
002
002
001
001
004
004
002
002
002
002
*OBS
8442
8192
8472
8233
8515
7P64
7349
8068
8374
8435
6334
8394
1786
8481
2062
MAX
1ST
7.4
8.5
10.0
21.3
11.2
9.9
33.4
26.5
18.2
16.5
7.6
23.7
19.0
7.0
5.3
1-HR OBS>
2ND 40
7.1
7.6
9.3
14.3
9.4
9.0
32.2
24.2
16.4
14.8
7.6
21.0
17.6
6.8
4.8
MAX
1ST
5.2
5.9
7.9
8.7
7.2
7.9
25.9
20.8
8.1
8.9
6.0
15.8
7.9
4.5
3.8
8-HR OBS>
2ND 10
4.9
4.6
7.0
7.9
6.9
7.0
16.7 5
13.8 4
7.7
8.3
4.1
12.9 4
7.7
4.1
3.0
METH
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
-------
VId31Id3
JUSUVS O.ON S30Q NV3M 3 Hi J.VHL S31V3IQNI i
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
4T
41
H13U
SZ
T£
c8T
m
84
£2
/I
££
i£T
i£2
c9Z
*94
T4
6£
&£
*9T
*Z4
04
NV3W OtIZ 1ST
lid* UH-4Z XVU
III
88T
9ZT
222
m
T6T
OiT
0£T
£S£
OOS
9£4
ZTZ
ZT£
£41
04£
££T
Si I
ONZ
dH-T
OST
2ST
602
8ST
4ZZ
£iT
002
T8T
SET
48£
635
TS4
2T2
4T£
8ST
Oil
i£I
261
1ST
XVU
6909
T69S
069T
i4t>8
T9£8
4S69
6909
£6£4
690T
Z84Z
1024
£9£8
T90i
i£S8
9i9S
£T24
£££9
SQO»
ZOO
zoo
TOO
ZOO
ZOO
400
400
400
400
TOO
TOO
ZOO
ZOO
ZOO
ZOO
TOO
ZOO
ZOO
3dO
d3d
39
T9
29
29
T8
29
T8
29
T9
29
T8
29
19
29
T8
29
29
T9
dA
OVOd NVWQI3M S0£
QVOd HVUQI3M S0£
11 V 1S3M) 46 AMH
S31HVH3 IS £9201
S31UCH3 IS Z.9ZOT
31S3HDNIM * H164
31S3H3HIM * H164
AMH \L H OOStT
AtlH U N OOSTT
t Moociat)3icnonav
» XOOa3M3J.Q10HdV
aiiVA luvssiaou
311VA INVSSIdOU
3AV aainnH ss
3AV d31tinH SS
H AlNn03 » ££AMH
39.1 9 Add3d Nil
39.1 » Add3d Nil
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 S31dVH3 IS
03 sinoi is
03 siocn is
03 AV13
03 AV13
03 311Vld
03 311V1d
03 NOSd3JJ3r
03 NOSd3JJ3f
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 AV13
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 sinoi is
03 S31dVH3 IS
A1I3
A1I3
A1I3
A1I3
03 NO
03 NO
N
N
NUV IS
NtiV IS
SVSHVX
SVSHVM
SVSNV>I
SVSNtfX
Sd3dJ3r
Sd3333f
OSnOd3J
osnaa3j
N01AV13
N01AV13
03 A VI 3
N01JJV
NOUdV
S^3dQQV A1NH03 NOI1V301
T0390000E49Z
T0390000E49Z
TOJZ0009T49Z
T03IOOOZT49Z
T03I0003T49Z
TOHS2006£Z9Z
IOHS2009£292
TOHE2009EZ9Z
TOH£2008£292
T03ZT0092Z9Z
T033T0082Z9Z
T03T00009I9Z
T03T00009T9Z
T03T00040T9Z
I09IOOO
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
OZONE (PARTS PER MILLION) MISSOURI
PAGE 28
80-62
METHODS: HOURLY VALUES CHEMILUMINESCENCE-II, ULTRA VIOLET DASIBI CORPORATION-^, CHEMILUMINESCENCE RHODAMINE B DYE-IS
SITE ID LOCATION
260030001G01 AFFTON
260030001G01 AFFTON
260030001G01 AFFTON
261020003F01 CLAY CO
261020003F01 CLAY CO
2610C0003F01 CLAY CO
261020004F01 CLAY CO
261020005F01 CLAY CO
261020005F01 CLAY CO
261040001G01 CLAYTON
2610'»OOOIG01 CLAYTON
261040001G01 CLAYTON
261600001G01 FERGUSON
261600001G01 FERGUSON
261600001G01 FERGUSON
261860014G01 GREENE CO
262280012F01 JEFFERSON CO
262280012F01 JEFFERSON CO
262380023H01 KANSAS CITY
262380023H01 KANSAS CITY
262380023H01 KANSAS CITY
262330025H01 KANSAS CITY
262360025H01 KANSAS CITY
262380025H01 KANSAS CITY
26 2 950001 A08 MARK TWAIN NATIONAL
262950001A08 MARK TWAIN NATIONAL
262950001A08 MARK TWAIN NATIONAL
263740003F01 PLATTE CO
264120001G01 ST ANN
264120001G01 ST ANN
264120001G01 ST ANN
264160002F01 ST CHARLES CO
264160002F01 ST CHARLES CO
264160002F01 ST CHARLES CO
264160005F03 ST CHARLES CO
264160008J05 ST CHARLES CO
2*42800071(01 ST LOUIS
264280061H01 ST LOUIS
264280062H01 ST LOUIS
COUNTY
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
GREENE CO
JEFFERSON CO
JEFFERSON CO
PLATTE CO
PLATTE CO
PLATTE CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
CLAY CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
PLATTE CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST CHARLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
ST CHARLES CO
INDEPEMDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
ADDRESS
LIN FERRY » L'BE
LIN FERRY S L'BE
LIN FEPPY ( L'BE
WATKINS MILL ST
WATKINS MILL ST
WATKINS MILL ST
ROOSTERVILLE AIR
HWY 33 & COUNTY H
HWY33 t COUNTY H
55 HUNTER AVE
55 HUNTER AVE
55 HUNTER AVE
FLORISSANT VALLE
FLORISSANT VALLE
FLORISSANT VALLE
FAIR GROVE HIGH
ARNOLDTEHDROOK t
APNOLOTENarcOOK t
11500 N 71 HUY
11500 N 71 HWY
11500 N 71 HWY
49TH & WINCHESTE
49TH t WIKCHESTE
49TH * WINCHESTE
MARK TWAIN NAT.
MARK TWAIN NAT.
MARK TWAIN NAT.
WEATHERBY LAKE.C
10267 ST CHARLES
10267 ST CHARLES
10267 ST CHARLES
HWY 94 (WEST ALT
WIY 94 tUEST ALT
HWY 94 (WEST ALT
WELDON SPRINGS
PROSPECT 8FRAIIES
8227 SOUTH DROAD
SKREVE " 1-70
RIVER DES PERES
REP
YR ORG
80
81 002
82 002
80
81 001
82 001
80
81 001
82 001
60
81 002
82 002
80
81 002
82 002
62
81 001
82 001
60
81 004
82 004
80
81 004
62 004
80
81
82
81 001
80
81 002
82 002
80
81 001
82 001
81
80
80
80
80
HOBS
8016
6578
4241
7757
6729
7940
5074
4863
7383
8221
6752
4193
8287
6660
4199
2197
4085
1466
6846
6212
8467
7089
8622
6375
4722
7850
684
3428
8027
6746
4212
5405
6817
7623
2295
6741
5433
8220
7300
DAILY MAX
1ST 2ND
.171 .128
.161 .119
.114 .104
.160 .160
.120 .110
.092 .084
.150 .138
.125 .121
.103 .099
.139 .134
.171 .153
.177 .155
.199 .177
.132 .123
.163 .121
.120 .077
.180 .140
.100 .085
.135 .132
.127 .115
.109 .097
.140 .094
.073 .068
.096 .091
.155 .150
.115 .115
.050 .045
.120 .109
.148 .138
.133 .131
.170 .124
.199 .162
.151 .148
.128 .109
.120 .108
.161 .144
.136 .133
.034 .073
.114 .111
1-HR VALS > .125 NBR VALID MISS DAYS
3RD MEAS EST DAILY MAX ASS < STD ME
.120
.103
.104
.160
.108
.084
.131
.121
.099
.134
.127
.143
.162
.117
.121
.070
.110
.085
.114
.115
.094
.091
.068
.086
.105
.105
.045
.108
.137
.115
.115
.142
.125
.109
.096
.127
.123
.072
.109
2
1
0
7
0
0
5
1
0
4
3
4
11
1
1
0
2
0
2
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
2
1
5
3
1
0
3
2
0
0
2.2
1.3
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
8.6
1.8
0.0
4.2
3.8
8.2
11.5
1.3
2.1
0.0
4.2
0.0
2.5
1.1
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0
3.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.2
2.6
2.0
7.9
3.8
1.1
0.0
3.8
3.3
0.0
0.0
337
274
176
323
287
344
211
207
315
345
284
176
348
276
174
92
173
62
286
342
355
292
360
351
196
327
29
149
335
279
177
229
288
329
100
282
219
344
306
2
5
6
4
3
7
2
1
6
4
1
5
1
3
7
0
0
0
2
0
3
5
3
5
1
3
0
2
6
2
3
2
5
6
6
5
8
4
6
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
14
14
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
14
11
11
11
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMPTRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOJK REPORT
OZONE (PARTS PER MILLION) MISSOURI
PAGE 29
80-82
METHODS: HOURLY VALUES CHEMILUMINESCENCE-II, ULTRA VIO'.ET DASIBI CORPORATION-!*, CHEMI LUMINESCENCE RHOOAMINE B DYE-IS
SITE ID LOCATION
264280063H01 ST LOUIS
264280064H01 ST LOUIS
264300006G01 ST LOUIS CO
264300006G01 ST LOUIS CO
264300006G01 ST LOUIS CO
264580026H05 SPRINGFIELD
264580026H05 SPRINGFIELD
264580026H05 SPRINGFIELD
COUNTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
INDEPENDENT CTY
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
GREENE CO
ADDRESS
HATER DEPT
208 S 12TH ST
305 HEIDI1AN ROAD
305 WEIDMAN ROAD
305 WEIDMAN ROAD
5012 S. CHARLEST
5012 S. CHARLEST
5012 S. CHARLEST
REP
YR ORG
80
80
80
81 002
82 002
80
81 005
82 005
DAILY MAX
*OBS 1ST 2ND
6406 .143
7330 .117
8164 .163
6363 .139
3707 .138
4454 .100
6980 .090
2038 .060
.138
.116
.157
.114
.131
.090
.080
.059
1-HR VALS >
3RD MEAS
.131
.113
.152
.080
.121
.080
.070
.059
4
0
8
1
2
0
0
0
.125 NBR VALID
EST DAILY MAX
5.5
0.0
8.5
1.4
4.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
261
302
342
268
155
185
303
68
HISS DAYS
ASS < STD HE
10
12
3
2
5
3
8
2
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
00
-------
04/19/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PAGE 33
LEAD
JUG/M3I
MISSOURI
81-82
METHODS: JARRELL-ASH EMISSION SPECTRA icAP-90t EMISSION SPECT MUFFLE FURHACE-9i, ATOMIC ABSoRpTion-92t DITHIOZONE HETHOO-93
EMISSION SPECT (LOU TEMP ASHJ-95, X-RAY FLUORESCEI1CE-96, FLAMELES5 ATOMIC ABSOI7PTION-97
SITE ID
LOCATION
COUNTY
ADDRESS
REP METH QTRLY ARITH MEAN MEANS> MAX VALUES
YR ORG SOBS 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH 1.5 1ST 2M)
260030001G01 AFFTON
261040002G01 CLAYTON
ST LOUIS CO
ST LOUIS CO
LIN FERRY * L'BE 82
801 SOUTH BRENTM 82
15 92
16 92
.29
.51
.93 .57
1.70 1.05
V£>
-------
05/13/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SUSPENDED PARTICIPATE HATTER (UG/M3I ILLINOIS
PAGE
61-62
METHOD! GRAVIMETRIC, 24-HOUR HI-VOLUME FILTER SAMPLE-91
co
o
SITE ID
140160001F01
140160004F01
140320001F01
14G320001F01
1407Z0001F01
140720001F01
14150000ZF01
14150000ZF01
1415C0001F01
I4zizooioroi
142120010F01
14Z960007F01
142960007F01
14Z960008F01
14Z960009F01
142960009F01
142960010F01
142960010F01
14Z9S0011F01
14Z960011F01
142960014F02
l'»Z96001<»FOZ
142960015F01
142960015F01
14Z960016F01
l'tZ?60016F02
14C960019F01
144680007F01
144660007F01
147960001F03
147960001F03
146520007F01
146520007F01
LOCATION
ALTON
ALTON
BELLEVILLE
BELLEVILLE
CAIIOKIA
CAHOKIA
COLLIHSVILLE
COLLIH5VILLE
COLUtlBIA
EAST ST LOUIS
EAST ST LOUIS
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITT
GRANITE CITT
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
GRANITE CITY
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
HATERLOO
WATERLOO
HOOD RIVER
HOOD RIVER
COUNTY
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MONROE CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
MADISON CO
MADTSCM CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MONROE CO
MONROE CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
REP MAX 24-HR OBS> OBS>
ADDRESS YR ORG tOBS 1ST 2ND 260 150
103 E 3RD ST 81 001
103 E 3PD ST 82 001
101 SOUTH ILLINO 81 001
101 SOUTH ILLINO 82 001
BI-STATE PARKS A 81 001
BI-STATE PARKS A 82 001
115A M MAIN 81
115A H MAIN 82
208 SOUTH RAPP 81
RAPS SITE 81 001
RAPS SITE 82 001
23RD AND MADISON 81 001
23PD AMD MADISON 82 001
2301 E 23PD 61
2001 E 20TH ST 61
2001 E 20TH ST 82
15TH i MADISON 61
15TH * MADISON 62
ROOSEVELT t ROCK 81 001
ROOSEVELT t ROCK 82 001
NSM RAILROAD 61
Nf.H RAILROAD 82
JOHNSON AVE. 81
JOHNSON AVE. 82
23RO t NAMEOKI 82
23RD * NAMEOKI 61
20TH AND ADAMS 82
POAG ROAD 81
POAG ROAD 82
U.S. DEPT. OF AG 61
U.S. DEPT. OF AG 62
HATER TRT PLT 54 61 001
HATER TRT PLT 54 62 001
58
55
61
60
60
54
58
60
37
60
56
61
52
19
60
58
61
58
58
57
46
21
59
52
41
56
46
53
50
61
60
54
51
172
129
180
117
215
117
221
121
184
237
174
251
218
161
391
417
357
462
231
188
689
279
265
159
331
288
223
137
98
200
94
314
141
157
116
110
115
122
108
123
112
149
231
165
215
176
133
341
365
298
332
173
169
534
221
145
116
271
219
191
125
94
108
87
191
122
IS
7
3
6
4
1
1
e
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
10
5
12
6
1
46
23
26
20
1
7
11
3
1
3
ARIT 6EO
MEAN MEAN
60
63
69
56
70
53
70
55
63
113
92
116
67
64?
205
157
150
145
104
63
166
123?
61
64
104?
114
83?
62
46
60
46
69
61
73
58
66
52
65
49
66
50
58
105
64
108
77
79?
190
136
139
124
96
75
137
110?
76
60
90?
106
74?
58
41
M
42
80
M
«SO
1.6
1.9
1.4
1.5
1.9
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.*
1.4
1.5
l.T
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
oo
05/13/83
NATIONAL AEPOMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PAW
SULFUR DIOXIDE (UG/M3)
ILLINOIS
81-82
METHODS: HOURLY VALUES HEST-GAEKE coLORiMETRic-iit CONDUCTIMETRIC-IS, COULOMETRIC-M, FLAME PHOTOM€TRIC-I*»
HYDKOr.EN PEROXIDE NAOH TITRATION-10, CATALYST FLAHE PHOTOHETRIC-19, PULSED FLUORESCENT-20, SECOND DERIVATIVE SPKTWOSCOPT-M.
COHDUCTANCE ASARCO-22, ULTRA VIOLET STIMULATED FLUORESCEHCE-23,SEQUENTIAL COHDUCTIMETRIC-33,
24-HOUR GAS BUBBLERS PARAROSANILINE-SULFAMIC ACIO-91, PARAROSANILIKE SULFAMIC ACID TEMPERATURE CONTROLlCO-97
SITE ID
LOCATION
COUNTY
REP MAX 24-HR OBS> MAX 3-HH OBS> MAX 1-HR ABIT
ADDRESS YR OR6 HOBS 1ST 2ND 365 1ST 2ND 1300 1ST 2ND MEAN
140160006F01 ALTON
140160006F01 ALTON
140160006F01 ALTON
1407Z0001F01 CAHOKIA
140720001F01 CAHOKIA
142120010F01 EAST ST LOUIS
14212P010F01 EAST ST LOUIS
1429600I2F01 GRANITE CITY
142960012F01 GRANITE CITY
142960012H01 GRANITE CITY
1446P0007F01 MADISON CO
144680007F01 MADISON CO
148520007F01 HOOD RIVER
148520007F01 WOOD RIVER
148520007F01 HOOD RIVER
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
ST CLAIR CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
MADISON CO
2700 EDWARDS 01 001
2708 EDWARDS 61 001
2708 EDWARDS 82 001
BI-STATE PARKS A 81 001
BI-STATE PARKS A 82 001
RAPS SITE 81 001
RAPS SITE 82 001
2301 ADAMS ST 81
2301 ADAMS ST 82
GRANITE CITY APC 81 001
POAG ROAD 81 001
POAG ROAD 82 001
HATER TRT PLT 54 81 001
HATER TRT »LT 5* 81 001
HATER TRT PLT 54 82 001
8084
79
6802
7439
7094
8138
7733
83
7941
7137
8044
8258
1795
7979
7871
129
154
207
154
120
366
211
89
114
101
114
104
160
267
271
124
92
166
113
101
298
167
44
95
97
89
94
154
158
169
338
284
377
293
361
1 934
624
164
483
337
198
302
27?
548
822
329
276
355
206
202
903
596
103
351
206
193
232
871
505
657
459
590
673
558
786
1438
1438
191
584
561
369
508
529
749
1258
443
521
608
527
681
1247
1053
157
571
422
296
359
40*
681
1100
29
«3?
40
24
23
57
41
50?
29
33
23
24
40?
34
36
14
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
14
20
20
INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
05/13/83
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
u
CARBON MONOXIDE IMG/M3I
ILLINOIS
61-82
METHOD: NONDISPERSIVE INFRARED (NDIRI CONTINUOUS, HOURLY VALUES-II, FLAME IONIZATION-M
SITE ID
1AOU0007F01
1«01*0007F01
14ZK0010F01
142120010F01
142960P17F01
l MAX
1ST 2ND «0 1ST
12.1 12.
11.5 11.
15.1 1*.
16.7 12.
13.5 11.
22.9 18.
7.7
6.8
9.3
5.1
6.S
12.2
8-HR
2ND
7.S
6.3
7.5
S.O
6.5
9.*
OB3>
10
I
HETM
11
11
11
11
11
11
00
ro
-------
05/13/83 NATIONAL AEPOMETRIC DATA BANK M6f It
QUICK LOOK REPORT
NITROGEN DIOXIDE (UG/M3) ILLINOIS 81-82
METHODS: HOURLY VALUES COLORIMETRIC-LYSHKOW-II, COLORIMETRIC-GRIESS-SALTZMAN-IZ, couLOMrn»ic-i3t CHEMiLUMiNESCEtcE-i«t
24-HOUR GAS BUBBLERS NASN SODIUM ARSENITE ORIFICE-84, NASN SODIUM ARSENITE FRIT-94i TEA METHOD-95t T6S METHOO-96
REP MAX 1-HR MAX 2*-MR ARIT
SITE ID LOCATION COUNTY ADDRESS YR ORS fOBS 1ST 2ND 1ST 2ND MEAN
142120010F01 EAST ST LOUIS 3T CLAIR CO RAPS SITE 81 001 790 197 167 «1? 14
142120010F01 E»ST ST LOUIS ST CLAIR CO RAPS SITE 82 001 6871 207 179 *2 1*
102<»60017F01 GRANITE CITY MADISON CO 2001 EDISON 82 5253 165 158 47? 1*
00
OJ
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
-------
05/1S/BS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PAGE
OZONE (PARTS PER MILLION) ILLINOIS
80-62
METHODS! HOURLY VALUES CHEMILUMINESCENCE-11, ULTRA VIOLET DASIBI CORPORATION-14, CHEMILUMINESCENCE WHOOAM1NK B OYI-1S
00
SITE 10
140160006F01
140160006F01
140160006F01
1421Z0010F01
142120010FOI
I4?i?ooioroi
142960012F01
1429600KF01
1429&0012H01
14294001I-H01
14'«680007F01
1446B0007F01
1446B0007F01
144680008F01
14468000BF01
14 .125 NBR VALID
3RD MEAS EST DAILY MAX
.134 7 8.1
.115
.114
.132
.090
.108
.019
.089
.066
.094
.148
.106
.111
.135
.106
.099
.126
.094
.079
.140
.117
.105
1.3
1.1
5.8
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.4
0.0
0.0
6.6
0.0
0.0
3.2
1.4
0.0
6.4
1.0
0.0
312
273
321
307
258
338
4
279
102
316
311
269
338
272
258
311
331
24?
313
337
340
332
MISS DAYS
ASS < STD HI
6
10
14
a
16
11
0 .
10
4
16
7
6
13
»
10
8
11
7
10
6
13
10
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
-------
MISSOURI
STATE OF MISSOURI
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BAMK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAD/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PACK 9
APR 19, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
CO
tn
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
M*«**II*N *««*************««*
R6 ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
07 26 001 C 02101
«« CARBON MONOXIDE **
07 26 001 C 42401
«« SULFUR DIOXIDE «»*
07 26 001 C 42602
«» NITROGEN DIOXIDE *
07 26 001 C 44201
«*»««*« OZONE »«***»*
PRECISION DATA
«»»*»»»»»*»»*»*»***»»»»»»*»
II OF PRECIS PROB LIM
ANLYZRS CHECKS LO UP
ACCURACY DATA
81-1
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
62-3
82-5
81-1
81-3
81-4
81-5
62-1
82-2
62-3
62-5
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-1
81-3
61-4
81-5
62-1
82-2
62-3
82-5
002
002
002
001
002
006
006
006
006
008
007
008
008
002
002
003
003
003
003
004
007
005
005
005
006
006
006
0003
0003
0009
0006
0015
0030
0035
0033
0098
0030
0041
0051
0122
0005
0005
0009
0014
0021
0044
0016
0036
0022
0074
0023
0034
0039
0096
-16
-16
-14
-00
-07
-12
-15
-15
-14
-10
-56
-28
-31
-16
-16
-08
-19
-13
-13
-12
-09
-09
-10
-07
-07
-08
-07
+00
+ 00
+ 15
+ 03
+09
+08
+ 12
+ 19
+ 13
+ 19
+55
+ 20
+ 31
+03
+03
+ 08
+ 07
+18
+ 11
+ 08
+ 04
+ 11
+08
+ 14
+ 06
+ 09
+ 10
B
A
A
A
F
A
A
A
A
A
D
E
E
E
SOURCE TRACE » AUDITS
AUO GAS ABLTY Ll-3 L4
B
A
A
A
F
A
A
A
A
A
D
E
E
E
002
000
0002
001
002
001
0004
002
000
0002
001
004
001
0006
000
0000
001
002
001
0004
003
000
0003
002
001
002
0005
0000
0000
002
0002
0000
0000
0000
000
0000
0000
FROB
LIM
LO-L1-UP
-01
-01
-13
-13
-02
-02
-13
-13
-06
-06
-07
-07
-00
403
+02
+ 29
+29
+07
+07
+20
+20
+03
+03
+09
+09
+05
+05
+05
+07
+06
PROB
LIM
LO-L2-UP
+03
+03
-09
-09
-02
-02
-10
-10
-03
-03
-09
-09
-07
-05
-06
+19
+19
+06
+06
-00
+00
+03
+03
+02
+02
+08
+08
+06
+07
+07
PROB
LIM* PROB LIM
LO-L3-UP ' LO-L4-UP
+02
+02
-07
-07
-07
-07
-09
-09
-11
-11
-10
-10
-11
-03
-07
+08
+08
+08
+08
+04 -01 -01
+04 -01 -01
-01
-01
+06
+06
+08
+08
+07
+05
+06
3>
CO
ro
-n -o
o PO
•ya m
o
^* !—i
3 C/>
CO 1-1
1-1 O
3> O
i— i
73 f*
O
3 O
O C.
•Z. 70
t-. 1*
-\ O
o -<
•SSL CO
CD -I
1—4
O 3B
-------
MISSOURI NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK PAGE 10
STATE OF MISSOURI ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY APR 19. 1983
MANUAL METHODS SAROAD/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT NAZ73/NAPOOO
PRECISION DATA ACCURACY DATA
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY ••*«*»«**««**««*»»«**»«**KK«*«**««*»*«****V*****» «**««*«v***N***ii**«**«***««**«*««***«*««tt
««»»*««*»»««««*»«««»«»»«**» t OF COLLOC PROB LIM COLL SAMP VAL COLL f AUDITS PROB LIM PROB LIM PROB LIM
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q SAMPLRS SITES LO UP BELOW LIM DATA PRS LEV 1-3 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP LO-L3-UP
07 26 001 I 11101 81-2 18 2 -24 -01 0 2 007 -11 +08
»»»» PARTICUUTE *»«» 81-3 18 2 -19 +20 0 18 005 -03 +02
81-5 18 2 -22 +10 0 20 0012 -07 + 05
82-1 17 2 -10 +11 0 003 -04 +06
82-2 17 2 -12 +06 0 002 -06 +07
82-3 22 2 -19 + 25 0 004 -04 +01
82-5 19 2 -14 +14 0 0 0009 -05 +05
00
cr>
-------
MISSOURI
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAO/PRECISION-ACCUPACY REPORT
PAGE 11
APR 19, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«»«««***«**«*K««**K*««***4*
R6 ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
K*«********«***N**«*W*K*«tt*
» OF PRECIS PROB LIM
ANLYZRS CHECKS LO UP
ACCURACY DATA
SOURCE
AUD GAS
TRACE
ABLTY
f AUDITS
Ll-3 L4
PROB LIM
LO-L1-UP
PROB LIM
LO-L2-UP
PROB LW1 PROB LIM
LO-L3-UP LO-L4-UP
07 26 002 C 42101
»» CARBON MONOXIDE «*
CO
07 26 002 C
»» SULFUR DIOXIDE «»»
07 26 002 C 42602
*» NITROGEN DIOXIDE *
0? 26 002 C 44201
«**«*** OZONE •*«•*««
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
000
005
000
005
005
005
0054
0039
0032
0125
0032
0036
0035
0103
0038
0035
0030
0103
0032
0033
0032
0097
0041
0029
0031
0101
0032
0032
0031
0095
0039
0035
0000
0074
0000
0028
0033
0061
-06
-15
-09
-10
-21
-10
-12
-14
-51
-13
-11
-25
-17
-11
-07
-12
-15
-13
-07
-12
-19
-08
-06
-11
-16
-11
-14
-08
-10
-09
«08
+09
+ 04
+07
+13
+07
+ 12
+ 11
+85
+ 14
+ 08
+ 36
+07
+08
+ 06
+ 07
+18
+ 11
+10
+ 13
+ 23
+ 09
+ 11
+14
+ 12
+ 13
+13
409
+ 08
+09
A
A
A
A
A
F
A
A
E
E
000
000
0000
001
001
001
0003
001
000
0001
001
001
001
0003
0000
-00 -00 -00 +06
0000 +00 +00 +00 +06
0000
-07 +07 -14 +11
0000 -07 +07 -14 +11
-00 +03
+00 +03
-13 +05
-13 +05
000
0000 0000
001
001
000
0002 0000
000
0000 0000
000
002
001
0003 0000
-23 *14
-23 +14
-16 +03
-16 +03
-07 -07
-07 -07
+02 +08 +01 +06
+02 +08 +01 +06
+02 404
+02 404
-------
MISSOURI
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL AEPOMETR1C DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEf.'CY
SAROAD/PPECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PAGE 12
APR 19, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
****** «***«*<(**»***«*««****
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
«*V«**««»K*»**»********N ******* ******************
t OF COLLOC PROS LIM COLL SAMP VAL COLL
SAMPLRS SITES LO UP BELOW LIM DATA PRS
ACCURACY DATA
«*««««*«****««***««»****«««lf«*»»*IMI**M*M
• AUDITS FROB LIM PROS LIM •> PROS LIM
LEV 1-3 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP LO-L3-UP
07 26 002 I 11101
»»»« PARTICULATE *«»»
81-1
81-2
81-3
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
10
9
9
9
10
10
11
10
-11 «03
-31 +26
-08 +14
-17 +14
-44 +59
-15 +15
-38 +65
-32 +46
27
5
25
57
003
006
0009
002
002
003
0007
-10 406
-08 +09
-09 +08
-08 +10
-09 +01
-01 +03
-06 +05
00
CO
-------
MISSOURI
ST. LOUIS CITY
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL AEPOMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEKCY
SAROAD/PRECISION-ACCU3ACY REPORT
PAGE 13
APR 19, 1903
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«*«««*»*«**«KM»«*«««*««*»«»
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
«***»«»»**»»«*«**««»** *«*«***«*««** »»»»»»»*»»«)»»#
» OF COLLOC PPOB LIM COLL SAMP VAL COLL
SAMPLRS SITES LO UP BELOW LIM DATA PRS
ACCURACY DATA
«*********«««»««W*K**«V«**K«*»***V»*»ft«*«
« AUDITS PROB LIM PROS LIM PROB LIM
LEV 1-3 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP LO-L3-UP
07 ?6 003 I H101
»»«» PARTICULATE «*«*
81-2
81-3
81-*
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
9
10
10
10
11
11
2
2
2
2
2
2
-3*
-38
-36
-26
-30
-28
+31
+ 22
+ 27
+ 29
+06
+ 18
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
26
003
000
0003
003
003
007
0013
-17 +27
-17 »27
-07 +06
-06 +09
-09 +06
-07 +07
00
-------
MISSOURI
ST. LOUIS CITY
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«•*»** *«««»*»««**«IMHt»«IHI*«
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-<»
07 26 003 C 42101
»« CARBON MONOXIDE ««
07 26 003 C 42401
»» SULFUR DIOXIDE «**
07 26 003 C 42602
«» NITROGEN DIOXIDE »
07 26 003 C 44201
****«»* OZONE ««**«**
82-1
82-2
8Z-3
82-4
82-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-4
82-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-4
82-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-4
82-5
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAD/PRECI5ION-ACCURACY REPORT
P R E C I
MMMMMMMMtf
• OF
ANLYZRS
002
003
003
004
004
004
002
002
002
003
003
003
S I 0 N
MMMWMMMMI
PRECIS
CHECKS
0009
0026
0035
0015
0029
0044
0013
0009
0022
0019
0015
0034
D A
JMMMMMI
PROB
LO
-37
-43
-40
-26
-17
-22
-55
-42
-49
-31
-28
-30
T A
FMMM
LIM
UP
428
426
427
424
428
426
456
423
440
417
427
422
ACCURACY
MMMMM MMM MM MMMMM/ "*"******""*"***"* •••••••••••••••••••••••••••i
SOURCE TRACE
AUD GAS ABLTY
C
A
A
A
A
F
A
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
w w w w w w ww w w w »
• AUDITS
Ll-3 L4
001
002
002
002
0007 0000
001
002
002
001
0006 0000
001
000
002
001
0004 0000
000
001
005
001
0007 0000
rwwwww*
PROB
rwwwwv
LIM
LO-L1-UP
-44
-18
-26
-29
-23
402
-11
-28
-28
-15
-15
412
415
408
412
-09
408
-01
432
432
408
408
0 A
JMMMMMI
PROB
T A
1MMMMJI
tWwWil
LIM
LO-L2-UP
-21
-08
-09
-13
-15
403
-06
-12
-12
-14
-14
401
403
408
404
401
4Q0
405
411
411
402
402
IMtjMMJM
FVtIVWHWf
PROB
PA6E 13
JUL 27, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
IMMMMMMMMHMMBMB
LIM PROB LIM
LO-L3-OP LO-L4-UP
-13
-04
-08
-08
-09
404
-03
-06
-06
-16
-16
-00
-03
410
402
402
412
407
411
411
404
404
-------
MISSOURI
ST. LOUIS CITY
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL AERONETRIC D.ATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAD/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PACE 14
JUL 27, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«««*«*»**»«* »»«**ft**ll ««**«»
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
««**»«*«»*«««ff*M«W*«ll*«**«»Vlt*«**ltM**««««ll*«*«*«»
t OF COLLOC PROB LIM COLL SAMP VAL COLL
SAMPLRS SITES LO UP BELOW LIM DATA PRS
ACCURACY DATA
VM*««**»*«««**W«*MM»»M******»*NW«**«»«*««
« AUDITS PROB LIM PROB LIM PJ?OB LIM
LEV 1-3 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP L$-L3-UP
07 26 003 I 11101
«**» PARTICULATC »»«*
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-4
82-5
83-1
83-5
t
10
10
10
11
9
10
z
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
-34
-38
-36
-26
-30
-04
-20
401
401
*31
422
+27
429
+06
«14
«16
*11
411
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
26
49
003
000
0003
003
003
007
002
0015
003
0003
-17 427
-17 427
-07 406
-06 409
-09 406
-44 421
-17 411
-05 403
-05 403
-------
vo
ro
MISSOURI
KANSAS CITY
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
**« *«****««« ***** <•»»<•»*«»»»
R6 ST RO TTP POLL YR-Q
07 26 004 C 42101
«» CARBON MONOXIDE ««
07 26 004 C 42401
»» SULFUR DIOXIDE «»»
07 26 004 C 42602
«« NITROGEN DIOXIDE *
07 26 004 C 44201
**««««* OZONE ««**«*»
81-1
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-1
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-1
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
62-2
82-3
82-5
81-1
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SAROAO/PRECISIOM-ACCUPACY
P R E C I
* or
ANLYZRS
002
002
002
002
002
002
003
003
003
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
002
S I 0 N
i innm* ** m
PRECIS
CHECKS
0007
0008
0010
0009
0034
0009
0015
0018
0042
0004
0011
0012
0027
0011
0015
0011
0037
0002
0007
0007
0006
0022
0013
0008
0015
0036
0009
0010
0012
0011
0042
0012
0017
0015
0044
DATA
m n 4f it ttv jtiMt
PROB LIM
LO UP
-00 -00
-15 +16
-14 +13
-10 +07
-10 +09
-10 +12
-02 +16
-08 +12
-07 +13
-00 -00
-26 +20
-25 +30
-17 +17
-28 +28
-18 +19
-22 +23
-23 +23
-06 +06
-74 +71
-13 +19
-30 +39
-31 +34
-36 +46
-22 +23
-26 +27
-28 +32
-03 +01
-18 +21
-03 +10
-10 +16
-09 +12
-05 +17
-10 +16
-09 +13
-08 +15
BANK
AGENCY
REPORT
ACCURACY DATA
ff#4f If Wtf 4Mf Kltlllf wwwwn www ** «*»**«* »»»»• ww «*»»«»•» w www wwww
SOURCE TRACE * AUDITS PROB LIM PROB LIM
AUO GAS ABLTY Ll-3 L4 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
000
000
0000 0000
001
002 -15 -02 -07 -05
001
0004 0000 -15 -02 -07 -05
000
000
0000 0000
001
002 -15 -07 -15 -00
001
0004 0000 -15 -07 -15 +00
000
000
0000 0000
001
002 -45 +02 -51 +18
001
0004 0000 -45 +02 -51 +18
000
000
0000 0000
001
002 -07 +07 -05 +04
001
0004 0000 -07 +07 -05 +04
PAGE 14
APR 19, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
F WWKVHV1IWK WVVUWtt
PROB Llh PROB LIM
LO-L3-UP' LO-L4-UP
-03 -01
-03 -01
-12 +04
-12 +04
-33 +12
-33 +12
-06 -01
-06 -01
-------
MISSOURI
KAH5AS CITY
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIPOtlMENTAL PPOTECTION AGENCY
SAROAD/PRECISIOU-ACCURACY REPORT
PA6C I*
APR 19, 1981
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«*«»«*»*»««»*««WK*««VNK*K«»
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-q
PRECISION DATA
*«***«* V«V***K«W**N»**
-------
MISSOURI
SPPIHGFIEID
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
EHVIPOHMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAO/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PAGE 16
APR 19. 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PPECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«V*»***«*«*«**«*«*V«*K**W«*
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
«»»»»»»*«»«»***»***«***v*«*
* OF PRECIS PROB LIM
ANLYZRS CHECKS LO UP
ACCURACY DATA
SOURCE
AUD GAS
TRACE
ABLTY
» AUDITS
Ll-3 L4
PROB LIM
LO-L1-UP
PROB LIM
LO-L2-UP
PROB LIM
LO-L3-UP
PROB LIM
LO-L4-UP
07 26 005 C 42401
»» SULFUR DIOXIDE *»»
07 26 005 C 44201
«»«»««* OZONE *«*«***
ei-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-5
81-2
81-4
81-5
82-3
82-5
001
001
002
001
001
001
001
000
000
000
001
001
0007
0012
0019
0012
0007
0019
0000
0000
0008
0008
-21
-21
-21
-07
-47
-27
-20
-20
•»04
+12
+ 08
+41
+ 17
+29
+32
+ 32
C
F
001
001
000
0002 0000
001
002
000
0003 0000
000
000
0000 0000
000
0000 0000
-14 +22 -17 +10 -18 +12
-14 +22 -17 +10 -18 +12
v£>
.£»
-------
MISSOURI
SPRINGFIELD
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL ACROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAD/PRECISIOII-ACCU2ACY REPORT
PA6E 17
APR 19. 1963
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«*«*«*
-------
MISSOURI
SPRINGFIELD
MANUAL METHODS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAO/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PACE 19
JUL 87, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
•***»**««««***«*«**««»**««•
R6 ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
***»*»**«««*«»*«*«******»****»«**«**»**»*******«*
* Of COLLOC PROB LIM COLL SAMP VAL COLL
SAMPLRS SITES LO UP BELOW LIM DATA PRS
ACCURACY DATA
«tt»»*»*«««***««*»***M*»**«**«IHHHMMHHMMHM»
• AUDITS PROB LIM PROB LIM PROB LIM
LEV 1-3 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP \LO-L3-UP
07 26 DOS X 11101
***« PARTICULATE *«»»
81-2
61-3
81--V
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-*
82-5
83-1
83-5
9
10
9
10
11
11
9
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
+05
+01
+ 03
-08
-08
-02
-06
-06
-01
-01
+10
+ 11
+11
+01
+ 03
+04
+04
+03
+ 08
+08
0
2
2
0
0
0
2
2
1
1
28
30
58
003
000
0003
002
003
000
007
0012
003
0003
-03 +10
-03 +10
-03 -00
-04 +03
-06 +03
-04 +02
-09 +05
-09 +05
vo
cr\
-------
MISSOURI
SPRINGFIELD
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAROAO/PRECISION-ACCURACY REPORT
PAGE 18
JUL 17, 1983
NA273/NAPOOO
PRECISION-ACCURACY DATA KEY
«*«*»•««*« M*»«««MIHt«*»*«IHMI
RG ST RO TYP POLL YR-Q
PRECISION DATA
ACCURACY DATA
» OF PRECIS
ANLYZRS CHECKS
PROB LIM SOURCE TRACE » AUDITS PROB LIM PROB LIM PROB LIM\ PROB LIM
LO UP AUO GAS ABLTY Ll-3 L4 LO-L1-UP LO-L2-UP LO-L3-UP '. LO-L4-UP
07 26 005 C 42401
»» SULFUR DIOXIDE *»*
07 26 005 C 44201
**««««» OZONE *******
81-2
81-3
81-4
81-5
82-1
82-2
82-3
82-4
82-5
81-2
81-4
81-5
001
001
002
001
001
001
001
001
000
000
000
0007
0012
0019
0012
0007
0007
0026
0000
0000
-21
-21
-21
-07
-47
-29
-28
+04
+12
+08
*41
+17
+09
+22
C
F
F
A
A
001
001
000
0002 0000
001
002
000
001
0004 0000
000
000
0000 0000
-14 +22 -17 +10 -18 +12
-14 +22 -17 +10 -18 +12
-------
§•1.376
HUM Mtowvri.
TtHo 40—Protection of Environment CHoptor I—f nvironmontol Protection Afoncy
511-37*
TSP
DMgnittdvw
» low ACCfl (OTtfr
SI low* («, *r** Mtwotng MM (tout I into* Don t*
"•»»»»W •*•*. north to DMT I-Z70 md south to tfxwt 1
IM* iMyond lh» aty krntl)
"••"•no. ol In* City ol SI louM
"•rrwnrjw ol AOCH
""*«« CHy AOCH (094)
Stti« in* MM Dong 55rr, 51 to 1,435 »,„ (^^ to ^JQ
•Ml «B M«%od no. north to 1-35. •OuHu>»K to l-».
""*'"••' *» '-«3». «nd KXitnvMt to 1h» •!•!• In*)
OoMnot
rn0vl
P'jr'yy
•teno*nM
X
X
Dow not
m**t
wcondvy
•MnrJird*
X
x
X
Cwnotb*
cU»«it»d
M*r*Hn
Ptrton>l
•UndVtM
X
DMignjMm*:
SI Lou* AQCR (070):
Er*r» VM
Km»M City AOCW (OM):
.Mrdunn County
Cl*y County
PIMM County
flwnmMr ol AOCR
Northern AOCR (137)
P»* County .
Rt** County
««m«(nd« ol SIM*
DOM not
IRMt
JKX?«
X
X
X
X
Cwnttt*
Ltlll«l<«
b*t1*rlhni
nctonri
•ujnrJtnJI
I
1
1
1
I
CO
DMgntf
Mmoun Ht0hwcy ?v 1 . wn
Highocy 7. north to US
M^jt wily *¥Vt, iluiwl to 1
Mifjoun l*»uti»»»> 9. touff
Atjtfj County
SouthMMMm AOCfl (I3W Tcmni
n«mjjndoi g| AOCH
Soutfrwtrittjm AQCn (139|
MM
t Bndg* R4 *n4 HSth SI to
n north to 1-70. *•*! to Mruoun
HigrMrty 24 «rMt to Mmourt
*naun Highmy IS?. ••*! to
to US Highway FF. *nrj du*
•njt^ S1 nortfi, rang* t *f**f).
•«p » north, rang* 14 MM *nrj
M (N** ItadnrJ)
Don not
mMt
pnrrujry
•ujnrJwrj*
X
Oo**nol
m**t
•Undwd*
X
X
CO
J»
3>
t—t
3
D*iigo»tod tnt
\
SI Low* AOCM (070):
Ttw *r«* •ncorrfMMMt hy 1 770 •nd t» MMMppI Mm .
Northern AOCfl (137):
Pifcv) County • •• « •••• • • — •«• •
RtRt County
DOM not
££L
X
(/I
C*»w«HI>« -1
"tisjir c
o
m
»— 4
» 2
« z
K -I
K >-- rt
0
z
oo
'EPA »»»gn««on
M«oun—SO,
pmgimiil tn*
Mortem AOCH (137)
P** County
Hunainil* of AQCfl
n*rmivtm ol Stoto
OoMnot
m**t
pnmvy
•UndvrM
DOM not
iMcondvy
•undvd*
Carmotb*
ClMHlfwd
BvtMf tntn
wlnnil
•UrKtardl
II
1
«
t
DVMQnflMO WA
Nontwm AOCR (137)
Pike County ..
Rafts County
RwnoWKfor of AOCR
OoMnol
mwl
pmvy
MvirJvDi
Cvnolb*
cUMHMor
o<(twi' *Mn
MkOMl
•tantwdi
X
X
X
X
(43 PR 8964. Mar. 3. 1978. M amended at 45 PR 22931. Apr. 4. 1980:15 PR 27761. Apr. 94,
1980; 4.5 PR 62821. Sept. 22. 1980: 46 PR 899. Jan. 5. 1981; 46 FR 40008. AUf. 6. 1981]
-------
APPENDIX B
Statistical Evaluation of Trends
The trend evaluation procedure used in the air quality evaluation is based
on the Sen non-parametric statistic. The procedure was recommended by
Vector Research, Incorporated, in a study performed under contract
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It was selected over
other candidate methods as the method which gives the highest probability
of detecting real trends. Essential advantages of the method Include
the following:
L. It takes the seasonality of data into account.
2. It deals with autocorrelation effects in data collected at frequent
Intervals e.g., hourly. (Autocorrelation is the tendency for data measured
at nearby times to be more similar than data measured at more distant
times).
3. It does not assume that the data are normally distributed.
4. It identifies continuing trends, even if there is some oscillation
around the trend line.
The latest draft report of the study, "Methods for Classifying Changes
in Environmental Conditions" [VRI-EPA 7.4-FR80-l(R)] describes in more
detail the other candidate methods and the advantages of the Sen statistical
test.
A step-by-step summary of the trend evaluation procedure is given in the
following paragraphs, which were adapted from the above report.
1. Compute one data value for each month of each year. For high-frequency
data series in which autocorrelation may be present (e.g., continuous
monitor data), a monthly average will correct for that autocorrelation.
Alternatively, if trends in high pollutant concentrations at a site are
of greater interest, the 90th percentile concentration for each month
is used. (The 90th percentile concentration produces a more stable
statistical estimate than would the maximum concentration.)
2. Compute the seasonal average of the data for each calendar month,
(i.e., compute the average of all January values, the average of all
February values, etc.). Subtract the appropriate seasonal average from
the value for each month to obtain seasonally adjusted data.
3. Rank the seasonally adjusted data. Replace each adjusted datum
with its rank. (This step makes the procedure non-parametric. It
eliminates the requirement for different statistical methods for different
series of data with different distributional laws governing their
random behavior. It also limits the potential error-producing effects
of outliers.)
4. Compute the Sen test statistic, S, from the formula
y
12 T2 «vT / Y + 1
S - /Y T I
""C" /D _ D \£ \g
z_ vnvt K.t> y
t«i y
99
-------
where
Y « number of years
y « the Index of the year (the index of first year is 1, of the second
year, 2, etc.)
T « number of periods per year (12)
t « the index of the month (the index for January is 1, for February 2, etc.)
Ryt * the rank of the seasonally adjusted value for month t of year y
R.t * the mean rank for month t over all the years
RY% « the mean rank over all months for year y
The significance of the individual parts of that formula is described as follows.
a) For each year, R« is computed by averaging the ranks of the
seasonally adjusted data'for that year. This will be large if the data
in that year are higher than that in other years, small if the data are
smaller. Thus, an increasing trend in this mean rank indicates an
increasing trend in the data through the years. Likewise, a decreasing
trend in the mean ranks indicates a decreasing trend in the data.
b) The term
represents the covariance between the mean rank for a year and the index
of that year. When large annual mean ranks (Ry - (TY + l)/2 positive)
occur in late years (y-(Y+l)/2 positive) or small annual mean ranks
(Ry. - (TY + l)/2 negative) occur in early years (y-(Y+l)/2 negative) a
positive product will result. Thus, an accumulation of positive products,
and therefore, a large positive result, is associated with a positive
trend. Similarly, an accumulation of negative products, and a large
negative result, is associated with a negative trend.
c) The first term of the equation is a scale factor which normalizes
the covariance calculated above. It is a data-based estimate of the
expected standard deviation of the covariance statistic if there were
no trend. The scaling adjusts the covariance statistic so that it may
be compared with tabulated percentile values of the normal probability
distribution, rather than requiring the generation of special tables
uniquely applicable to this statistic.
5. If the statistic exceeds (in either direction) the appropriate
percentile values of the tabulated normal probability distribution, a
statistically significant trend is present. If it does not exceed those
values, no statistically significant trend is present.
100
-------
Specifically, 1f the Sen statistic exceeds ± 1.645 (the 90th percentile
values of the normal distribution for a two-tailed test), we conclude
that the data show a trend. If the statistic does not exceed those
limits, but does exceed +1.28 (the 80th percentile values), we conclude
that the data show a provable trend. Otherwise, we conclude that no sta-
tistically significant trend is shown by the data.
The following example illustrates the above process. While the trend
calculations are usually performed by a computer, and include five years
of data, the example shows how the calculations can be done manually.
The example uses only three years of data, so that the calculation can
be more easily followed.
Monthly geometric mean TSP data provide the starting point for the
calculation. The monthly values and the seasonal averages are:
Year
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun
1 102
2 136
3 70
Monthly
(Seasonal)
Average 102.67
126
107
67
100.0
142
144
84
123.33
150
68
125
114.33
92
80
112
94.67
112
100
83
98.33
Year
Jul Aug Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1 124
2 90
3 95
Monthly
(Seasonal)
Average 103.0
122
104
105
110.33
126
125
107
119.33
117
125
101
114.33
93
102
68
87.67
136
63
98
99.0
The seasonally adjusted data are obtained by subtracting the appropriate
seasonal average from each monthly value.
Year
Jan
Feb Mar Apr May Jun
1 -.67
2 33.33
3 -32.67
26
7
-33.0
18.67
20.67
-39.33
35.67
-46.33
10.67
-2.67
-14.67
17.33
13.67
1.67
-15.33
101
-------
Year
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 21.0
2 -13.0
3 -8.0
11.67
-6.33
-5.33
6.67
5.67
-12.33
2.67
10.67
-13.33
5.33
14.33
-19.67
37.0
-36.0
-1.0
The seasonally adjusted data are ranked from lowest to highest and
replaced by the ranks Ryt, as shown in the next table. Ties are handled
by assigning the same average rank to each of the tied values. (Ranks
24 and 25 are tied, so both months are ranked as 24.5). The mean rank
for each season (R.t) and tne msan rank for each year (Ry.) are also
shown.
Year
Jan Feb
Mar
Apr May
Jun
1 17 33
2 34 23
3 54
R.t 18.67 20
30
31
2
21
35
1
24.5
20.17
15 27
8 18
29 7
17.33 17.33
Year Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Rv_
1 32
2 10
3 12
R.t 18
26
13
14
17.67
22
21
11
18
19 20 36 26.0
24.5 28 3 17.875
9 6 16 11.625
17.5 18 18.33
The individual terms (Ryt-R t)2 in tne summation of the scale factor are
listed in the followi notable. The summation over all three years
for each individual month, is shown in the last line of the table.
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
1 2.8
2 235.1
3 186.8
yt-*.t)2 «»•'
169
9
256
434
81
100
361
542
219.9
367.5
18.7
606.1
5.4
87.0
136.2
228.7
93.5
0.4
106.7
200.6
Year Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 196
2 64
3 36
v-".t)2 296
69.4
21.8
13.5
104.7
16
9
49
74
2.25
49.
72.25
123.5
4
100
144
248
312.2
235.0
5.4
552.6
102
-------
Summing across the last line of the table, we have
12 3
Z Z (R^-R t)z « 3834.9
t«l y«l
Substituting into the formula for the Sen statistic, we have
(17.875 -37,
+ (3 - 4 ) (11.65 - 17 )
.1938 [ - 7.50 + 0 -6.85 ] = -2.78
Since the test statistic is below the range ± 1.645 (the 90th percentile
values of the normal distribution), we conclude (with greater than 90%
confidence) that the data show a decreasing trend.
103
-------
APPENDIX C
Population Exposure Estimates
As Section XIII of this report described, previous estimates of population
exposure to elevated concentrations have focused on county-level populations
in areas where all or portions of a county had been designated as not
meeting the NAAQS's for specific pollutants. Those approximations tend to
overestimate, and sometimes greatly so, the population exposure. In
order to refine those estimates, populations within the designated
non-attainment areas were desired. Systems Applications, Inc. (SAI), of
San Rafael, California has written the software necessary to compute
population estimates within any arbitrary closed polygon at any location
in the United States. The procedure used is based in part on the high
resolution population gridding program used in the SHEAR model for
estimating population exposure to air pollutants (Anderson and Lundberg,
1983). Robert G. Ireson was the SAI project manager for the current
study. Funding for the project came through EPA Headquarters. Tim Matzke
(Environmental Results Branch, OMSE) provided the necessary coordination.
The assistance of both of those individuals is gratefully acknowledged.
This Appendix gives a general description of the software, and provides
copies of the program outputs, including population density maps.
Since those maps show approximate population densities by square kilometer,
they may be useful as a reference for other analyses, in addition to
the population exposure estimates. The abbreviations "PNA," "SNA," and
"Unclass" in the map titles stand for "Primary Non-Attainment Area,"
"Secondary Non-Attainment Area," and "Unclassified Area," respectively.
The starting point for the population estimation is a set of points
which define a closed polygon (the non-attainment area). These points
were initially obtained by digitizing the outline of each non-attainment
area from appropriate maps. Those points were used both in constructing
the non-attainment area boundaries shown in the body of the report,
and as input to the population estimation software.
The SAI software checks each polygon to verify closure, and selects a
cell size which is appropriate to the size of the non-attainment area
of interest. Map scale is also adjusted according to the size of the
area Comparison of the Kansas City 63 map (2 km x 2 km cells) with the
St. Joseph TSP map (1 km x 1 km cells) illustrates both effects. Maps are
plotted with Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate axes, and include
a border extending four cell widths beyond the boundary of the area of
interest.
The program searches the population data file, which contains the locations
of the centroids of all census block groups and enumeration districts
(BG/ED's), and the population of each BG/ED. It assigns each centroid
to the appropriate cell in the final grid, and distributes the population
for each BG/ED according to the density of centroids and the size of
the cells. It then calculates the population density for each cell.
Individual cells are classified as being inside the polygon, outside
104
-------
the polygon, or divided by the polygon. The population within the
polygon is estimated by adding up the populations of all cells in the
polygon. For cells divided by the polygon, the relative areas inside
and outside are used to estimate the population inside.
The population extraction and gridding program produces a listing, by
county, of the number and total population of the BG/ED's extracted for
the grid. For completeness, those listings are also included. Where
the geographical density of the BG/ED's centroids is low, the populations
may be spread over a large number of cells, especially near the edges
of the final grid. In those cases, (which appear on the map as large
areas with uniform low density), population density estimates may be
shifted into or out of the polygon. If the total population is small,
that effect may significantly change the estimate for population within
the polygon.
Because of the approximations discussed above, the population estimates
in the text were rounded to the nearest 1000. Where total population
was low, and the non-attainment area boundary coincides with the city
limits, the city population from census tables was used, rather than
the estimate from the computer-produced population density map.
Reference
Anderson, Gerald E., and Lundberg, Gary W. 1983. User's Manual for SHEAR.
A Computer Code for Modeling Human Exposure and Risk from Multiple Hazardous
Air Pollutants in Selected Regions. Report SYSAPP-83/124, Systems Applica-
tions, Inc., San Rafael, California.
105
-------
CD
cn
344
4356 -
354
364
374
384
4346 -
4336 -
CP
c.
4326 -
4316 -
4306 -
429
1 t i i i i i t r I i i i 1 i li t I i t * sB t i i i Lilirttri itilittitiir
- 4356
- 4346
- 4336
- 4326
- 4316
- 4306
344
354
364 374
Easting (km)
384
4296
Kansas City CO Unclass
Population Density Map for Polygon 3
>2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km*)
Enclosed Population is 672.000
-------
717
727
737
747
4298
4298
4288
1^4278
4268
425
737
747
4258
Easting (km)
St. Louis CO PNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 44
>2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 1.199.91--
i ^00,0 oo
-------
o
oo
274
4380 -
4360 -
4340
t-
o
4320 -
4300 -
4280
294
314
334
354
374
394
414
- 4380
4360
y 4340
- 4320
- 4300
294
314
334 354
Easting (km)
374
394
414
4280
>2000
1000-2000
''ill 500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is-
Kansas Cltv and Lawrence PNA's
Population Density Map for Polygon 47
-------
632
4318 -
652
672
692
712
732
752
772
792
O
vo
» jBpt"|Jrmpmir ^
i ix i liiiii i I i r I I i i i l i rVj 1 r
419
652
672
692
712 732
Easting (km)
752
772
792
4318
- 4298
4278
4258
- 4238
- 4218
4198
>2000
1000-2000
HI 500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is
St. Louis 03 PNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 48
-------
743
- 4294
426
733
743
Easting (km)
4284
4274
4264
St. Louis TSP PNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 49
>2000
1000-2000
i 500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km*)
Enclosed Population is 122.000
LD
LO
-------
729
739
749
4294 -
4284
01
c
(_
o
4274
426
- 4294
4284
4274
739
Easting (km)
749
4264
St. Louis TSP SNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 50
>2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
"25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 525.000
-------
263
273
4058
c
c
4048
403E
4058
4048
273
Easting (km)
4038
New Madrid TSP SNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 51
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 2.260
-------
332
342
352
4411 -
439
532
342
Easting (km)
- 4411
- 4401
352
4391
St. Joseph TSP SNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 52
>2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km')
Enclosed Population is 74.200
tr-
io
-------
335
345
4405 -
en
c
o
z
439
335
345
4405
4395
>2000
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density fpeople/km2)
Enclosed Population is 16.100
Easting (km)
St. Joseph TSP PNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 53
-------
584
594
en
c
(_
o
4339
432<
4339
594
Easting (km)
Mexico TSP Unclass
Population Density Map for Polygon 54
4329
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 9.890
cc
L1
-------
350
360
370
380
390
4342 -
I I 1 1 I t I I 1 111 t 1
*:- • l :• • i- :• -i: :• ;r • -t • -i - • i- • r • i- r i i • i I t • i i i i it
4342
- 4332
* 4322
- 4312
430
550
360
370
Easting tkm)
380
390
4302
Kansas City, MO. TSP SNA
Population Density Map for Polygon 69
>2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 683,000
cr
-------
353
363
373
1 lu i!i'v>'"> " mi i ii • iiiWti ]
__ !**!l I .!Wt'"l !2000
1000-2000
500-1000
200-500
100-200
50-100
25-50
<25
Density (people/km2)
Enclosed Population is 334.000
LO
-------
99 BO/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
REGION -
REGION ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 344OOO.
NORTHING - 4296OOO.
ZONE - 13
REGION 3IZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST - 49OOO.
NORTH-SOUTH - 63OOO.
63786 EXTRACTED
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
91 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX,
3141 COUNTIES,
232367 BG/CD'5. —
1OOO BO/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE.
249 BO/ED-8 MITH
227 BG/ED-S WITH
14 BC/ED-S WITH
178 8C/CD-S WITH
813 BG/ED-S WITH
92 BO/ED-S WITH
TOTAL POPULATION OF
TOTAL POPULATION OF
TOTAL POPULATION OF
TOTAL POPULATION OF
TOTAL POPULATION OF
TOTAL POPULATION OF
224O63 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 2OO91
1673O3 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 2O2O9
17439 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29O37
122331 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29O47
614482 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29O93
33312 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29163
oo
132* BO/TO*-«»«tTM-ft TOTAL POPULATION OF 1179930 EXTRACTED
._RE
-------
1939 BC/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
REGION - *T
GIN
1599603 EXTRACTED
REGION ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTINO - 274OOO.
NORTHING - 4280000
ZONE - 13
REGION SIZE (METERS)
.EA5T-HEST j;
NORTH-SOUTH -
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
1O6OOO.
81 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX,
\
12
3141
232367
1000
26
31
3
2
20
293
49
3
3
3
241
8
3
38
190
12
830
4
6
.. . .69
16
COUNTIES.
BG/ED'S.
BC/ED'8
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
PER PACE IN POPFILE.
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
BC/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION
BC/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BG/ED-S
WITH
WITH
WITH
A
A
A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
16124
6679O
2886
559
14479
256977
37106
2950
1753
4688
176666
3288
1285
32506
137056
7483
624447
2316
2834
42332
9488
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
20OO3
2OO4S
2OO39
2OO83
20O87
2OO91
201O3
2O121
20139
20177
2O2O9
29O21
29O23
29O37
29O47
29O49
29095
29101
29107
29163
29177
1874 BQ/ED.~£ WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF 1464013 EXTRACTED
-------
REGION -
REGION ORIGIN 17
w> 24
12
85
' ^^ 7
1164
11
— 14
13
' 662
STATES FOUND ON POPULAT ION-FILE
COUNTIES.
BG/ED'S.
BG/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE.
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BC/ED-S
BO/ED-S
BG/ED-S
BG/ED-S
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
A
A
A
A
A
A.
A
A
A
A
A
A.
A
A
A
A
A
A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL POPULATION
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
WITH A TOTAL
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
_FJ3P.ULA.IJ.QN_
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
.POPULATION.
POPULATION
INDEX.
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
4022
2035
12685
8724
16441
245587
18831
1O99
1241
33962
279238
2924
15349
67343
6903
129259
15788
4712
127495
5985
981534
10777
13032
10756
5O6463
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
_EXJBACIED_
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
JLXIRAC1&D.
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
EXTRACTED
.EXTRACTED.
EXTRACTED
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
_FROH
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
17OO3
17013
17027
17O83
17117
17119
17133
17133
17143
17137
17163
171B9
FROM COUNTY 29O53
FROM COUNTY 29O71
FROM COUNTY 29073
FROM COUNTY 29O99
FROM COUNTY 29113
FROM COUNTY 29139
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
.F.ROM
FROM
COUNTY 29183
COUNTY 29187
COUNTY 291B9
COUNTY 29193
COUNTY 29219
COUNTY 29221
COUNTY
2951O
3102 BG|WD-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
.BEfilflN__- *4°\ _
REGION ORfcIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 733OOO
2522185 EXTRACTED
-------
PAGE
IB
NORTHING -
ZONE -
4264OOO.
REGION SI2E (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
17OOO.
31000.
! O
i O
31 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX,
3141 COUNTIES.
232367 BG/ED'S,
1OOO BO/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE.
33 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
.... 8B BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
371 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
662 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
34738 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 17119
71640 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 17163
281108 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29189
506463 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29310
S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF 893949 EXTRACTED
1174
REGION -
REGION ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 7290OO.
NORTHING - 4264QOO.
ZONE -
REGION SIZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
15
22000.
3600O.
31 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX,
3141 COUNTIES.
232367 BG/ED'S.
100O BQ/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE,
\
64 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
103 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
766 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
662 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
49740 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 17119
83365 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 17163
625331 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29189
5O6463 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29310
1597 BG/EJJ-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF 1267299 EXTRACTED
REGION - *J\
REGION ORIG/N (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 263000.
NORTHING -
ZONE -
REGION SIZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
4038OOO.
16
19OOO.
2BOOO
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
-------
JND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX.
3141 COUNTIES.
232967 BC/ED'S.
1000 BC/ED'S PER PACE IN POPFILE.
13 BC/ED^S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
8554 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29143
13 BC/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
REGION - £ ~l^
REGION ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 335000.
8534 EXTRACTED
o
o
o
0
NORTHING -
ZONE -
REGION SIZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
POPULATION YEAR - 197B
31 STATES FOUND ON
3141 COUNTIES.
232567 BG/ED'S.
4391OOO.
15
220OO.
2300O.
POPULATION-FILE INDEX.
ro
r\j
1OOO BG/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE.
3BO/ED-SWITHI A TOTAL POPULATION OF
2 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
137 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
2650 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 2OO43
1210 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29O03
B1904 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29O21
142 BC/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
REGION - CJ "^ _
REGION ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 335000,
85764 EXTRACTED
\
NORTHING -
ZONE -
REGION SIZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
439500O.
15
13OOO.
14000.
POPULATION YEAR - 197B
51 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX.
3141 COUNTIES,
22256Z_BQ/EEL'_SJ
1000 BG/ED'S PER PAGE IN POPFILE.
2 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
130 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
15O6 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 2OO43
78551 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29021
ne/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF
80057 EXTRACTED
-------
PAGE. 2O
•""» REGION -
REG1DN ORIGIN (UTM COORDINATES/METERS)
EASTING - 5B400O.
^ NORTHINO - 4329000.
ZONE - 15
REGION SIZE (METERS)
•"> EAST-WEST - 19OOO.
NQRTH-SQUTH - 19QQQ.
POPULATION YEAR - 1978
51 STATES FOUND ON POPULATION-FILE INDEX,
3141 COUNTIES.
232567 BG/ED'S,
O lOQO BG/ED'S PER PACE XN POPFILE. . _ .......
£ ! ._ 22 BG/ED-S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF 15486 EXTRACTED FROM COUNTY 29007
00 ~>
22 BG/ED^S WITH A TOTAL POPULATION OF 15486 EXTRACTED
-------
I O
j
O
O
REGION -
REGION OR'
NORTHING -
ZONE -
REGION SIZE (METERS)
EAST-WEST -
NORTH-SOUTH -
-------
APPENDIX D
NADB Data Completeness Criteria
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL AIR
DATA BRANCH
VOLUME III.
AEROS SUMMARY AND
RETRIEVAL MANUAL
SECTION Report Capabilities
CHAPTER Air Quality Data
(SAROAD)
SUBJECT
SECTION
2
CHAPTER
3
SUBJECT
0
DATE PAGE
8/10/81 5
Update I I I- 5
3. Geometric Mean = Antilog (i Inx)
n
4. Geometric Standard Deviation
SDGEQ = Antilog (SDlftn) = antilog
\
2 2
z(lnx) -(llnx)
n
n-T
The air quality data criteria are as follows;
1. Minimum summary criteria for continuous sampling (sampling
interval less than 24 hours) are:
a. Data representing quarterly periods must reflect a minimum
of 75 percent of the total number of possible observations
for the applicable quarter.
b. Data representing annual periods must reflect a minimum
of 75 percent of the total number of possible observations
for the applicable year.
2. Minimum summary criteria for noncontinuous sampling
(sampling interval of 24 hours or more) are:
a. Data representing quarterly periods must reflect a
minimum of five observations made during the applic-
able quarter. If no measurements were made during 1
month of the quarter, each of the two remaining months
must have no fewer than two observations reported.
b. Data representing annual periods must reflect 4 quarters
of observational data satisfying the individual quarterly
criteria.
125
-------
Population Density (People/mi2)
ro
CTl
->7000
-1000-7000
- 200-600
- 50-200
r<50
-------
Population Density (People/mi2)
->7000
-1000-2000
- 200-600
- 50-200
-<50
-------
-------
TABLE 2
LEGEND FOR AMBIENT MONITORING DATA MAPS
Boundaries
I I
Primary Nonattainment Area
Secondary Nonattainment Area
Unclassified Area
Monitor Symbol Colors and Flag
f No Violation of Standard
<** Violation of Secondary
Standard
r
Violation of Primary
Standard
Exceedance of Alert Level
Annotation for Standards Violated
A Annual Primary Standard
Q Quarterly Primary Standard
24 24-hour Primary Standard
°4 24-hour Secondary Standard
* 8-hour Primary Standard
11 3-hour Secondary Standard
i 1-hour Primary Standard
Monitor Symbol Sizes
Microscale
c . Middle Scale
0
Neighborhood
Scale
Urban Scale
Regional
Scale
Annotation for Trends
t Increasing Trend
A Probable Increasing Trend
— No Trend
V Probable Decreasing Trend
! Decreasing Trend
(Where two trend symbols are
shown, the first is for long-term
averages, the second for 24-hour
observations.)
Data Completeness
fl" Data met completeness
criteria each year.
0 Data did not meet complete-
ness criteria one or more
years.
-------
------- |