JULY 1980
Regional
Air Pollution
Study
EMSC7010.92FR

-------
                                                                                      600R80117
                    EMSC7010.92FR
JULY 1980
                                    REGIONAL AIR  POLLUTION STUDY
                                                (RAPS)

                                        '   FINAL  REPORT

                                        CONTRACT  68-02-2093
                                          Prepared for the

                                  Environmental  Protection Agency
                          Research  Triangle Park, North Carolina   27711
                                                  by

                                            R. T.  Jorgen
                                                 and

                                          J. A. Strothmann
                                      Rockwell International

                                      Environmental Monitoring & Services Center
                                      Environmental & Energy Systems Division
                                           11640 Administration Drive
                                            Creve Coeur, MO 63141
                                              (314) 567-6722
FORM 742-A-5A NEW 9-78

-------
                                  PREFACE

     The Regional Air Pollution Study (RAPS)  was structured as  an orderly
progression of events.  The primary steps consisted of the field measurement
program, the data management effort, and model  development and  evaluation.
The field measurement program consisted of both continuous measurements  from
a 25 station telemetering network and a meteorological  sounding network  for
upper air measurements.   In addition specialized field measurements  and
related projects were accomplished under a series of task orders and other
mechanisms.
     This document is the final report for EPA Contract 68-02-2093 which
covers the RAPS field measurement program, specifically, the Regional  Air
Monitoring System (RAMS), the Upper Air Sounding Network (UASN), and the
task orders issued in support of the field measurement program.  In  order
to provide continuity through the RAPS program, initial  performances under
the EPA predecessor contracts, 68-02-1080 and 68-02-1081, are also described.

-------
                                 CONTENTS

Preface                                                                 iii
Figures                                                                  xi
Tables                                                                  xii

Section 1.  Regional Air Monitoring System                                1
     1.0  Introduction                                                    1
     2.0  History                                                         7
          2.1  Contractual Responsibilities                               7
               2.1.1  Rockwell International                              7
               2.1.2  Xonics, Incorporated                                7
               2.1.3  Meteorology Research, Incorporated (MRI)            7
               2.1.4  McDonnell  Douglas Electronics Corporation (MDEC)    8
          2.2  Instrument Selection and Testing                           9
               2.2.1  Performance Procedure, Typical                      9
                      2.2.1.1  Initial Tests                              9
                      2.2.1.2  Analyzer Performance Tests                16
                      2.2.1.3  Verification Tests on Performance
                               Specifications                            19
               2.2.2  Performance Test Results, Typical                  20
          2.3  First Article Configuration Inspection                    20
          2.4  Network Installation                                      25
          2.5  Systems Acceptance Test                                   25
          2.6  Engineering Changes                                       28
               2.6.1  Remote Station Hardware                            28
                      2.6.1.1  Beckman 6800 Chromatograph                28
                      2.6.1.2  MSA Catalytic Oxidizer                    28
                                                                 (continued)

-------
                       CONTENTS (continued)
                 2.6.1.3  Zero Air System                           30
                 2.6.1.4  Calibration Panel                          30
                 2.6.1.5  Monitor Labs 8440  NO/NOX Analyzer         30
                 2.6.1.6  EG&G Model  880 Dew Point Sensor           31
                 2.6.1.7  Laboratory Data Control  H2 Generators     31
                 2.6.1.8  MRI Translator                            31
                 2.6.1.9  Nephelometer                              31
          2.6.2  Remote Station Software                            31
                 2.6.2.1  Carbon Monoxide Analyzer                  31
                 2.6.2.2  Barometric Pressure                       32
                 2.6.2.3  Ozone                                     32
                 2.6.2.4  Carbon Monoxide Analyzer                  32
                 2.6.2.5  Pyrheliometer                             32
                 2.6.2.6  Dew Point                                 32
                 2.6.2.7  Wind Speed                                33
                 2.6.2.8  Turbulence                                33
     2.7  Deinstallation                                            33
3.0  Operations                                                     36
     3.1  Central Computer Facility                                 36
     3.2  Field Operations                                          38
4.0  Maintenance                                                    41
     4.1  Typical Instrument Failures                               41
          4.1.1  Beckman Model 6800 Air Quality Chromatograph       41
                 4.1.1.1  Slider Valves                             41
                 4.1.1.2  Catalytic Converter Assembly              41
                 4.1.1.3  Analytical  Columns                        42
          4.1.2  Tracer Model 270 HA Sulfur  Analyzer                42
                 4.1.2.1  Rotary Valves                             42
                 4.1.2.2  Linearizer Circuits                       42
                 4.1.2.3  Column Heater                             42
          4.1.3  Meloy Model SA-185 S02 Analyzer                    42
                                                             (continued)
                                vi

-------
                           CONTENTS  (continued)
               4.1.4  Monitor Labs 8440  NO/NOX Analyzer                  43
                      4.1.4.1   Sample  Capillaries                        43
                      4.1.4.2  Ozone Generator                           43
                      4.1.4.3  Chopper Mechanism                         43
                      4.1.4.4  NOp Converter Assembly                    43
               4.1.5  Monitor Labs 8410  Ozone Analyzers                  43
               4.1.6  Haake Water Bath                                  44
               4.1.7  Dry Air System                                    44
               4.1.8  Vacuum System                                      44
               4.1.9  H2 Generators                                      44
               4.1.10 Wind Direction                                    45
               4.1.11 Wind Speed                                        45
          4.2  Routine Preventive Maintenance                           45
          4.3  Multipoint Calibrations                                  49
     5.0  Quality Assurance                                             51
          5.1  Multipoint Calibrations                                  51
               5.1.1  Index                                             51
               5.1.2  File Description                                  51
          5.2  Audit Activity                                           52
               5.2.1  Summary                                           52
               5.2.2  File Description                                  52
               5.2.3  Independent Audits                                52
Appendices
     A.  Multipoint Calibration Procedures and  Data Forms                63
     B.  Multipoint Calibration Index                                    82
     C.  Quality Assurance Audit Activity                               113

Section 2.  Upper Air Sounding Network                                  175
     1.0  Introduction                                                  175
     2.0  Work Performed                                                177
                                                                  (continued)
                                    vii

-------
                           CONTENTS  (continued)
          2.1   Sites  and Preparation                                   177
          2.2   Station Operational Periods                              177
          2.3   Personnel Acquisition and Training                       185
          2.4   Materials and Equipment                                 189
          2.5   Maintenance and Repair of GFE  Equipment                  189
          2.6   Data Collection                                         196
          2.7   Quality Control                                         198
          2.8   Miscellaneous                                           205
     3.0  Performance                                                  213
     4.0  Problems                                                     216
     5.0  Recommendations                                              218
     6.0  References                                                    220

Section 3.  Summary of RAPS Task Orders                                 221
     1.0  Introduction                                                 221
     2.0  Program Management                                           222
     3.0  Regional Air Monitoring System (RAMS)                         223
          3.1   Evaluation of RAMS Measurements                          223
          3.2   RAMS Station Relocation                                 224
     4.0  Upper Air Sounding Network (UASN)                             225
          4.1   UASN Operation                                          225
     5.0  Aerial Monitoring System                                     227
     6.0  Pollutant Transport and Dispersion  Studies                   228
          6.1   Boundary Layer Structure  and  Energetics  Study           228
          6.2   Subsurface Heat Flux  Study                              229
          6.3   Boundary Layer Tracer Study                              230
              v                                                  (continued)
                                    vi i i

-------
                       CONTENTS  (continued)
 7.0  Pollutant Transformation and Removal Studies                   231
      7.1   Plume Mapping Program (MISTT)                             231
      7.2   Power Plant Plume Mapping                                 232
      7.3   Plume Tracer Study                                       232
      7.4   Hydrocarbon Characterization                              233
      7.5   Aerosol  Source Characterization                           234
      7.6   Particulate Measurement and Analysis                      235
      7.7   High Volume Filter Sampling Network                       236
      7.8   LBL Dichotomous Sampling Network                          237
      7.9   Aerosol  Source Documentation                              237
 8.0  Pollutant Measurement Program                                 239
      8.1   Pollutant Variability                                    239
      8.2   Audits and Cross Calibrations                             240
 9.0  Pollutant Effects Study                                       241
10.0  Related Investigations                                        242
      10.1   Flight Impact on Stratospheric Aerosols                  242
      10.2   Catalyst Sulfate Study                                  242
      10.3   Visibility Model Development                             243
      10.4   Aerosol Effects on Visual  Range                          243
      10.5   CAMP Station Operation                                  244
      10.6   DA VINCI Manned Balloon Flight                           245
      10.7   Participation in the Sulfate  Regional  Experiment        245
            (SURE)
11.0  Emission Inventories                                          246
      11.1   Emission Inventory Methodologies                         246
                                                             (continued)
                                ix

-------
                            CONTENTS (continued)
           11.2  Individual  Emission Inventories                         247
           11.3  Data Handling and Verification                         251
     12.0  Data Management                                              254
           12.1  RAPS Data Bank                                         254
           12.2  RAPS Central  Computer Facility                         255

Appendix
    A.  Listing of RAPS Task Orders                                     256

-------
                                 FIGURES
Section 1.   Regional  Air Monitoring System
Number
   1

   2
   3
   4
   5
Location of the Regional  Air Monitoring  System
(RAMS) Stations
RAMS Station (Site 103)
Oscilloscope Trace of Meloy Measuring  Zero  Gas
RAMS Shutdown Procedure
Routine Preventive Maintenance Checklist
Page

   2
   3
  24
  35
  46
Section 2.  Upper Air Sounding Network
Number
   1
   2
   3
   4
   5
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
                                                            Page
Location of Upper Air Sounding Network Sites                  178
UASN Site 141                                                179
UASN Site 142                                                180
UASN Site 143                                                181
UASN Site 144                                                182
UASN Periods of Operation                                    187
Pre-baseline Control Box Schematic                           206
Portable Pibal Timer (20/30 sec.  timer)                      206
Aspirated Psychrometer                                       207
Simultaneous 403 MHz and 160 MHz Radiosonde Temperature
and Relative Humidity Profiles                               209

-------
                                  TABLES
Section 1
Number
   1
   2
   3
   5
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
  11
  12
  13
  14
Regional Air Monitoring System
                                                            Page
RAMS Remote Stations Instrument Distribution                    5
Performance Characteristics of RAMS Gaseous Analyzers          10
Performance Characteristics of RAMS Meteorological
Instrumentation                                               13
Performance Characteristics of RAMS Suspended Particulate
Samplers                                                      15
Meloy Labs Sulfur Gas Analyzer Acceptance Test Results         21
FACI System Performance Summary                               25
RAMS Station Operational Periods                              26
Systems Acceptance Test                                       29
RAMS Station Deinstallation and Disposition Schedule          34
Data Summary - RAMS Stations                                  54
RAPS Helicopters                                              56
St. Louis City and County Stations                            57
Illinois Stations                                             58
Miscellaneous Audits                                          59
Section 2.  Upper Air Sounding Network
Number                                                                  Page
   1        Site Location and Site Specific Information                  183
   2        UASN Station Operational  Periods                             186
   3        Site Deactivation Dates                                      188
   4        Variable Schedule of Radiosonde Release Times                 188
   5        UASN Station Equipment                                       190
   6        Routine Tests and/or Calibrations of Station Equipment
            and Instrumentation                                          195
                                                                  (continued)
                                     xn

-------
                            TABLES (continued)
Number                                                                  Page
   7        Final Quality Control  Work Checklist                         199
   8        Pibal and Radiosonde Data Processed by UASN Quality Control   203
   9        Missing Wind Data Due  to Radome Installation                 211
  10        Upper Air Sounding Network Performance Summary               214
  11        Upper Air Sounding Network Cumulative Performance Summary    215
                                   xi i i

-------
                                SECTION 1
                      REGIONAL AIR MONITORING SYSTEM
1.0  INTRODUCTION
     One of the primary*objectives of RAPS was to create a comprehensive,
accurate and readily retrievable data base for all  criteria pollutants  and
selected non-criteria pollutants for use in developing and evaluating air
quality simulation models.  As a major part of the RAPS field measurement
program, the Regional Air Monitoring System (RAMS)  was designed to provide
continuous surface based aerometric measurements for this data base.   RAMS
consisted of twenty-five remotely operated, automated stations controlled  and
polled via telemetry by a central data acquisition system.  The locations  of
these stations, shown in Figure 1, were arranged in concentric circles  with
average radii from the central urban station of 5,  11, 20, and 44 kilometers.
Station elevations were fairly uniform averaging 154 +_ 23 meters above  mean
sea level.  The stations were clustered at the center of the network  as the
criterion for site locations required minimum spacing where the concentrations
and gradients were highest.  The four rural sites spaced at approximately  90°
azimuth were situated so as to provide background measurements regardless  of
wind direction.
     Each RAMS station (see Figure 2) consisted of a shelter, tower,  fence,
sensors and support equipment.  The metal  shelter was 4.88 m wide x 3.25 m
deep and 2.74 m high.  Towers were provided at each station to serve  as
meteorological equipment stands.  Erected on the northern side of the station
plot, seventeen stations had 30 m towers while the other eight had 10 m towers.
Every station was surrounded by a 2 m high chain link fence topped with 3
strands of barbwire.
     There were three major categories of instrumentation within each RAMS
station:  gaseous pollutant analyzers, meteorological sensors and suspended
particulate samplers.  The distribution of these instruments is shown in
                                      1

-------
FIGURE 1.   LOCATION OF THE REGIONAL AIR MONITORING SYSTEM (RAMS)  STATIONS

-------
FIGURE 2.   RAMS STATION (SITE 103)



                 3

-------
Table 1.
     The RAMS station was equipped with four gaseous pollutant analyzers  to
measure ozone, nitrogen oxides, sulfur gases and carbon compounds.   All pumps
were removed from the gas analyzers prior to installation in the system
thereby eliminating their characteristic noise and failure problems.   Replac-
ing these pumps, a common vacuum pump and compressor-dryer assembly were
installed in each station.  The single stage oilless compressor supplied
pressurized air to the heatless dryer equipped with two identical  desiccant
chambers packed with molecular sieve and charcoal.  Each chamber acted as a
desiccant and pollutant adsorber.  In addition to drying the air,  ozone,
sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide and oxides of nitrogen were
removed.  The chambers alternated with one being regenerated while the other
dried the air.  A continuous stream of ultrapure air was thus provided the
analyzers.  Ambient air entered the station through an inverted glass funnel
attached to a 76.2 mm I.D. glass tube.  The intake funnel and tube were
covered with a perforated metal shield for protection.  The tube was con-
nected to a horizontal glass manifold of the same diameter inside the station.
Each analyzer was then able to sample air from this manifold via Teflon
tubing.  The two gas bag samplers also sampled from this common manifold. A
Teflon filter, 6.3 mm mesh, was placed over the bottom of the intake funnel
with glass traps at each end of the manifold.  Ambient air was transported
through the manifold by a blower (100 CFM nominal) located at the downstream
end where the air was exhausted outside the shelter.
     A calibration system for the gaseous analyzers provided a zero and up-
scale concentration of various gases.  Two mass flow meters were used to
measure the diluent and calibration mixture.  Zero air supplied by the
compressor-dryer assembly was additionally purified by passage through a
catalytic oxidizer for removal of carbon monoxide and was used as the
diluent and for determining instrumental zero.  The calibration gases were
then mixed in a chamber and delivered to an open ended manifold which allowed
the instrument to sample calibration gas on demand with excess gas vented.
The calibration system allowed accurate dilution of calibration sources in
ratios up to 1500 to 1 although a nominal value of 500 to 1 was used during
the execution of automatic calibration.  The calibration system could be

-------
                            TABLE  1.   RAMS  REMOTE  STATIONS  INSTRUMENT DISTRIBUTION

03 - Monitor Labs 8410
NO-NOX Moni
tor Labs 8440
CO-CH4 - THC Beckman 6800
TS-S02-H2S Tracer 270HA
TS - Meloy SA 185
Visibility
Wind Speed
- MRI 1561
- MRI 1022S
Wind Direction - MRI 1022D
Temperature
Dew Point -
- MRI 840-1
Cambridge 880
Temp. Gradient - MRI 840-2
Barometer -
Solar
Radiation
(Eppley)
Turbulence -
Gas Bags -
Sostman 363
Pyranometer
Pyrheliometer
Pyrgeometer
-R.M. Young 27002
Xonics
Hi-Vol, Sierra 305
LBL Dichotomous Sampler
10 Meter Tower
30 Meter Tower
o

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X



X
00
o

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X





X



X
CO
c

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X

X
X
X

X
s

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X



X



X
LT>
o

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X
X
X

X
«£>
c:

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X





X
X
X

X
l~^
c

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X



X
CO
o

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X


X



X
X
X
X

0*>
c:

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X



X
X



X
c


X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X






X


X

r-


X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X



X
CVJ


X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X
X

X
CO


X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X



X
*d-


X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X

X


X

tn


X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X






X
X
X
X



-------
controlled automatically by computer or operated manually.
     An exhaust manifold provided the exit from the gas  sample manifold  as
well as the exhaust provisions for the outputs from the  hydrogen generators
and chromatographs.  The calibration exhaust manifold provided the exit  from
the calibration manifold as well  as the exhaust provisions  for the outputs
from the hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide permeation  tubes  and the  ozone
generator.  Exhaust calibration gases were scrubbed with an in-line acid gas
filter prior to venting.  Other contaminants including ozone generated within
the oxides of nitrogen analyzer and ethylene support gas for the ozone
analyzer were removed by reaction with charcoal  and catalytic  oxidation
respectively.
     Most of the meteorological instrumentation was mounted on the station
tower.  The only exceptions to this were the solar radiation equipment,  the
dew point sensor and the barometric pressure sensor.   The solar radiation
instruments were mounted on their respective stands atop the shelter.  The
dew point sensor was mounted within the station and sampled from a specially
designed inverted funnel which was mounted on the side of the  shelter  approx-
imately 1.8 m above the ground.  The barometric pressure sensor was also
mounted on the station at approximately 1.8 m above ground  level.
     The high volume suspended particulate samplers were mounted on the
station roof while the nephelometer and dichotomous sampler were located
inside the shelter.  The nephelometer and dichotomous sampler  utilized a
specially designed aluminum intake manifold.  The intake was designed  to
insure the entry of particles from the air stream for delivery to the
analyzer and had a conical cover to simulate the particle size censoring of
the standard hi-vol.
     The following is the final report for the Regional  Air Monitoring
System network which includes the selection and testing  of the equipment and
analyzers used, summaries of the routine operation and maintenance activities,
and quality assurance activities and indices.

-------
2.0  HISTORY

2.1  CONTRACTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1.1  Rockwell International
     Rockwell International, as the prime contractor, had overall  responsi-
bility for the Regional Air Monitoring System.   Several  subcontracts  were let
by Rockwell for specific tasks.  Rockwell, in addition to its supervisory
activities, acquired and prepared the 25 RAMS sites and space for  the RAPS
operations center.  Rockwell designed, procured and installed the  RAMS
central computer facility.  The data acquisition system used in each  of the
25 stations was a Rockwell product developed for RAMS.  The First  Article
Configuration Inspection (FACI) and System Acceptance Test (SAT) were con-
ducted by Rockwell with support from the subcontractors.  Rockwell  also
provided the documentation and technical reports required by the contract.

2.1.2  Xonics, Incorporated
     Xonics, Inc. was given the responsibility of designing, fabricating and
testing the Regional Air Monitoring Stations.  This responsibility included
the exhaustive pre-installation testing of the gaseous instruments.  Xonics
provided support to Rockwell during the SAT and after its completion  operated
and maintained the network for six months.                                 :

2.1.3  Meteorology Research, Incorporated (MRI)
     Meteorology Research, Inc. supplied, installed, calibrated and main-
tained the meteorological instrumentation in the stations.  The instruments
provided measured wind speed, wind direction, turbulence, temperature, dew
point, barometric pressure and light scattering coefficient (nephelometer).
MRI assisted in the acquisition and lease of a weather facsimile receiver
(NAFAX) and FAA Class A weather teletype service.  MRI also provided  a data
display board upon which current weather and climatological data were posted.

-------
2.1.4  McDonnell Douglas Electronics Corporation (MDEC)
     McDonnell Douglas designed, provided and tested the data communications
system which provided two-way communication from the 25 RAMS stations to the
central computer facility.  McDonnell Douglas also supported the operation
and maintenance of the central computer facility by providing five computer
operators for the first year of operation.

-------
2.2  INSTRUMENT SELECTION AND TESTING
     It was the objective of the RAMS network  to provide  a  comprehensive,
continuous and accurate data base of aerometric measurements.   The  design
goal of the system was to obtain at least 90%  valid data  capture.   Conse-
quently to minimize instrument problems and meet the design goal  and  objec-
tives of the system, emphasis was placed in instrument selection  and  testing
prior to operation.
     Most of the instruments used in RAMS were specified  prior to contract
award.   These instruments were all state-of-the-art in nature  and were
selected on the basis of certain other desirable performance characteristics
which were essential to the program.  The Tracer sulfur chromatograph,  for
example, was considered essential for the resolution of total  sulfur  species
at a number of the sites.  Rockwell prepared specifications for the instru-
ments which listed the performance standards and detailed the  interface and
                           ^
support requirements for each instrument to be integrated into the  system.
These specifications then served as the conditions for acceptance and pro-
vided the criteria for the performance test conducted by  the supplier and
the acceptance test conducted by Rockwell.
     Summaries of the manufacturers' stated performance specifications  for
the instrumentation used in RAMS are shown in  Tables 2, 3,  and 4.
     After the supplier had conducted a performance test  on each  instrument,
Rockwell conducted a redundant quality assurance acceptance test  to verify
performance specifications prior to shipping it to Xonics Inc. for  instal-
lation in the RAMS stations.  The following is an example of the  procedures
and results Obtained in the test of a single Meloy SA185  Total Sulfur
analyzer.  The example is typical of the intensive examination and  testing
that each instrument underwent prior to use.

2.2.1  Performance Procedure, Typical

2.2.1.1  Initial Tests
     A.  Range Selection
         Determine if range selection can be activated and provides
         required signal.
                                      9

-------
      TABLE 2.  PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF RAMS GASEOUS ANALYZERS
OZONE
     Range

     Noise (most sensitive range)
     Lower Detection Limit
     Zero Drift

     Span Drift

     Minimum Precision
     Operational Period
     Lag Time
     Rise Time
     Fall Time
     Minimum Linearity
0 to 0.2 ppm
0 to 1.0 ppm
0.002 ppm max.
0.005 ppm max.
+. 1% max/24 hours
+_ 3% max/week
+ 2% max/24 hours
+_ 3% max/3 days
+ 2% full scale
7 days min.
15 sec. max.
30 sec. max.
30 sec. max.
+ 1%
OXIDES OF NITROGEN
     Ranges from zero
     Noise
     Lower Detection Limit
     Lag Time
     Rise Time

     Minimum Linearity
     Fall Time

     Zero Drift

     Span Drift

     Precision
     Operational  Period
     (unattended)
0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 5.0 ppm full scale
0.002 ppm on most sensitive range
0.005 ppm
15 seconds
30 seconds,-except for NO mode which is
15 seconds
+ 1%
30 seconds, except for NO mode which is
15 seconds
+ 2% in 24 hours
+ 2% in 3 days
+ 2% in 24 hours
+. 2% in 3 days
+ 2%
7 or more days
                                                                 (continued)
                                     10

-------
                             TABLE 2 (continued)
CARBON MONOXIDE. METHANE. TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
     Ranges

     Noise
     Lower Detection Limit
     Zero Drift

     Span Drift

     Minimum Precision
     Operating Period
     (unattended)
     Minimum Linearity
  Carbon Monoxide
0-10 ppm
0-50 ppm
0-100 ppm
0.2 ppm max.
0.2 ppm max.
+. 2% max.
+_ 4% max.
+_ 2% max.
+ 3% max.
at 24 hrs.
at 168 hrs,
at 24 hrs.
at 168 hrs,
+ 2%
168 hrs. minimum

+ 1% full scale
     Methane and
  Total Hydrocarbons
0-10 ppm
0-25 ppm

0.05 ppm max.
0.05 ppm max
+ 2% max. at 24 hrs.
+_ 3% max. at 168 hrs,
i 2% max. at 24 hrs.
+_ 3% max. at 168 hrs.
+ 2%
168 hrs. minimum

+ 1% full scale
HYDROGEN SULFIDE, SULFUR DIOXIDE. TOTAL SULFUR
                         Hydrogen Sulfide  Sulfur Dioxide    Total  Sulfur
Ranges
Noise
Lower Detection Limit
Zero Drift
Span Drift
Precision
Operational Period
Minimum Linearity
0-0.1 ppm
0-1.0 ppm
0.002 ppm max.
0.005 ppm max.
+_ 2% max/ 24 hrs.
+_ 3% max/week
+ 2% max/ 24 hrs.
+. 2% max/week
+ 2%
7 days min.
+ 1%
0-0.2 ppm
0-1 .0 ppm
0.002 ppm max.
0.005 ppm max.
+, 2% max/ 24 hrs.
+_ 3% max/week
+ 2% max/24 hrs.
+ 2% max/week
+ 2%
7 days min.
+ 1%
0-0.2 ppm
0-1 .0 ppm
0.002 ppm max.
O.QH5 ppm max.
+_ 2% max/ 24 hrs.
+_ 3% max/week
+_ 2% max/24 hrs.
.+_ 2% max/week
+_ 2%
7 days min.
+ 1%
                                                                 (continued)
                                     11

-------
                             TABLE 2 (continued)
TOTAL SULFUR
     Range
     Noise (most sensitive range)
     Lower Detection Limit
     Zero Drift

     Span Drift

     Minimum Precision
     Operational Period
     Lag Time
     Rise Time to 90%
     Fall Time to 90%
     Minimum Linearity
0 to 0.2 ppm
0 to 1.0 ppm
0.002 ppm max.
0.005 ppm max.
+ 2% max/24 hrs.
+ 3% max/3 days
+. 2% max/24 hrs.
+. 3% max/3 days
+ 2% full scale
7 days min.
15 sec. max.
30 sec. max.
30 sec. max.
+ 1% full scale
GAS SAMPLER
     Flow Rate
     Bag Capacity
0-1200 cc/min regulated
100 liter
                                     12

-------
TABLE 3.  PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF RAMS METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTATION
WIND SPEED
     Range
     Starting Threshold
     Response Distance
     Flow Coefficient
     Accuracy
0.22 to 22.35 meters/sec.
0.22 meters/sec.
1.5 meters (63% recovery)
1.92 meters/revolution
+ 0.067 meters/sec.
WIND DIRECTION
     Starting Threshold
     Delay Distance
     Damping Ratio

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
     Range
     Accuracy
     Effect on Radiation
     Lag Time
0.3 meters/sec.
1.1 meters
0.4 at 10° angle of attack
-20°C to 50°C
+ 0.05°C
< 0.05°C
75 seconds
VERTICAL TEMPERATURE GRADIENT
     Range
     Accuracy
+. 5°C differential
+ 0.1°C
DEW POINT
     Range
     Maximum Depression
     Accuracy
     Lag Time
-40°C to 50°C
45°C at 27°C ambient
+ 1°C
30 seconds (experimentally determined)
                                                                 (continued)
                                     13

-------
                             TABLE 3 (continued)
TURBULENCE
     Range
     Threshold
     Response
   0.22 meters/sec,  to  22  meters/sec.
   0.22 meters/sec.
   .1  revolution per  30  centimeters  of
   air movement
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
     Range
     Resolution
     Linearity
     Operating Temperature Range
     Temperature Coefficient
   71  to 81  centimeters  Hg
   0.2% of full  scale
   + 0.3% of full  scale
   -50°C to 68°C
   0.0014% full  scale/°C
SOLAR RADIATION
     Pyranometers

         #2
         #3
     Pyrgeometer
     Normal Incidence Spectral
     Pyrheliometer
Inner Hemisphere
   Quartz
   WG7
   WG7
   None

   Filter Number
         1
         2
         3
         4
         5
         6
         7
         8
         9
Outer Hemisphere
  Quartz
  Schott GG395
  Schott RG695
  KRS5

  Window
  Quartz
  GG395
  GG475
  OG530
  OG570
  RG630
  RG695
  RG780
  Blank
                                     14

-------
               TABLE 4.  PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF RAMS
                       SUSPENDED PARTICULATE SAMPLERS
NEPHELOMETER
     Scattering Coefficient
     Accuracy
0.1. to 10 x 10"4 m"1
+ 10% of scale
TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES

     Flow Range

     Voltage Output
     Filter Size
0.425 to 1.56 SCMM

0-5 VDC
20 x 25 cm
FRACTIONATED TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
     Particle Size Range
     Flow Rate
     Filter Loading
greater than 2 micrometers
less than 2 micrometers
total 50.0 1pm
fine 47.5 1pm
coarse 2.5 1pm
automatic
                                    15

-------
     B.   Flame-off Hydrogen Shut-off
         1.   With flame lit, turn off power and note hydrogen  flow.
         2.   With flame lit, cap off inlet air until  flame  goes  out  and
             note hydrogen flow.
         3.   If instrument has an automatic reignite circuit,  verify
             analyzer will automatically reignite after flame  out  due  to
             power failure.
             NOTE:  Analyzer passed tests if shut-off and reignite circuit
                    functions correctly.

2.2.1.2  Analyzer Performance Tests
     The following tests are to be performed under the following conditions
unless otherwise specified in a given test:
         1.   Ambient temperature, pressure and humidity.
         2.   Range setting of 0 - 1.0 ppm F.S.
         3.   Chart speed of 0.5 inches per hour.
         4.   Outside ambient air.
         5.   Recorder output 0 - 10 mv» linearized.
     A.   Operation Period Test
         1.   Set-up analyzer according to manual  procedure.
         2.   After final flow and electrical adjustments completed start
             recording output and indicate time and date.
         3.   Continue recording output for seven consecutive days.  Record
             all changes in input gases or chart speed and test  being
             performed.
         4.   Other tests may be performed during this period.  However no
             change in the gas flow rates or electrical alignments can be
             made.
     B.   Noise
         1.   Introduce zero air into the analyzer.
                                    16

-------
    2.  After baseline has stabilized switch range to 0 - 0.2 ppm F.S.
        Set record chart speed to 16 inches per hour.
    3.  After approximately 5 minutes record the peak to peak noise
        in terms of ppm sulfur.
        NOTE:  Analyzer'passed test if noise <_ 0.002 ppm
C.  Precision Test
    1.  Introduce zero air into the analyzer.
    2.  Allow baseline to stabilize and set recorder chart speed to
        1  inch per hour.
    3.  Introduce 0.85 +_ 0.05 ppm SOp to analyzer and mark chart
        indicating when gas introduced and concentration.
    4.  After output has stabilized, introduce zero air into the
        analyzer and mark chart indicating gas introduced.
    5.  Allow baseline to stabilize.
    (5.  Repeat steps 3 through 5 three more times.
    7.  Determine precision of analyzer by calculating the average of
        the four final span values and determine the variances in
        ppm of each spanvvalue from the average calculated.
        NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if the deviations from the
               average value are £+0.02 ppm.
D.  Response Time Test
    1.  Introduce zero air into the analyzer.
    2.  Allow baseline to stabilize and set recorder chart speed to
        2 inches per minute.
    3.  Introduce 0.85 +_ 0.05 ppm SOp to analyzer and mark chart
        indicating when gas introduced and concentration.
    4.  After 2 minutes set record chart speed to 2 inches per minute.
    5.  After output has stabilized, set record chart speed to
        2 inches per minute.

                                17

-------
    6.   Introduce zero air into the analyzer and mark chart indicating
        gas introduced.
    7.   After 2 minutes set recorder chart speed to 2 inches per hour.
    8.   Allow baseline to stabilize.
    9.   Determine lag time, i.e.  time from when span gas initially
        introduced to when the first response to the span gas is
        observable on the recorder.
        NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if lag time is _< 15 seconds.
   10.   Determine 90% rise time,  i.e., the time from when the recorder
        first responds to span gas to when the output reads 90% of
        the final stabilized output.
        NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if the 90% response time is <_
               30 seconds.
   11.   Determine 90% fall time,  i.e., the time when the first response
        to the zero gas is noticed to when the output reaches 90% of
        the final baseline.
        NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if the 90% fall time is <_ 30 seconds,
E.  Linearity Test
    1.   Introduce zero air into the analyzer and allow the baseline to
        stabilize.
    2.   Set recorder chart speed to 4 inches per hour.
    3.   Introduce 0.1 +. 0.05 ppm S02 span gas.  Record exact concen-
        tration of span gas and output after it has stabilized.
    4.   Repeat step 3 using the following span gases:  0.2, 0.4, 0.6,
        0.8 and +_ .05 ppm S02-
    5.   Determine the least squares line from the data points and
        determine the deviation of each point in ppm.
        NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if deviation from least squares
               line is <_ +_ 0.01 ppm.
                                18

-------
     F.   Zero and Span Drift Tests
         The following tests shall be performed once in  the morning  and  once
         in the afternoon for at least three consecutive days.   The  date and
         time of each test are to be recorded on the chart paper.
         1.  Set recorder chart speed to 2 inches per hour.
         2.  Introduce zero air into the analyzer.
         3.  After baseline has stabilized,  record  value.
         4.  Introduce 0.85 +_ 0.05 ppm SOp.   Record exact concentration  of
             span and output after it has been stabilized.
             NOTE:  Analyzer passed test if (1) the zero drift  was  less  than
                    or equal to +. 2% F-s- Per 24 hours and +_ 3% F.S.  per
                    3 days, and (2) the span drift  was less than or  equal
                    to +_ 2% F.S. per 24 hours and +_ 3% per 3 days.

2.2.1.3  Verification Tests on Performance Specifications
     The specifications for (1) lower detection limit, (2) linearizer per-
formance, and (3) constant hydrogen flow over temperature range of  10°C  to
40°C are considered design specifications which require only one time
verification.  The following tests were performed for verification:
     1.   Lower Detection
         Zero air was introduced to a SA 185-RAMS analyzer until the base-
         line stabilized.  With the range selector activated to the 0 to
         0.2 ppm full scale, 0.005 ppm sulfur dioxide was introduced.  This
         data indicates the signal to noise for the lower detection limit
         of 0.005 ppm is greater than 4 to 1.
     2.   Linearizer Performance
         Three linearizer boards were tested for accuracy and for temperature
         stability over range of 10°C to 40°C.  The results indicated an
         accuracy of better than 2% F.S. and an output variation of less than
         + 2% over 10°C to 40°C.
                                     19

-------
     3.   Hydrogen Flow
         The hydrogen flow was initially set at 125 ml/min (specified
         operating setting).   The hydrogen flow rate was measured by a
         mass flow meter after the analyzer had thermally equilibrated.
         The flow variation was well  within the alloted +_ 15 ml/min.

2.2.2  Performance Test Results, Typical
     The results of the supplier's test were then forwarded to Rockwell  to
be verified in the acceptance test.  An example of the performance test
results are shown in Table 5 and Figure 3.
     Instrument testing and evaluation did not stop after their installation
in the RAMS station.  Many tests were performed during the course of study
to determine the effects of carbon dioxide, relative humidity and other
variables on instrument response.  Most of these tests were performed under
the various RAPS Task Orders as supplemental contract activity.

2.3  FIRST ARTICLE CONFIGURATION INSPECTION
     The First Article Configuration Inspection (FACI) was a two phase in-
spection performed on the first RAMS remote monitoring station and the
central  computer facility.  During the first phase of the test a physical
inspection of the equipment was conducted, its documentation reviewed and
system components were activated and their functions demonstrated.  The
second phase was an operational test in which the remote station and the
central  computer facility functioned as an integrated system for seven
continuous days.
     The inspection was made by EPA staff specialists in concert with key
personnel of Rockwell and its subcontractors.  The inspection was held at
the RAPS Central Facility from February 4, 1974 to February 15, 1974.  Com-
munications between the EPA and Rockwell were exchanged via semi-formal
comment sheets which allowed deficiencies and discrepancies to be noted,
recorded for file, and to serve as documentation for required corrective
action.
                                     20

-------
      TABLE 5.  MELOY LABS SULFUR GAS ANALYZER ACCEPTANCE TEST RESULTS
              SERIAL # 3L 272
            Ho FLOW
                 EPA # 7434
           AIR
      50
FLOW  59
              ZERO DRIFT
              SPAN DRIFT
Date
1974
Apr. 22
Apr. 23
Apr. 24
Apr. 25

Time
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00

Output
Volts
0.214
0.213
0.206
0.114

Dev. from
ave.
0.027
0.026
0.019
0.073

Date
1974
Apr. 19
Apr. 20
Apr. 21
Apr. 22

Time
6:00
6:00
6:00
6:00

Output
Volts
4.870
4.778
4.820
4.818

Dev. from
ave.
0.048
0.044
0.002
0.004

AVERAGE 0.187 VOLTS AVERAGE 4.822 VOLTS
MAX DRIFT/DAY 0.092 VOLTS MAX DRIFT/DAY 0.092 VOLTS
MAX DEV./3 DAYS
(Acceptable
0.073 VOLTS MAX DEV./3 DAYS 0.048 VOLTS
: Max drift/day <. .2 volt & Max dev./3 days <:
.15 volts)
NOISE
LOWER DETECTION LIMIT
Time
Base
5 sec/ cm
2 msec/cm
Vertical
Sensitivity
10 mv/cm
10 mv/cm
Peak to Peak
Value (mv)
22
22



PPM
"zero"
5 ppb
Output
Volts
0.08
0.14
(Acceptable:  4 50 mv, each case)
PRECISION
(Acceptable:  diff. of the above to be
 at least twice the noise level)
          REPRODUCIBLE TO     0.4     % (Acceptable:  ^ 2%)

CALIBRATION         DATE Apr. 26. 1974    STATUS CHECK
PPM
0.040
0.080
0.120
0.160
0.200

OUTPUT
VOLTS
1.262
2.222
3.182
4.153
5.293

'% DEV. FROM
L.S.L.
0.1.6
0.02
0.20
0.16
0.22

                                                  FLAME-OUT STATUS
                                                      POWER STATUS
                                               REMOTE RANGE CHANGE"
                                                  RANGE INDICATION

                                          CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
                                                         LINEARITY
                                                             SLOPE
                               OK
                               OK
                               OK
                               OK
                              0.99998
                              0.04129
                                                         INTERCEPT -0.01179
                                          PERFORMED BY Dennis  Hengstenberg

                                             SIGNATURE''
                                                                  T*
                                     21
                                                                (continued)

-------
                              TABLE  5  (continued)
MELOY WORK SHEET
(ALL WORK DONE ON LOW RANGE)
                   SERIAL # JZ-3.-73L
                      EPA #
INDICATOR SETTINGS-
            HYDROGEN FLOW
              SAMPLE FLOW
                                           TIME BASE
NOISE (SEE ATTACHED PHOTO'S)              	
TACCEPTABLE:    .050 VOLTS, PEAK TO PEAK)   5 sec/cm
                   PEAK TO PEAK VOLTS
                       <  0.
                                                                        I/
                                           2 msec/cm
                          0, 033. I/
DETECTION LIMIT
(ACCEPTABLE:DIFF.    TWICE THE NOISE LEVEL)
               OUTPUT/5ppb =
               OUTPUT/zero = pot
PRECISION                                               	
(ACCEPTABLE:  REPRODUCIBLE TO + 0.1 VOLT = + 2% OF FULL SCALE)
REPRODUCIBILITY = Q, 4 % @  1 .



FLOW
L/MIN
0.023
"
n
„
•,



TOTAL
L/MIN
/y.6^6
X3V3
4.WS
3.4,?a
J-.757



BATH
TEMP
30.0
n
n
it
i <



OUTPUT
l,3L(.3i
o< i er' o* ^L,
c_J | ' O tf^
4.ftt
*^ *1 ^ 3



PPM
^yo3
,6&6
.130
,H>0
,300



% ERROR (of
full scale)
-t-O.lts
~- 0. O3.
-Q.^o
- o, /b
~rd>33~

 LEAST SQUARES CURVE FIT DATA

 LINEARITY   n
     SLOPE   Q.o-i
 INTERCEPT -0,0
 STATUS CHECK

 POWER STATUS CHECK	0/C
 FLAME-OUT STATUS CHECK      nkL
 RANGE COMMAND	QIC.
 RANGE INDICATION 	OK.
                                     22
                                                                  (continued)

-------
                              TABLE  5  (continued)
MELOY WORK SHEET, CONT.
(ALL WORK DONE ON LOW RANGE)
                                             SERIAL  #  3L-
                                                EPA  #
INDICATOR SETTINGS-
                                      HYDROGEN FLOW
                                        SAMPLE FLOW
SPAN & ZERO DRIFT ANALYSIS

ZERO DRIFT
DATE
Sa-Ay-r.
53 "
34 "
25- "


TIME
iz: oo
i^',00
\3C.OO
( 3 '. (70


OUTPUT
VOLTS
0.2.1^
O.SNS'
o, a 06
6, //*/


DIFF.

-0. 00 /
-0, 001
-6, 0*?^


DEV. FROM
AVE.
+-6.6Z-1
±6.03.(t>
-to. 01 1
- 0. 013


                                                             AVERAGE  Q,
                                                       MAX DRIFT/DAY  a,

                                                     MAX DEV./3 DAYS
SPAN DRIFT
   DATE
TIME
            4, .'
OUTPUT
 VOLTS
DIFF.
                  -0,095.
                              -6 .
DEV.  FROM
   AVE.
                              -O.Ob'-l
                                        AVERAGE
                                  MAX DRIFT/DAY

                                MAX DEV./3 DAYS
  (ACCEPTABLE:  MAX DRIFT/DAY  ^.2 VOLT & MAX DEV./3 DAYS  ^.15 VOLT)
                                      23

-------
FIGURE 3.   OSCILLOSCOPE TRACE OF MELOY MEASURING ZERO GAS
                             24

-------
     At the conclusion of FACT, a report which summarized the events which
occurred during the inspection period, and the data which resulted from the
Intensive seven day test was submitted to the EPA.   In this document, formal
response to comments which ranged from missing fire extinguishers and mani-
fold maintenance to flow meter calibration and NCL  converter efficiency were
presented.  The performance of the system during the seven day test was also
evaluated in the report and is summarized in Table  6.

                TABLE 6.  FACI SYSTEM PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
         Performance Category                Percent Data Capture
         PDP-8 System                                98.9
         Monitoring Support System                   99.1
         PDP-11 and Telecommunication System         98.8
         Total System Performance                    96.8

2.4  NETWORK INSTALLATION
     Most, but not all, of the RAMS instrument testing was conducted in
California.  Assembled and tested systems were then transported intact to
the St. Louis area in air suspension electronic moving vans.  Each system
was then installed at a monitoring site prepared in advance.  Final testing
and calibration was then performed prior to integration of the system into
the network.  The operational period of each site is presented in Table 7.

2.5  SYSTEMS ACCEPTANCE TEST
     RAMS was the most complicated system of its kind ever developed and the
completion of its design, acquisition, fabrication  and installation was
marked by the Systems Acceptance Test (SAT).  The primary objective of the
SAT was to demonstrate that RAMS performed to specifications under normal
operating and maintenance procedures.  Consequently, SAT was a test of both
the physical facility and the operation and maintenance procedures.
     Before SAT was initiated, a protocol was written to define the rules
and procedures for the successful completion of the test.  According to the
plan, the RAMS network was to be operated continuously for a period of not
less than thirty consecutive days.  System failures beyond the control of
                                     25

-------
TABLE 7.   RAMS STATION OPERATIONAL PERIODS
Station
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
Start
8/15/74
6/28/74
6/24/74
8/20/74
8/02/74
4/22/74
8/28/74
8/02/74
6/29/74
8/21/74
8/26/74
8/26/74
6/24/74
8/20/74
6/02/74
7/21/74
7/09/74
7/26/74
9/04/74
8/27/74
7/26/74
8/09/74
8/07/74
7/24/74
7/14/74
Stop
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
2/12/77
2/12/77
7/14/77
                     26

-------
Rockwell such as acts of God, fires, etc. which would result in the loss of
data would be exempted.  However, if the loss was under control of the con-
tractor, the test would be extended accordingly.  During the period at
least 90% of the total potential data from each type of sensor had to be
produced in valid form.  Total potential data was defined as one observation
per sensor cycle throughout the thirty day period.  One sensor cycle was
equivalent to one minute for each instrument except for the chromatographic
instruments.  The chromatographic instruments for HpS/SO^/TS and CO/CH./THC
had sensor cycle times'of "3."75"and 5.0 minutes respectively.  Valid data were
defined as digital representations of compound concentrations produced by
properly calibrated instruments and recorded on magnetic tape.  Calibration
data were considered valid as long as the time required to obtain the calibra-
tion did not exceed the prescribed limits.  Instrumental drift in excess of
stated performance specifications was considered reason for data invalidation.
The turbulence and solar radiation sensors were exempt from the requirement
for 90% valid data, but were subject to other provisions of acceptance.
     Bag samplers and nephelometer heaters were also to be demonstrated
during the test.  At the conclusion of the SAT the data were to be reviewed
and validated with all supporting information to be submitted to the EPA.
     The SAT was accomplished during the period of November 25, 1974 through
December 25, 1974.  Preceded by a two day demonstration and functional test
and later followed by a three day post-SAT, the SAT did reveal a number of
problem areas.  For example, one of these problem areas was the poor overall
operation of the meteorological sensors.  The wind speed sensors had an
inordinate number of bearing problems which caused low readings or zero
when freeze up occurred, consequently, two engineering change orders were
instigated to correct this problem by balancing the wind cups and installing
a weatherproof gasket on the electronics.  The wind direction sensors in
the network were also misaligned.  This misalignment was due to several
different reasons:  misalighment at the time of installation, slippage in
the vane to potentiometer shaft coupling and internal slippage of the
potentiometer.  Engineering change orders corrected these mechanical  problems
and the sensors were realigned.  Eventually most of the problems were solved
or alleviated by engineering changes or changes in operating procedures.  A

                                    27

-------
three day post-SAT test was then conducted to identify  any  remaining  problems
and to verify the proper operation of the  network.
     All of the data collected during the  SAT and post-SAT  test were  sub-
mitted with supporting material  to the EPA for evaluation.
     The performance of the gaseous analyzers during the SAT  is summarized
in Table 8.

2.6  ENGINEERING CHANGES
     Following SAT and during the course of the routine operation  and main-
tenance of the RAMS network, a number of changes were made  involving  hardware
and software in the remote monitoring sites and at central.  The modifications
made, approximate date(s) of the modification and probable  effect  on  data  are
as follows:

2.6.1  Remote Station Hardare

2.6.1.1  Beckman 6800 Chromatoqraph
     Date(s):  Month of March 1975
     The sample pump and 3-way valve originally installed by  the manufacturer
were removed and a regulated vacuum applied to the sample vent to purge the
sample columns,  The original configuration of pumping the  sample  through  the
sample loops caused a pressurization of the sample loops to varying degrees
depending on the Condition of the pump, the amount of bleed,  etc,  which
resulted in poor precision of response.  By drawing the sample air through
the sample loops by means of a controlled vacuum applied to the sample vent,
a constant 400 cc/min. sample purge flow was maintained at  ambient pressure.
The effect of the change was significant improvement in measurement precision.

2.6.1.2  MSA Catalytic Oxidizer
     Date(s):  30 April 1976
     The MSA Catalytic Oxidizer was originally installed in the dilution air
flow path in such a manner that when the zero air valve was activated, all
zero air passed through the oxidizer and when the zero air valve was
deactivated there was no flow through the oxidizer.  The difficulty with
                                     28

-------
                                       TABLE 8.    SYSTEMS ACCEPTANCE TEST
                                         REGIONAL  AIR MONITORING  SYSTEM
                                         Instrument  Performance Summary

DAY
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
Average
330-359
°3
ZERO SPAN
98 90
96 96
94 94
100 100
99 99
96 96
92 92
92 92
96 TOO
100 100
100 100
100 96
92 84
92 84
96 92
84 80
88 80
100 93
95 91
89 91
88 92
96 96
94 94
100 98
100 100
98 94
96 96
95 95
96 96
100 96

95.40 93.57
CO
ZERO SPAN
100 100
100 100
100 96
100 96
96 100
100 100
96 88
92 93
92 96
100 96
100 96
100 98
96 92
88 92
96 96
96 95
94 98
96 96
98 98
100 100
100 100
100 96
100 98
100 100
100 100
100 98
97 97
94 94
100 97
100 100

97.70 96.87
CH4
ZERO SPAN
88 96
92 96
96 100
100 100
92 92
96 96
96 88
88 93
92 96
96 100
88 96
95 93
92 92
88 90
96 96
94 96
94 94
92 96
94 94
100 100
100 100
100 100
100 98
100 100
100 100
96 96
88 96
90 94
92 100
100 100

94.50 96.27
THC
ZERO SPAN
92 100
100 96
98 100
92 100
84 84
96 92
92 92
84 89
92 96
100 100
96 96
98 98
92 88
90 85
88 84
96 92
94 98
88 96
90 94
100 100
96 100
100 100
100 98
96 96
100 100
92 96
88 96
90 94
99 100
96 100

93.97 95.33
NO
ZERO SPAN
98 98
100 88
100 100
100 100
99 99
96 84
100 89
100 100
100 100
100 100
100 100
96 96
94 86
96 84
100 92
100 100
100 100
100 100
98 98
100 92
100 98
100 96
100 96
100 96
100 100
100 100
100 88
100 98
96 90
100 96

99.10 95.47
NO,
ZERO SPAN
94 94
96 84
96 96
96 96
95 95
92 80
92 85
92 92
99 99
96 96
92 96
94 94
90 82
93 92
98 92
96 96
96 96
93 96
94 98
100 88
100 96
100 88
100 92
98 98
100 100
94 98
92 96
92 84
100 90
100 96

95.67 92.83
TS
ZERO SPAN
92 88
88 86
92 94
92 94
95 95
92 88
96 98
96 96
96 92
96 92
100 100
92 96
89 74
88 76
96 86
96 92
95 91
100 94
96 87
96 92
92 90
100 92
96 100
98 90
100 97
96 96
92 96
84 100
85 80
100 96

97.53 91.60
so2
ZERO SPAN
84.6 84.6
89.8 80.4
92.3 88.4
84.6 92.3
92.3 92.3
00 92.3
00 84.6
100 92.3
100 92.3
00 100
84.6 100
100 100
89.6 67.0
88.5 88.5
92.3 84.6
84.6 92.3
93.9 86.2
92.3 92.3
92.3 83.3
92.3 84.6
92.3 92.3
100 100
100 91.8
97.0 81.4
100 94.9
92.3 100
77.0 92.3
100 100
95.0 83.8
100 92.3

93.59 90.24
ro

-------
this mode of operation was that without flow, the oxidizer would overheat:.
Operation such that all dilution air passed through the oxidizer was not
desirable due to the difficulty in maintaining the temperature of the
catalyst at a level suitable for hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide oxidation
without reaching a point that oxides of nitrogen were produced.
     To eliminate the problem created by the N0» emissions from the oxidizer,
a modification was made that enabled computer control of the dilution flow
through the oxidizer only during the CO-HC calibration cycle.   When not in
a CO-HC calibration cycle a bleed flow was maintained through  the oxidizer
to assure a constant operating temperature.  The effect of the change was
a higher oxidizer operating temperature and subsequent improved performance
without interference from N0» generation.

2.6.1.3  Zero Air System
     Date(s):  15 June 1976
     In its original configuration the pump box was insulated  from the shelter
and circulation air was provided by three exhaust blowers pulling in air
through vents in the floor.  This resulted in a high pump failure rate during
the summer months due to inadequate cooling.   The reconfiguration consisted
of blocking the floor vents, removing two of the three exhaust blowers, and
installing a duct to the shelter heating and cooling system.  The effect of
the change was improved compressor mean time between failure (MTBF).

2.6.1.4  Calibration Panel
     Date(s):  15 February 1974
     The humidifier used to humidify the dilution air during the NO/NOX
calibration was found to be unnecessary and was removed.

2.6.1.5  Monitor Labs 8440 NO/NOX Analyzer
     Date(s):  Month of November 1974, all sites
     A Drierite cartridge was added to the vent tee from which the ozone
purge air was drawn.  This provided for dry air through the 03 generator
during a failure of the station dry air system.  The effect of the change
was to improve span stability of the analyzer.
                                     30

-------
2.6.1.6  EG&G Model 880 Dew Point Sensor
     Date(s):  25 April 1976
     The dew point sensors were modified to sample only five minutes  every
thirty minutes in an effort to increase stability.  The modification  con-
sisted of an external  timer and switch which reversed the current through
the Peltier device causing it to heat for 25 minutes then allowing normal
operation for five minutes*  The effect of the change was to improve  the
rate of valid data recovery.

2.6.1.7  Laboratory Data Control Hp Generators
     Date(s):  1 June 1975
     A resistor was added across the NO contacts of the pressure switch to
allow a small amount of current to flow through the cell  at all  times.   The
effect of the change was an MTBF improvement.

2.6.1.8  MRI Translator
     Date(s):  10 May 1976
     Lightning protection devices were installed across the signal lines.
The effect of the change was an MTBF improvement.

2.6.1.9  Nephelometer
     Date(s):  25 November 1975 - 20 January 1976
     Internal modifications were made which included a change to the  in-
ternal calibration to alter the light path through the scattering chamber
to eliminate alignment problems.  A shielded wire replaced the printed
circuit foil to the first amp stage to reduce noise.  Larger air pumps
were installed.  A modification to the illumination brightness control
circuit was made to lengthen lamp life.  The effect of the changes was
improved performance.

2.6.2  Remote Station Software
2.6.2.1  Carbon Monoxide Analyzer
     Date(s):  1 March 1975
                                     31

-------
     Normal operating range for CO analyzer changed from range 2 (50 ppm)  to
range 1 (10 ppm).  No change in data quality resulted.

2.6.2.2  Barometric Pressure
     Date(s):  14 May 1975 to 15 March 1976
     Station dependent calibration coefficients for this parameter replaced
the nominal network-wide coefficients.  The effect of the change was an
improvement in data accuracy.

2.6.2.3  Ozone
     Date(s):  14 July 1975
     Normal operating range for the ozone analyzers was changed from range
1  (0.2 ppm) to range 2 (0.5 ppm).

2.6.2.4  Carbon Monoxide Analyzer
     Date(s):  17 December 1975
     RAX V3 was implemented.  The CO handler was modified to correct the
ranging problem causing spikes in the data following calibration.

2.6.2.5  Pyrheliometer
     Date(s):  23 January 1976
     The pyrheliometer data which was being stored in data slots PY01-PY09,
based on filter selection, was modified so that all of the data appears  in
slot PY01.  The effect of the change was to place all data in slot PY01
only.

2.6.2.6  Dew Point
     Date(s):  25 April 1976
     RAX V3A implemented.  The dew point handler was modified to monitor a
status bit indicating whether the sensor was heating or cooling.  The effect
of the change was to enable retrieval of valid dew point data.
                                     32

-------
2.6.2.7  Wind Speed
     Date(s):  10 June 1976
     The wind speed channel assignment was changed from 0 to 3 in order to
avoid random input encountered during the processing of channel 0.
2.6.2.8  Turbulence
     Date(s):  15 July 1976
     Turbulence data increased from 3 to 5 parameters.   Data format changed
from consecutive sequences of 3 values to sequences of 5 values.
2.7  DEINSTALLATION
     The operational period termination date for each of the RAMS monitoring
sites and the disposition of each site is given in Table 9 . .  The general
procedure followed for site restoration is given as Figure 4.
                                     33

-------
TABLE 9.  RAMS STATION DEINSTALLATION AND DISPOSITION SCHEDULE
Station
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
Termination
Date
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
6/30/77
3/31/77
2/12/77
2/12/77
7/14/77
Disposition
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Left in place. Assigned to the Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Left in place. Temporarily assigned to the City
of St. Louis
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Left in place. Assigned to the Harvard School
of Public Health.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Left in place. Assigned to the Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA on an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Delivered to EPA or an EPA designated consignee.
Left in place. Assigned to the Missouri Depart-
ment of Natural Resources.
                              34

-------
 1.   Advise property owner of plans.
 2.   Secure demolition permits from local  governmental  agency.
 3.   Select truck firm and obtain required escort/wide  load permits.
 4.   Arrange for electrical  service disconnect, removal  of meter and
     closing billing.
 5.   Arrange for telephone service disconnect, removal  and closing billing.
 6.   Arrange for Data/PBX Key lines disconnect, removal  and closing billing.
 7.   Remove all items from roof of building and secure  for shipment.
 8.   Package all loose items in shelter and secure for  shipment.
 9.   Secure all equipment in the instrument racks and brace and tie down
     for shipment.   Secure pump box equipment.
10.   Remove gas bottles from building.
11.   Secure lighting fixtures and side  door.
12.   Unbolt building from the footings.
13.   Remove fence and posts.
14.   Backfill post holes.
15.   Disconnect electrical service and  remove weather-head and  ground rods.
16.   Tie down A/C compressor.
17.   Final check inside for loose items and lock door.
18.   Load shelter on trailer and secure for shipment.  Load fencing material
     on trailer.
19.   Remove tower grounding network and met gear.  Stow for shipment.
20.   Dismantle tower into 40' or shorter sections and load on trailer.
21.   Remove building footings and backfill.
22.   Remove tower footings and backfill.
23.   All fill dirt to be compacted to 90% of maximum possible.
24.   Remove all gravel roadways, walks, and replace with top soil.
25.   Clean entire area and replace with sod.
26.   Haul all concrete and other debris to dump.
27.   Inspect site with owner and secure release.
28.   Close out leases and final payments.

                     FIGURE 4.  RAMS SHUTDOWN PROCEDURE

                                     35

-------
3.0  OPERATIONS

3.1  CENTRAL COMPUTER FACILITY
     The RAMS Central Computer Facility operated on a twenty-four hour a
day, seven days a week basis.  Each day was composed of three overlapping
operator work shifts:  Shift 1, 8:30am - 5:00pm; Shift 2, 4:30pm - 1:00am;
and Shift 3, 12:30am - 9:00am.  Each operator's primary responsibility was
to monitor and control the system's data acquisition functions.   In addition
to these tasks, the operators were responsible for the background processing
of the collected raw data into the validated, converted and averaged data
files.
     Shift 1:
     Shift 1 began with the operator selecting and displaying each of the
twenty-five sites on the system CRT and monitoring the teletype  printouts.
These displays and printout were designed to make the operator immediately
aware of any telecommunications and/or instrument problems.  Upon completion
of this check the operator would fill out a system status sheet  and generated
any needed corrective maintenance requests for the field maintenance staff.
Telecommunication problems were initially handled directly by the operator.
In the event of a telecommunication failure, the operator would  call  the
telephone company test station and have the line(s) checked.  If the problem
turned out not to be a telephone company problem, a corrective maintenance
request would be generated and distributed to the appropriate RAMS maintenance
personnel.
     Following the system status check, the operator would begin the back-
ground processing of the previous day's data.  The first step in this pro-
cessing was PASS1 (of TAPGEN) which extracted all of the raw calibration
data, performed the calibration calculations, and updated the system cali-
bration files.  In addition PASS1 generated a comprehensive printed summary
of all calibration activity which the operator would distribute  to the field
                                     36

-------
maintenance staff.  Next the operator would run a special  Drift  Summary which
would list calibration drift values for all of the system  instruments.  This
listing in turn would also be distributed to the field maintenance  staff  for
review.
     After the processing of the current calibration data  was  completed,  the
operator would continue with the processing of current and past  data.  The
remaining processing consisted of validation and averaging of  the  data and
the generation of the data listings and the finalized data tapes for EPA
archiving.
     The remainder of the first shift operator's time was  spent  monitoring
the system activity and making calibration file updates requested  by the
maintenance staff.

     Shift 2:
     The second shift began with the operator performing the same  system
checkout as in shift 1.  Upon completion of these checks,  the  operator would
set up the instrument calibrations to be remotely triggered between 8:00pm
and 12 midnight.   For the remainder of the second shift, the operator would
continue with the data processing tasks and monitor the instrument calibra-
tions at the CRT display.  At the end of the second shift, the operator
would turn over to the third shift operator a list of all  instruments which
were not successfully calibrated.

     Shift 3:
     The third shift operator would again start the shift  with a comprehen-
sive check of the system's data acquisition functions.  After midnight,  the
operator would then run a series of daily summaries including listings of
raw hourly averages of all data channels and a complete system telecommuni-
cations summary.   These reports were distributed to the maintenance staff
for review and dispatching of maintenance personnel.
     In addition to the daily summaries, the operator would restart remote
calibrations on all instruments which were not successfully calibrated
during the previous evening's calibration period.  While monitoring these
calibrations, the third shift operator would continue with the routine data
                                     37

-------
processing.

3.2  FIELD OPERATIONS
     The daily operational routine of the field maintenance staff on the
RAMS program was mainly divided into two categories, corrective maintenance
and preventive maintenance, with corrective maintenance being a 24 hour
effort.
     The preventive maintenance effort was a redundant task controlled
primarily by a preventive maintenance schedule which specifically set
maintenance intervals for various tasks.  This schedule handled such things
as manifold cleaning, filter replacement, dew point cell maintenance, and
other routine maintenance efforts.
     The preventive maintenance personnel were set up on a site visitation
schedule which provided for five visits per two weeks to each of the twenty-
five RAMS sites.  During each visit a station checklist was utilized to help
the individual to monitor the overall operational status of the monitoring
system.  This checklist directed attention to functions critical to proper
system operations such as flows, pressures, switch settings, and temperature
readings.  The required readings were recorded on the checklist along with
the initials of the individual making the observation and the date.  Any
abnormalities noted were either corrected by the P.M. individual or were
reported to central for dispatch.
     The corrective maintenance function was carried out on a demand basis
with scheduling considerations based on input from various means of problem
detection.
     The initial activity for the daily operational scheme was the review
of the TAPGEN, a daily computer printout containing information relating
to the previous nights auto zero/span sequence for the entire network.  The
TAPGEN contained pertinent information for every channel of every gaseous
analyzer that responded to the computer auto calibration command, such as
dilution flow, cal gas flow rate, permeation tube temperature, span con-
centration, voltage response to zero and span gas, slope and intercept, and
site and parameter identification.  Thorough review of the TAPGEN made
possible the detection of most problems that could occur to invalidate
                                    38

-------
ambient or calibration data, such as instrument failure, excessive drift,
failures in the dilution system, or failures in the calibration system.   The
TAPGEN also contained a drift summary which listed dates and times of the
last nine calibrations, as well as the voltage response to span gas and  the
resultant slope and intercept for each calibration of each gas channel.
     As the TAPGEN review proceeded abnormalities in the instrument response
to zero or span gas are noted.  These abnormalities resulted in an attempt to
isolate the cause by examining related information, such as another channel
of the same instrument, dilution air flow, span gas flow, and span gas con-
centration.  Once the problem was defined as much as possible a Corrective
Maintenance Report was initiated.  This procedure followed through the entire
TAPGEN.
     Another method of detecting problems was through a system of status
errors.  Certain critical operating parameters such as air pressure, vacuum,
flows, flame outs, etc. were continuously monitored and transmitted to the
terminal at Central.  Immediately upon receipt of a status error the com-
puter operator would fill out a status error report and bring it to field
maintenance attention.  A Corrective Maintenance Report was initiated for
the status problems.
     After the Corrective Maintenance Reports were initiated for all detect-
able problems they were separated by location, and estimated complexity.
The problems thought to be of a minor nature or would require little time to
correct were often assigned to the preventive maintenance crew if the
preventive maintenance schedule took them to or near the site of the problem.
The more complex and time consuming problems were assigned to the corrective
maintenance crew.  The priorities of the assignments were based on the goal
to achieve the highest valid data capture rate.
     If the work load permitted, an effort was made to keep one or two people
in the shop to perform bench maintenance on equipment not readily repairable
in the field and to provide emergency field support when necessary.
     Individuals were rotated out of the corrective maintenance activity to
perform multipoint calibrations whenever the workload permitted.  The
schedule usually permitted one and sometimes two peoole working on multipoint

                                     39

-------
calibrations at all times.
     During the course of a day, additional problems would Generally
develop after the maintenance crew had been dispatched.   Action would be
taken depending on the impact of the problem.   The maintenance crews could
be reached by phone or by radio and rescheduled, the problems could be held
for the second shift, or shop personnel  could  be dispatched.
     The second shift maintenance crew usually consisted of one or two
individuals.  The primary task for the second  shift was  to pick up corrective
action items remaining from first shift and multipoint calibrations.
Emergency maintenance problems that developed  during second shift, primarily
detected by means of status errors, were relayed to the  field by the
computer operator.
     Third shift was one individual whose responsibility was to correct
status errors as they developed.
                                    40

-------
4.0  MAINTENANCE

4.1  TYPICAL INSTRUMENT FAILURES
     During the operational period of the RAMS system each component
developed a history of specific problem areas.  The following is a summary
of typical failures by instrument or subsystem.

4.1.1  Beckman Model 6800 Air Quality Chromatograph

4.1.1.1  Slider Valves
     Pneumatic actuated slider valves were utilized for the sample injection/
backflush sequence of the analyzer operation.   The primary difficulty caused
by the valve was the lack of ability to maintain proper tension of the fixed
surfaces against the sliding surface.  Improper tension resulted in either
leaks, or sluggish operation which often caused instrument flame outs.

4.1.1.2  Catalytic Converter Assembly
     The catalytic converter assembly consisted of a thermally insulated
brass cylinder heated to approximately 525°C,  surrounding a catalytic
oxidizer and a catalytic methanator.  The catalytic oxidizer removed trace
hydrocarbons from the FID support air and the  carrier air used for total
hydrocarbon analysis.  The catalytic methanator converted the carbon monoxide
component of the sample to methane to permit detection by the FID.  The
primary failure mode was that the brass block  after a period of time would
begin to disintegrate resulting in insufficient heat transfer to one or both
of the catalytic converters.  The indication of failure of the catalytic
oxidizer would be a negative total hydrocarbon peak during an instrument
zero.  The catalytic methanator failure would  result in a decreased or non-
existant peak height for the CO component of span gas.
     Beckman Instruments eventually redesigned the converter assembly to
substitute a brisket heater for the heated brass cylinder.
                                     41

-------
4.1.1.3  Analytical Columns
     Analytical columns used for the separation of the methane and CO
sample components required frequent replacement.  As the columns degenerated
retention time of the two components decreased to an unusable condition.

4.1.2  Tracer Model 270 HA Sulfur Analyzer

4.1.2.1  Rotary Valves
     The pneumatic actuated rotary valves served the same purpose as the
slider valves in the Beckman 6800, that is to provide a sample injection and
backflush sequence.  The problems were also similar, keeping the stationary
portion of the valve at a proper tension to achieve a smooth operation
without leaks.  The problem most frequently resulted in no sulfur detection
due to a stuck valve.  The problem became so acute that all  units were
removed from the system and returned to the factory for refurbishment.

4.1.2.2  Linearizer Circuits
     The linearizer circuitry required frequent adjustment.

4.1.2.3  Column Heater
     The unit employed a cartridge heater embedded in the stationary portion
of the rotary valve.  The most common failure was the wires  breaking off at
the cartridge resulting in on column heat affecting elution  times of the S02
and HpS peaks.

4.1.3  Meloy Model SA-185 S02 Analyzer
     A large percentage of problems associated with the operation of the
Meloy sulfur analyzer were due to the inherent nature of the instrument.
The high consumption requirement for hydrogen created problems for the
hydrogen generators supporting the instrument and flame outs were a chronic
problem.  The problem of flame outs was compounded by the reconditioning
time required before the instrument returned to normal sensitivity levels
after being relit.
     Another problem associated to the operating nature of the instrument
was during periods of high humidity levels in the ambient sample, the zero
                                     42

-------
calibration would produce a higher response than ambient air.   The problem
was possibly the result of the humid air cooling the flame thus reducing
background light and lowering the baseline.  During the introduction of dry
zero gas no cooling would occur and the baseline would increase.

4.1.4  Monitor Labs 8440 NO/NOY Analyzer
                              A
4.1.4.1  Sample Capillaries
     The sample capillaries were prone to clogging resulting in decreased
sensitivity on the affected channel.

4.1.4.2  Ozone Generator
     The ozone generator power supply required a critical  adjustment to
maintain a constant ozone generation rate.  Frequent problems  were encountered
where the supply would drift from the set point resulting in decreased ozone
concentration available for the chemiluminescent reaction causing decreased
sensitivity for both channels.

4.1.4.3  Chopper Mechanism
     A large amount of N0«, data was lost due to malfunctions in chopper
mechanisms.  Initially the chopper drive belts showed a high failure rate,
they were replaced by belts of different construction and that problem was
practically eliminated.
     The chopper drive motor bearings and the chopper assembly bearings
required frequent replacement.

4.1.4.4  N00 Converter Assembly
     The NCL converter as originally supplied was comprised of seamed
molybdenum tube wrapped around a heated cylinder.  The failure mode was
caused by the seam in the molybdenum tubing separating.  The units were
redesigned by Monitor Labs such that seamless stainless steel tubing was
packed with molybdenum and formed around the heated block.

4.1.5  Monitor Labs 8410 Ozone Analyzers
     The Monitor Labs ozone analyzers were very reliable and aside from the

                                     43

-------
chopper drive belt problem which Monitor Labs corrected early in the
monitoring program, no typical problems were experienced.

4.1.6  Haake Water Bath
     Typical problems encountered with the Haake bath used for permeation
tube temperature control all resulted in abnormal bath temperature.   These
problems included failure of the circulation pump, temperature controller,
and mercury sensor.

4.1.7  Dry Air System
     The dry air system included a compressor, heatless dryer, surge tank,
and manifold.  The primary problems were with the compressor, with failures
of everything from valves to the electric motors a common occurrence.
     Problems also occurred in the heatless driers with the solenoid valves
and cam drive motors.

4.1.8  Vacuum System
     Typical problems of the vacuum system were related to pump failures
and vacuum regulator drifting.  The pump failure most common was the carbon
vanes breaking and jamming the pump resulting in a blown fuse.  The loss of
vacuum meant no sample flow for any of the analyzers and a Meloy flame out.
     Excessive vacuum regulator drift was generally apparent in instrument
span response, particularly the NO/NCL analyzer.
                                     A
4.1.9  H2 Generators
     Hydrogen generator failures consisted primarily of cell failures and
pressure regulator failures.  Cell failures occurred in two ways, either a
decrease in output to a point where it could not meet demand causing an S02
or CO-HC flame out or an internal rupture of the hydrogen diffusion membranes
allowing caustic solution into the supply lines, often destroying the
analytical columns of the CO-HC analyzer.
     Regulator failures were most critical where the generator was used to
support a Tracer because that was the only means of H« regulation, whereas
the Meloy and Beckman had internal Hp regulation.  Failure of the regulator
                                    44

-------
was most often caused by a ruptured cell allowing caustic into the regulator.

4.1.10  Wind Direction
     Wind direction data loss was primarily the result of a defective
direction sensing dual potentiometer, broken cables, or component failure
in the amplifier, the pot select sensing circuitry of the translator.

4.1.11  Wind Speed
     Loss of wind speed data was typically a result of a defective component
in the photocell assembly or the amplifier circuit in the sensor, or a
component failure in the tachometer card.  Broken cables and sensor bearings
also attributed to data loss.

4.2  ROUTINE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
     Preventive maintenance was performed on a regularly scheduled basis by
a crew dedicated to this function.  Maintenance performed was following
manufacturer's recommendations and was supplemented as experience dictated.
An example of a routine preventive maintenance checklist that had been used
in RAMS is presented as Figure  5.  At least twice per week each site was
visited for the purpose of making the checks indicated.  Each sensor and
major support item was examined in turn and critical flow settings, pressure
settings, etc. were recorded and compared to the norm.  Malfunctioning
equipment and/or equipment operating outside of specification was cause for
immediate repair or adjustment.  In the case of non-trivial repair, a call to
the central facility was made for immediate corrective maintenance.  Such
corrective maintenance was performed by field engineers and not uncommonly
involved the exchange of a spare sensor for the malfunctioning unit in order
to minimize down time.  In addition to the routine inspections performed by
the preventive maintenance crew, maintenance tasks such as filter replace-
ments, manifold cleaning, dessicant changing, etc. were performed on a
regularly scheduled basis.
     The overall objective of the preventive maintenance program was, by
definition, to prevent a problem from occurring and suffering data loss by
replacing components susceptible to wear and fatigue before very significant
wear had occurred.  The program also served to minimize data loss by nature
                                    45

-------
REMOTE STATION PREVENTATIVE CHECK LIST
STATION #
PARAMETER
DATE
FIELD ENGINEER
CONTROL PANEL
Row A Lights
Row B Lights, except (B5)
Row C Lights, '1-8 & 14
Row D
OXIDES OF NITROGEN
NO Zero Pot.
NO Span Pot.
NO Time Constant
NO Range
NOX Zer° p°t.
NUx bpan Pot.
NUX i ime constant
NO Range
Converter
Ozone Air, cc/min.
MANIFOLD PRESSURES
Pressure, PSIG (Tracer Sta.)
Pressure, PSIG (Meloy Sta.)
Vacuum, in Hg, reg. on
OZONE ANALYZER
Zero Pot.
Span Pot.
Time Constant
_Range
Sample Flow
Ethylene Cyl . Pressure
Pres. to Analyzer
Flow, cc/min.
"3 Output Adjust Setting
SULFUR CHROMATOGRAPH (Tracor)
Hydrogen. PSIG
Total Sulfur Air, PSIG
Column Air, PSIG
Sample Flow, cc/min.
Cycle Switch
Sample Source
Column Temperature
Detector Temperature
Cycle Lamps, In Cycle
Flame Lamp
TS FPD ANALYZER(Meloy)
Hydrogen Flow, mm.
Air Flow, mm.
Flame Out Light
NORMAL


OFF
OFF
ON
OFF
READ
READ
20
2
READ
READ
20
2
Cycles
Pegged
80
55
20
READ
READ
20
2
Pegged
35
30
>5
READ
READ
READ
READ
80
AUTO
Ambient
READ
1250C
ON
ON
READ
READ
OFF
OBSERVED

















































































































































































































































































































































































 FIGURE 5.  ROUTINE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST
                                                        (continued)
                           46

-------
REMOTE STATION PREVENTATIVE CHECK LIST
STATION #
PARAMETER
CO-HC CHROMATOGRAPH(6800)
Hydrogen Fuel, PSIG
Burner Air, PSIG
Air Carrier, PSIG
Air Service, PSIG
Hydrogen Carrier, PSIG
Oven Heater Light
Catalytic Heater Light
Program Power
Auto Zero,%
Analyses/Hour
Manual Function Switches
Flame Out Light
Reset Light
Sample Flow, FI-IV
HYDROGEN GENERATORS
Power Switch/Light
Low Water Light
Meloy Pressure, PSIG
Water Tubing Clear
CALIBRATION PANEL
Ozone Air, SCCM
§02 Air, SCCM
Dilution Air Pot. Setting
BAG SAMPLERS
Bag 1 , cc/min.
Bag 2, cc/mm.
GAS CYLINDERS
CO-HC High Pres., PSIG
t2H4 Hign Fres. , PblG
NO High Pres., PSIG

COMPRESSOR-DRYER
Pressure PI-1 (Tracer Sta.)
Pressure PI-1 (Meloy Sta.)
Pressure PI-2 (Tracor Sta.)
Pressure PI-2 (Meloy Sta.)
Box Blowers (2)
Dryer Cycles
Oxidizer Power
Drain Surge Tank
HYGROMETER
Sample Flow
Test
Dew Point
Change M iter
NORMAL
READ
READ
READ
50-55
READ
Cycles
ON
ON
10-40
12
To Right
OFF
OFF
Pegged
ON/ON
OFF
30

30
30
READ


250-1500*
250-1500*
500-2000*

90
65
100-105
75-80

30 SEC
ON

2 SCFH
t Diamond
READ

OBSERVED

















































































































^








































































































*•




































































































































                  FIGURE 5 (continued)
                                                       (continued)
                          47

-------
             REMOTE  STATION  PREVENTATIVE  CHECK LIST
STATION #
PARAMETER
WATER BATH
Power
Heating Indicator set at
Temperature, Bath
Water Level
NEPHELOMETER
Blower
Bulb
Change Filter

SOLAR RADIATION

-------
of the frequent visitations involved.  Trends in critical  parameters were
frequently apparent with enough lead time to allow corrective maintenance
to be scheduled before data loss occurred.

4.3  MULTIPOINT CALIBRATIONS
     Multipoint calibration of the gas analyzers in the RAMS program were
scheduled to be performed at approximately five week intervals.   The cali-
brations were performed on a repetitive cycle by two full  time field
engineers dedicated to performing the function.  Written procedures were used
in performing all calibrations and all pertinent data collected  during the
course of a multipoint calibration was recorded on a data  form appropriate
to the particular analyzer being calibrated.  The procedures and data forms
used are presented in Appendix A.
     Each analyzer in the the RAMS network was zero/span calibrated daily
under computer control.  All critical parameters including mass  flow meter
signals proportional to flow of standard gases and diluent air,  permeation
tube temperature, etc. were monitored continuously and recorded.  An updated
slope and intercept for each analyzer was generated daily  and used for drift
calculations and transformation of ambient data to engineering units.  The
only exception was hydrogen sulfide.
     In view of the frequency of zero/span calibration at  each site, the
objective in performing multipoint calibrations was primarily to demonstrate
linearity of response throughout the operating range of the analyzers.  In
practice, this was more than an idle exercise.  The Tracor sulfur chromato-
graph and the Meloy total sulfur analyzer are both inherently non-linear in
response and are equipped with linearizing circuitry.  This circuitry,
particularly in the case of the Tracor 270 HA, was subject to drift or
malfunction of a nature that output could become significantly non-linear
without the effect becoming apparent in the zero/span data alone.  Multi-
point calibration of the sulfur analyzers was therefore occasionally
accompanied by the adjustment of the linearizer circuitry  in order to main-
tain the manufacturer's linearity specification.  Another  problem detected
during the course of multipoint calibrations that would not have been
apparent upon examination of zero/span data included non-linear  carbon

                                     49

-------
monoxide response of the Beckman 6800 due to methanator failure.   The
Beckman 6800 also exhibited, on occasion, linear carbon monoxide  response
accompanied by a significant intercept resulting in a lower detectable  limit
much greater than specified by the manufacturer.  The latter problem, only
apparent at the time of multipoint calibration,  usually necessitated the
replacement of a stripper column.
                                    50

-------
5.0  QUALITY ASSURANCE

5.1  MULTIPOINT CALIBRATIONS

5.1.1  Index
     A key component of the quality assurance program for RAMS was the
rigorous schedule for multipoint calibration of each gas analyzer.  All
calibration activity is given by station and by parameter in Appendix B.
The date of each calibration, the manufacturer's serial  number, and the
EPA property number is given.

5.1.2  File Description
     The multipoint calibration file contains the calibration forms completed
by the RAMS field engineer at the time of calibration.   These forms identify
the instrument and document the calibration activity.  Multipoint calibration
activity began with the calibration of the mass flow meters in the station
calibration system by means of a positive displacement bubble type device,
verification of permeation tube temperature and verification of zero air
integrity.  The field engineer then used the station calibration system  to
introduce zero air and five different upscale concentrations of calibration
gas into the analyzer on each of the normal operating ranges and on those
ranges which could be used via the auto-ranging capability of RAMS.  The
data obtained were then plotted (concentration versus voltage output) and
the linearity, slope, and intercept of the instrument was determined.
Required maintenance and adjustments were then made and the calibration
repeated if necessary.
     In addition to the completed multipoint calibration forms the file
contains the performance and acceptance tests conducted for each instrument
prior to its installation in the RAMS network.
                                    51

-------
5.2  AUDIT ACTIVITY

5.2.1  Summary
     In addition to the routine calibration activity conducted in RAMS, in-
dependent audits were performed by individual(s) dedicated to the function.
Appendix C is a summary of all audit activity presented by station.

5.2.2  File Description
     In addition to the data shown in the audit tables the actual instrument
reading in volts as well as the slope and intercept of the transfer equation
can be found in the original file.  The name of the individual(s) performing
the audit, serial numbers and concentration of standards employed, etc.
are also included in the file.

5.2.3  Independent Audits
     In order to assess and document the validity of the data generated by
the Regional Air Monitoring System, two additional quality assurance programs
were conducted in addition to the routine audits and maintenance.  One of
these efforts was a task order under which a van, equipped with calibration
instruments and gases, performed audits on the RAMS stations during selected
periods.   The other effort was a complete quality assurance program conducted
by an independent EPA contractor, Research Triangle Institute (RTI).
     Under RAPS Task Order No. 44, a Winnebago van was originally equipped
with various monitoring instruments to perform pollutant variability studies.
However, under Task Order No. 58 the van was outfitted for performing com-
parisons and cross calibrations.  This van was used during the Summer 1975
Field Expedition to audit the RAPS helicopters, the Meteorology Research,
Inc. and Battelle aircraft, RTI and Environmental Measurements, Inc. vans,
EPA aerosol trailer, RAMS stations, portable ozone and carbon monoxide
monitors and the gas chromatography laboratory.
     Task Order No. 106 was an extension of Task Order No. 58 to continue
the audits through the 1976 Field Expeditions.  Audits were performed on
twelve different RAMS stations, the RAPS helicopters, the St. Louis City and
County stations, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency stations and

                                     52

-------
several miscellaneous sites.   Summaries of the audits are presented in
Tables 10 through 14.
     The RAPS Data Manager initiated a comprehensive and integrated quality
assurance program.  Research Triangle Institute (RTI) was contracted to
identify and assess the quality control practices and procedures employed
in RAMS/RAPS; to recommend changes or additions to these existing practices
and procedures as required to develop a comprehensive quality control pro-
gram; to document the validity of the data generated as part of the RAPS;
and to recommend quality assurance procedures to monitor the effectiveness
of the quality control program.  This independent audit and study of RAPS
consisted of three phases.  The first phase included an independent on-site/
off-site qualitative systems review.  The second phase involved conducting a
systematic and independent on-site quantitative performance audit.  Finally,
the third phase involved making recommendations for additions to or changes
in the quality control activities of RAPS based on the information gained in
the first two phases.
     During the first phase a two part checklist was developed.  The first
part was directed toward organizational structure, function and/or activities
that existed for checking purposes, independent of the remote stations.  This
portion of the checklist was designed to:
     1.  Identify existing system documentation, i.e., maintenance manuals,
         organizational structure, operating procedures, etc.
     2.  Evaluate the adequacy of the procedures as documented based on RTI
         personnel experience and applicable historical data from RAMS, if
         available.
     3.  Evaluate the degree of use of and adherence to the documented
         procedures in day-to-day operations based on observed conditions
         (auditor) and a review of applicable RAMS' records on file.
     The second part of the checklist was used for evaluating the remote
monitoring stations.  The monitoring stations were checked for nominal values
and acceptable ranges for the various pressures, flow rates and voltages as
specified by the RAMS Remote Monitoring Station Operation and Maintenance
Manual.
                                     53

-------
                                            TABLE 10.   DATA SUMMARY - RAMS STATIONS
POLLUTANT NO

STATION DATE
120* 2/14
101* 2/20
111** 6/25
112** 6/28
114* 6/29
104* 6/30
107** 7/1
120 7/2
112 7/19
114 8/17
111 8/18
104 8/19
115* 11/5
125** 11/11
101 11/12
102** 11/18
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
A B r2

-.0043 .9558 .9996
-.0035 1.0535 .9997
-.0051 .9513 .9992
-.0042 1.0049 .9997^
-.0007 1.0506 .9999
-.0196 1.0302 .9738

-.0009 1.0596 .9996
.0002 1.0260 .9999
.0004 .8943 .9997
-.0018 1.0015 .9997
-.0010 .8959 .9998
-.0010 1.0082 .9999
-.0017 .9469 .9998
-.0010 1.0200 .9998
.0029 1.0163 .9998
.9944
.0532
NO,
A B r2

-.0068 .9910 .9995
-.0067 1.0772 .9990
-.0108 .9965 .9992
.0000 1.1723 .9999
-.0007 1.0747 .9998
-.0030 .9613 .9566

.0027 1.0344 .9994
.0007 1.1841 .9998
-.0020 .9277 .9998
-.0032 1.0135 .9997
.0007 .8971 .9997
-.0005 .9861 .9998
-.0085 .9567 1.0000
-.0017 1.0240 .9997
-.0012 1.0746 .9933
1.0247
.0815
N02 CONVERTER
EFFICIENCY, %

94.0
98.5
96.0
100.0
99.0
98.0

101.0

97.9
98.7
98.5
96.6
99.3
99.3



°3
A B r2

.0086 .7880 .9956
-.0038 .9537 .9990
.0004 .8885 .9997
.0000 .8670 .9998
.0008 1.0096 .9999
.0000 .8550 .9999
.0020 .9070 .9999
.0026 1.0127 .9987
.0030 .9626 .9990^
.0021 .9475 .9990
.0033 1.0140 .9961
.0008 .9121 .9953
.0036 .9300 .9972
.0041 .9540 .9989
.0016 .8669 .9989
.0024 .9900 .9991
.9287
.0646
so2
A B r

-.0012 .7700 .9952
-.0049 1.2096 .9865









'2' .0006 1.0070 .9990
'2'-.0276 1.0200 .9968

^ .0026 .9010 .9987

.9815
.1623
tn
                        (1)  Audit performed 7/23/77
                        (2)  High range
                        *   Tracor Sulfur analyzer
                        **   Meloy Sulfur analyzer
                                                                                                                 (continued)

-------
                                                           TABLE 10 (continued)
POLLUTANT TOTAL SULFUR
STATION DATE
120* 2/14
101* 2/20
111** 6/25
112** 6/28
114* 6/29
104* 6/30
107** 7/1
120 7/2
112 7/19
114 8/17
111 8/18
104 8/19
115* 11/5
125** 11/11
101 11/12
102** 11/18
MEAN
STA.IDARD
DEVIATION
A B r2
.0017 .6757 .9952
-.0046 1.1863 .9889
(2>-.0088 .8799 .9989
(2'-.0033 .8459 .9997

(2'-.0045 .7567 .9997
(2) .0055 .7936 .9996
<2' .0112 .8850 .9976
(2) .0036 .9005 .9988
<2' .0192 .8780 .9980
(2> .0020 .8710 .9981
(2) .0334 .9050 .9909
.8706
.1263
TOTAL HYDROCARBON
A B r2
.0652 .7513 .9999
-.0807 .9026 .9978
-.0410 .7820
.0020 .8450
.0140 .9710
.0010 .9590
-.0220 .8560
.0200 1.0280
.0060 .8791
-.0040 .8518
-.0130 1.0014
.0217 1.0743 .9995
.1496 .9129 .9996
.0242 .9934 .9999
.0486 1.0001 1.0000
.9205
.0933
CH,
A B r2
.0093 .7394 .9997
-.2670 .9006 .9998
-.0620 .8870
-.0630 .9240
.0110 .9270
.0230 .9670
-.0500 .8860
-.0150 .9610
.0200 .8773
.0030 .8986
-.0240 .9836
-.0766 1.0413 .9996
.0419 .8932 .9996
-.0358 .9929 .9999
.0176 .9977 1.0000
.9251
.0717
CO
A B r2
.0082 .7957
.0601 .9063 .9963
-.1200 1.0140 .9997
-.0850 1.0850 .9990
-.2270 1.1170 .9998
.1170 1.0960 .9999
-.2730 1.0380 .9998
.0040 .9481 1.0000
.0107 1.0085
.0996 .9334 .9898
.0681 1.0367 .9913
.0550 .8769
-.0006 .8954 .9999
-.0120 .9377 .9984
-.2299 1.0043 .9987
.9795
.0905
AMBIENT T, °C
DURING AUDIT
22.9
-
-
-
21.6
-
-
Ol
in
                                 (1)  Audit performed 7/23/77
                                 (2)  High range
                                 *    Tracer Sulfur analyzer
                                 **   Meloy Sulfur analyzer

-------
                                                                         TABLE  11.    RAPS  HELICOPTERS
POLLUTANT

RAPS
HELICOPTER DATE
No. 95958 (1) 2/16
No. 95958 (1) 2/17
No. 87934 (1) 2/24
No. 95958 (1) 3/1
No. 95958 (2) 3/11
No. 87934 (2) 7/14
No. 87934 (1) 7/15
No. 95954 (1) 7/27
No. 87934 (1) 8/9
No. 87934 (2) 8/10
No. 95958 (1) 10/31
No. 95958 (2) 11/1
No. 95958 (1) 11/7
No. 95958 (2) 11/8
No. 95958 (1) 11/14
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
NO
A B r2


.0004 .8589a .9989
.0036 .9270a .9990
-.0022 .9605* .9994
-.0023 .9934a .9994
-.0038 1.0407a .9995
.0016 .9798a .9998
.0017 .9503a .9999
-.0001 .9372a .9991
-.0135 .8609a .9965
-.0111 .8484a .9995
.0013 .9929a .9999
-.0016 1.0406a .9997
-.0027 1.0488a .9994
-.0011 1.1131a .9999
.0002 1.08743 .9998
.9760
.0817
NOX
A B r2


.0089 .8377a .9992
-.0022 .9512a .9993
-.0045 .9688a .9994
-.0057 .9863a .9989
-.0047 1.0384a .9993
.0030 .9509a - .9992
.0037 .9439a .9979
.0008 .9340a .9996
-.0010 .9132a .9999
-.0041 .9122a .9996
.0046 1.0093a .9996
.0119 1.0236a .9996
.0013 1.05473 .9986
.0026 1.0966a .9995
.0001 1.0855a .9999
.9804
.0712
N02 CONVERTER
EFFICIENCY, %


_
_
_
98.0
98.0
99.0
-
102.0
103.0
100.0
97.3
96.7
88.2
96.7
98.6

°3
A B r2



-.0011 -9750b .9947
-.0077 .7436b .9923
.0042 .9449b .9970
.0018 .8198b .9995
.0096 .9660b .9997
.0146 1.1350b .9991
.0030 .7957b .9906
-.0083 1.1104b .9980
-.0075 1.0624b .9991
.0036 1.1530b .9988
.0018 1.1420b .9995
.0004 1.0960b .9996
-.0003 .9700b .9997
.0026 1.3006b .9991
1.0153
.1569
TOTAL SULFUR
A B r2


-.0112 1.2300° .9972

.0115 1.1426C .9980
-.0282 .9093° .9914
.0233 1.2920° .9960
-.0020 1.0593° .9997
-.0018 1.0532° .9999
-.0028 .8850° .9988
-.0037 .8811° .9983
.0034 .8460° .9988
.0002 .5651° .9995
.0013 .5569° .9993
.0078 .8445° .9984
.0088 .8050° .9969
.0090 .8340° .9985
.9230 .8348**
.2168 .1682**
CO
A B r2



1.0500 .94521"

.7899 .9125r .9986
-.0126 .9660r .9997
2.7873 .9287r 1.0000
1.7725 .87481" .9999
3.1970 .90281" .9995



.4071 .8661s .9999
1.7130 .9223s .9958
1.5420 .9530s .9997
.7990 .9832s .9979
.9255
.0379
AMBIENT T, °C
DURING AUDIT


20.2
19.4
22.3
28.3
21.9
23.5
23.8
„
_
,
,
,
„
_
-

tn
                             a =  Monitor Labs 8840 NO-NOX
                             b =  REM Scientific Co. Ozone Analyzer -  Model 612B
                             c =  Meloy Model SA160R
                             r =  Beckman DIF 7000 CO Analyzer
                             s =  Andros CO Analyzer
HELICOPTERS
No.  87934 = RAPS 1
No.  95954 = RAPS 2
No.  95958 = RAPS 3
(1)   Pre-flight audit
(2)   Post-flight audit
*    Sulfur analyzer results nay be seriously affected
     by the absence of C02 in the audit gas mixture
**   Recomputed omitting first four sulfur audits

-------
                                                    TABLE  12.    ST.  LOUIS  CITY  AND  COUNTY  STATIONS
POLLUTANT NO NOX Oj TOTAL SULFUR TOT;_ HYDROCARBONS CO

CITY DATE
Sta. No. 4 6/7
Sta. No. 1 6/8
Sta. No. 5 6/9
Sta. No. 3* 6/10
Sta. No. 2* 6/11
Sta. No. 3 9/8
Sta. No. 2 9/8
COUNTY DATE
Sta. No. 6* 6/15
Sta. No. 9* 6/17
Sta. No. 7* 6/18
Sta. No. 8 6/21
Sta. No. 6 8/25
Sta. No. 7 8/26
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
A B r2

.0036 .6508m .9672

.0000 .9500m .9918
.0186 .3949™ .9883
.0040 .47401" .5820



.0000 .14301"
.0000 .0670
.0000 .1570
.0000 .6270


.4330
.3047
A B r2

.0097 .0237m .8305


.0256 .0085m .1412
.0370 .0470 .1580



.0000 .2200
.0130 .1570
.0040 .0170
.0080 .0000


.0676
.0858
A B r2

.0114 .8970f .9966
.0144 .8822f .9947

.0100 .8355e .9742
.0473 1.3680e .9989
.0055 1.09306 .9989
.0050 1.6630f 1.0000

1.0030 .9860d .9980
(.0060 .5130" .9930
.0021 .8477" .9976
.0046 .5675" .9996
.0005 .7375" .9997
.0088 .7628" .9978
.0031 .8281" .9975
.9216
.3106
A B r2


.1592 .9051° .9973
.1210 1.1979° .9984
.1010 1.1990° .9910
.0665 1.4070° .9933



.0057 .74251 .9775

.0000 .6670
.0000 .3870


.9294
.3586
A B r2

.3000 .8640
.2000 .7730
.0000 .9090
.3000 .6820

.1000 .5450


.2500 .4550
.1000 .9090
.2000 1.0910
.0000 .8860


.7904
.1993
A B r2

7.5680 .9350 .9990
5.1500 1.4900 .9990
6.1980 1.0560 .9980
7.1720 1.1020 .9990
8.7900 1.2480 1.0000
4.7190 1.1163 .9996
4.5100 1.1281 1.0000

1.8700 1.0090 .9902
.6770 1.1100 .9960
3.1710 1.3140 .9412
.0000 1.1950
1.6020 1.0950 .9994
2.4110 .8759 .9852
1.1288
.1599
tn
                 d = Dasibi Ozone Analyzer
                 e =.Bendix Ozone Analyzer
                 f = MEC Ozone Analyzer Model  1100
                 1 = Technlcon S02 Analyzer (breadboard constructlor
m = Technicon NO Analyzer (breadboard construction;
n °-Monitor Labs Model 8410 Ozone Analyzer
o = Davis Model 11-7000 S02 Analyzer

-------
                                                     TABLE  13.   ILLINOIS  STATIONS
POLLUTANT NO CO 03 S02 TOTAL SULFUR
^
STATION DATE
East
St. Louis 6/1
Cahokia
Mounds 6/1
Alton 6/3
Mood
River 6/3
Wood
River 9/10
Cahokia
Mounds 9/10
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
A B r2






A B r2

2.4600 .8130 .9960

2.3330 .8490 .9996

.8310
.0254
A B r2

-.0023 .7260° .9952
-.0041 .7326" .9963
-.0014 .3125" .9996
-.0003 .3092a .9995
.0026 1.0003d .9997
-.0009 .9800d .9996
.b3<:2
.1125
A B r2

(-.0309 1.0463m .9649
\ .0640 .8750P 1.0000
.0295 .9414m .9993
-.0293 .9889m .9759
.0417 .9266m .9764

.9556
.0649
A 8 rL

.0639 .6751 p 1.0000




cn
00
                                                        a =  Dasibi Model  1003AH Ozone Analyzer
                                                        m =  Technicon IV  SO, Analyzer
                                                        p =  Philips SO- Analyzer

-------
                                                                        TABLE  14.    MISCELLANEOUS  AUDITS
POLLUTANT NO HOX 03 S02 TOTAL HYDROCARBON CH. CO
DATE
Husar 6/16
Da Vfnci* 7/9
MRI Cessna 7/10
RAPS G.C. Lab 7/22
Univ. Van
Minnesota 7/24
MRI Cessna" 7/25
Oa Vinci* 7/28
Chancy Laser 7/29
Chaney Laser 7/29
HcElroy Van
SIGN-X 8/2
McElroy Helicopter
SIGN-X 8/6
A 8 r2

.0008 1.018S8 .9991

.0201 .5064" .8973


A B r2

.0004 1.0166a .9995

.0171 .7946a .9659


A B r2
.0024 .7691 .9980
.0006 1.0266 .9995
.0082 .7655b .9994

.0090 .95WJ .9996
.0015 .9544b .9970
.0000 1.0120d .9999
.0033 .9385h .9985
.0048 1.2189h .9990


A B r2

.0211 .78691 .9966
-.0334 1.0925j .9996

.0094 .7305k .9944
.0422 l.ZeBO-' .9986
.0422 .76951 .9994
.0740 .4600y .9950
.0630 .65109 .9980
A B r2


.1993 .9818



A B • r2


-.1250 1.0477



A B r2


-.0525 1.0561 .'1',-,'i
.0360 .6492 .9i62


cn
vo
                            • Monitor Labs 8440 NO-NO,
                          b • REM Scientific Co. Ozone Analyzer - Model 6128
                          d * Daslbl Model 1003AH Ozone Analyzer
                          9 • SIGN-X S02 Analyzer Model 604E
                                           *  Reported instrument meter readings
                                           ** Severe Instrument drift In NO-NO- analyzer
h = A.I.D.  portable ozone analyzer (two analyzers audited)
i = TECO Thermo Electron Corp. Series 43
j = Theta Sensors Inc. Model LS-400A S02 Analyzer
k « Monitor Labs Model 8450 S0? Analyzer

-------
     The overall average rating derived from the first part of the checklist
was 2.8 out of 5.0 possible,  This rating indicated that some improvements
had to be made in order to have an acceptable quality assurance program.
(3.0 represented a marginal, but tolerable condition.)
     Eight remote stations were checked for the second part of the checklist.
The results of these checks revealed that there was uncontrolled or unregu-
lated purging of the ultraviolet lamp housing assembly of the ozone generator;
that the calibration gas mixture created 2 to 3% excess nitrogen which caused
an estimated error of 5 to 10% in hydrocarbon measurements; that some of the
mass flow meters needed recertification; that multipoint calibrations were
not performed every five weeks; and that instruction and operating manuals
for the data system, air quality analyzers and calibration equipment needed
upgrading.
     The overall objective of the quantitative performance audit (Phase II)
was to collect the information necessary to estimate the current precision
and bias of the air pollution and meteorological data generated and subse-
quently reported by RAMS.
     The audit consisted of two main components as follows:
     1.  Total measurement systems audits were performed by locating the
         RTI instrumented mobile Environmental Monitoring Laboratory (EML)
         next to a RAMS station and making simultaneous and independent
         measurements of the same parameters over extended time periods
         (minimum of six days).
     2.  Point-in-time audits of the gaseous air pollutant analyzers were
         performed utilizing calibration systems, certified by EPA prior
         to use, to generate accurately known reference samples for challeng-
         ing the analyzers in the twelve RAMS stations audited.
     Based on the performance audit results and a review of the RAMS vali-
dated hourly averages computer printouts covering the same time period as
the audit, the following conclusions were drawn:
     1.  Except for carbon monoxide, the gaseous air pollutant measuring
         systems and associated calibration techniques and procedures were

                                     60

-------
         capable of producing data of acceptable precision and accuracy
         when properly maintained, i.e.,  calibrated (multipoint)  every five
         weeks,  preventive maintenance performed on schedule,  etc.
     2.   Ambient CO levels less than about 2 ppm were measured low by all  the
         RAMS stations audited indicating a systematic network bias.
     3.   Response times of the sulfur analyzers were much improved compared
         to the results from the HERL audit conducted during the  week of
         January 19 through January 26, 1975.
     4.   Solar radiation data reported from Station 103 may have  been
         inaccurate prior to and during the audit due to 60 Hz pickup on the
         circuits.   The cause of the 60 Hz pickup was located  and corrected
         by Rockwell shortly after the audit.
     5.   RAMS dew point sensors are difficult to maintain in an operational
         mode.   In nearly all the stations audited the sensors were not
         cycling but were in the cooling mode the full time that  RTI  was in
         the station.  Also, the validated hourly averages reported by RAMS
         usually had more than one station reporting negative  dew points in
         June.
                                       q
     6.   Data from RAMS ambient temperature, wind speed, and wind direction
         measurement systems, when compared to RTI, showed good agreement.
     In the third phase RTI made recommendations for the improvement of the
RAMS/RAPS quality control program.  These recommendations included suggestions
for audit procedures, equipment requirements,  data analysis and quality con-
trol organizational structure.  Recommended data validation procedures in-
cluded interparameter checks, range checks and lower detection limit checks.
All of these recommendations can be found along with the results  of the first
two phases in the contract final report.
     During the second contractural period RTI conducted three performance
audits on the RAMS during 1976 and one during 1977.  These audits included
quantitative checks on air quality analyzers,  the ambient temperature measure-
ment systems (5 meter level), the dew point sensors and the high  volume
samplers located at 23 RAMS stations.  The purpose of these audits was to:
                                     61

-------
     1.   Determine the accuracy of individual  sensors at a given point in
         time.
     2.   Identify and report in a timely manner each sensor and/or system
         whose accuracy was found to be outside acceptable limits so that
         Rockwell could investigate and take immediate corrective action if
         required.
     3.   Provide estimates of measurement bias and precision for the RAMS for
         each parameter audited to document the quality of the RAMS measure-
         ments on a network basis.
     The audit devices used to audit the gaseous air analyzers either con-
tained NBS Standard Reference Material (SRM) or transfer standards whose
traceability to NBS SRM or other acceptable primary standards were clearly
established prior to the audit.  Hence the auditors were able to generate
known audit samples on-site.  The high volume sampler flow rates were audited
using a reference flow device provided by the Quality Assurance Branch of
EMSL.  The ambient temperature measurement systems were audited using a
system similar to the RAMS system and by taking simultaneous measurements
for comparison.  The dew point temperature sensors were audited by performing
multiple readings with an aspirated psychrometer.
     Twenty-three of the 25 RAMS stations were audited during the two-week
audit periods.   Audits of 2 of the 23 stations were repeated after elapsed
times of 5 and 10 days to allow for an estimate of the repeatability of the
audit process under field conditions.
     In general the conclusions drawn from the audits indicated that the
RAMS network data were considered acceptable in terms of percent valid data,
accuracy and precision.
                                     62

-------
            APPENDIX A
MULTIPOINT CALIBRATION PROCEDURES
          AND DATA FORMS
                63

-------
                                       INSTRUMENT  (MONITOR LABS) NO-NOY
                                       SERIAL # 	_
                                       EPA #	
                                       DATE OF CALIB. 	
                                       PERFORMED BY 	
                                       SIGNATURE
VAC PANEL PRES	IN/Hg
RANGE CALIBRATED FOR NOX 	
NOY ZERO POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)
NOJj SPAN POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)~

NO ZERO POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)_
NO SPAN POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)
N02 SPAN POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)

MF-1G S/N	FLOW EQUATION
MF-1C S/N	
                    &  NO 	

                   _(AFTER  CALIB.)
                   _(AFTER  CALIB.)'

                   _(AFTER  CALIB.)
                   _(AFTER  CALIB.);

                     (AFTER  CALIB.)
E-A RECORDER S/N_
NO CYLINDER #
.FLOW  EQUATION_

 CHART SPEED
 FULL SCALE
VOLTS
    DATE  &  # OF  CERTIFICATION
CYLINDER CONC.
 PPM
CALIBRATION DATA
MF-1G
cc/min
20
20
20
20
5



MF-1G
Volts








ZERO AIR
MF-1C
cc/min









MF-1C
Volts









N
Cone.









0
Volts









NOU
Cone.









A Volts









OPTIC TEST NO
OPTIC TEST NOT
        _PPM,  RANGE
         PPM,  RANGE"
ELECTRONIC TEST NO
ELECTRONIC TEST NOT
        _%FS
        "%FS
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
    NO
NOV
LINEARITY-

SLOPE	
INTERCEPT-
                                    64

-------
                      OZONE GENERATOR CALIBRATION

                                       DATE OF CALIB.
                                       PERFORMED BY_
                                       SIGNATURE
MF-1C S/N_
MF-1G S/N
E-A RECORDER S/N
FULL SCALE
     VOLTS
               FLOW EQUATION
              /LOW EQUATION"
               CHART SPEED
CALIBRATION

MF-1C, cc/min
MF-1G, cc/min
NO VOLTS WO OZONE_

NO VOLTS W OZONE
5000
MF-1C, VOLTS
               MF-16,  VOLTS
               NO PPM WO OZONE
               NO PPM W OZONE
OZONE PPM (NO PPM WO OZONE - NO PPM W OZONE)	

OZONE GENERATOR SLEEVE SETTING	VOLTS

OZONE GENERATOR AIR FLOW, cc/min	
                                 .10
OZONE GENERATOR RATE, y£/min     .5041
                                                75041
GENERATION RATE EQUATION   PPM 0? = MF-1C flow, liters/minute * .03
                                   65

-------
COLUMN TEP.
DET. TEMP.
SAMPLE FLOW
TS AIR PRES.
Ho PRES.
COLUMN AIR PRES.
H0S PERM TUBE TEMP
S00 PERM TUBE TEMP
H?S PERM TUBE #
SOo PERM TUBE #
E-A RECORDER S/N
°C
°C
cc/min
PSIG
PSI6
PSIG




CHART
INSTRUMENT (TRACOR) TS-S00
DATE OF CALIBRATION
SERIAL #
EPA #
PERFORMED BY
SIGNATURE
(COMP. VOLTAGE)
(COMP. VOLTAGE)
OUTPUT nq/min/@
OUTPUT no/mi n/0
SPEED FULL SCALE






30°C
30°C
VOLTS
MF-1C S/N
FLOW EQUATION
CALIBRATION
MF-1C
(cc/min)















MF-1C
(volts)















ZERO AIR
TS
(cone. )
.40
.30
.19
.15
.10
.06
.03









(L)
(volts)
	
__-














TS (H)
(volts)
















S02
(cone)
.40
.30
.19
.15
.10
.06
.03









(L)
(volts)
__-
__ —














S02 (H)
(volts)
















H2S
(cone)







.20
.15
.095
.08
.06
.04
.02


(L)
(voits;







—
___







H2S (H)
(volts)
—
___
—
—
—
—
—









CALIBRATION CONSTANTS


1 TNFARTTV

ci noc
oLUrh 	
TNTFDTFPT


TS (L)







TS (H)







SO^ (L)







SOo (H)







H9S (L)






'
H9S (H)






                                      66

-------
                                        INSTRUMENT
                                        SERIAL #_J
                                        EPA #
                                                (MONITOR LABS)  -  OZONE
                                        DATE OF CALIB.
                                        PERFORMED BY_
                                        SIGNATURE
ETHYLENE PRES.
ETHYLENE FLOWj
SAMPLE FLOW
RANGE CALIBRATED
                                 _PSIG
                                 _cc/mi n
                                  cc/mi n
ZERO POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.)
SPAN POT SETTING (BEFORE CALIB.);

MF-1C S/N	
E-A RECORDER S/N

00 GEN. OUTPUT ADJUST SETTING
                                            (AFTER CALIB.)
                                           "(AFTFR CALIB.)
                                 FLOW EQUATION
                           CHART SPEED
                    FULL SCALE
          VOLTS
                                      ANALOG VOLTAGE
CALIBRATION
  MF-1C
 ( cc/mi n)
         MF-1C
       (cc/volts)
Cone.
Volts
1090
                                  .45
    1410
                              .35
    1986
                              .25
    3331
                              .15
   10052
                              .05
ZERO AIR
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS

LINEARITY	

SLOPE
INTERCEPT
OPTIC TEST
ELECTRONIC TEST
                                _PPM, RANGE,
                                    67

-------
    INSTRUMENT (BECKMAN 6800)  CO-HC
    SERIAL N0.__	
    EPA NO.	
    DATE RUN	
    PERFORMED BY	
    SIGNATURE
H0 FUEL PRES.
BURNER PRES.
CARRIER AIR PRES.
SERVICE AIR PRES.
H0 CARRIER PRES.
<-.
C3. and R #
PSIG
PSIG
PSIG
PSIG
PSIG
Cl #
             DATE INSTALLED
PARAMETER
AUTO ZERO A
AUTO ZERO B
VALVE A
VALVE B
COMPONENT 1 (THC)
COMPONENT 2 (CH4)
COMPONENT 3 (CO)
TIME, SECONDS
ON







OFF







A







  ,  FULL SCALE
RECORDER CHART SPEED	

NOTES:

     1.  Attach original manual chromatoqram to this form.

     2.  Run an automatic chromatogram to check gating and attach
         original to this form.
VOLTS
68

-------
   FIVE POINT CALIBRATION OF MONITOR LAB 8440 OXIDE OF NITROGEN ANALYZER

A.   Preliminary instrument checks
     1)  Perform an alter on instrument 16.   The instrument should be  on
         line, not reset, not storing, logging, 120 half second average,
         auto ranging, and not calibrating.
     2)  Adjust the vacuum manifold to 20 in. Hg.
     3)  Replace the desiccant in the NO and NOX photomultiplier housing.
     4)  Using a calibrated rotometer, measure the flow through each sample
         inlet line entering into the reaction chambers.  The flow through
         these capillaries should be 250 +_ 50 ml/min.  for each.  Also,
         measure the flow through the ozone line entering the reaction
         chamber.   The total flow here should be 80 +_ 10 ml/min.
     5)  Check the heat exchangers used to cool the photomultiplier tubes.
         They should be warm to the touch.
     6)  Check for any looseness or wear in the bearings of the chopper
         assembly.

B.   Sta NO Cylinder Recertification
     1)  Attach a chart recorder to the output terminals located on the front
         of the instrument.  Full scale for the recorder should be 1 volt
         while monitoring the NO channel.
     2)  Allow the NOy instrument to sample zero air and record the 60 sec.
         average zero value on the NO recertification form.
     3)  The instrument must be either replaced or repaired if it fails to
         conform with a 50 mv maximum noise level  while sampling zero air.
         This applies to both NO and NOX channels, which may be observed on
         the station display.

                                     69

-------
     4)  Allow the instrument to sample span gas and record only the NO
         channel and MF1G span voltages.
     5)  Switch the NO,, and NO sample lines on the back of the instrument.
         The NO output voltage should remain the same, but if it should
         increase, the station NO cylinder should be replaced.  This
         occurrence will indicate that N02 is present in the station NO
         cylinder.  N02 in the NO cylinder is generally seen only when an
         NO tank has an internal pressure of less than 400 Ibs.
     6)  Reconnect the NO and N0» lines to their normal outlets.
     7)  Disconnect the station NO tank and replace it with the calibration
         standard tank.  Open the NO flow controller to its maximum and
         activate the NO and NO-THC run calibrate valves.   When the NO std.
         tank is now opened, it will purge the plumbing lines as quickly as
         possible with the least chance of contaminating the NO std. tank.
     8)  After 5 min., reduce the MF1G voltage to that found in Section 4,
         when the station NO tank was spanned.  Record this NO channel
         voltage output.  MF1C must also remain the same as that used in
         Section 4.
     9)  The concentration of the station NO cylinder can be calculated from
         the following:
  Sta. NO cyl. cone., ppm = std. cyl.  cone, ppm std.'  cyl span - zero j
volts
volts
         where:  MF1C and MF1G remain constant
    10)  Record the new concentration on the NO recertification form and on
         a tag around the neck of the station NO cylinder.
    11)  Reconnect the station NO cylinder and proceed as in Section 7 to
         avoid contaminating the station NO tank.
    12)  Remove the chart recorder and attach its trace as requested.

C.   Five Point Calibration of an NO., Analyzer
     1)  Turn the ozone generator power off to the NO,, analyzer.

                                     70

-------
     2)  Set the zero voltage output by adjusting the NO and NOX zero pots.
         To attain the desired 40 to 60 mv output, the dial  settings should
         ball between 490 and 515.  Failure to do so will require the instru-
         ment to be replaced.  Record the zero voltages and  dial settings on
         the NO-NOX calibration form.
     3)  With the analyzer still sampling dilution air, turn the ozone power
         on.  Any increase in the instrument voltage outputs will indicate
         NO or N0~ in the dilution gas.  Should this occur,  the activated
         charcoal in the heat!ess dryer will have to be replaced.
     4)  Using calculated values for MF1C, MF1G, and the new sta. NO cylinder
         concentration, span the instrument to 0.25 ppm NO.   Allowing the
         instrument to reach a voltage plateau on the chart  recorder, adjust
         the NO and N0» channels to 2.550 volts.  Record these values on the
         calibration form.
     5)  Allow 03 to enter the calibration system.  Monitor  the NOw channel
         for any change in voltage output.  Any dropping in  NOw output
         voltage indicates the molybdenum metal catalytic converter is
         depleated and should be replaced before continuing.  Deactivate
         the 0^ valve.
     6)  Using the flow equations for MF1C and MF1G, introduce into the NOw
         analyzer the called for span concentrations as seen on the NOX
         calibration form.  Allowing the instrument to remain at each con-
         centration, until a constant voltage is attained, record each
         output voltage for NO and NOw using the logout 60 second averages.
     7)  Plot all NO and NOX points on graph paper to insure linearity.

D.   Calibration of Ozone Generator
     1)  Check that the rotometer, for the 0, flow, is 30 ml/min.
     2)  Set MF1C to give a flow of 5000 ml/min.
     3)  Using the above MF1C flow rate, adjust MF1G for an  NO concentration
         of 0.2 ppm.  NO output voltage should be the same as that during
         the five point calibration.
                                     71

-------
4)  Turn on the ozone run-calibrate valve, allowing NO to be converted
    to N02 in the calibration manifold.   If the NO voltage is too high
    or too low for the NO voltage output for 0.1  ppm as seen during the
    five point calibration, adjust the ozone sleeve setting downward or
    upward respectively.  This is a delicate adjustment with a long lag
    time, and no adjustment to the sleeve should be made to correct the
    voltage until the sleeve has remained unchanged for 5 minutes.
5)  When the same voltage for 0.1 ppm NO during the 5 point calibration
    is attained, the adjustment to the sleeve is complete.  If the NO
    values for this calibration appear to oscillate, the closure of the
    air register directly over the 03 generator has proven helpful  in
    ending this problem.
6)  Return all run calibrate valves to their normal state.
7)  Alter instrument 16 such that its output is on line, not in reset,
    storing, not logging, 120 half second averaging, auto ranging,  and
    in calibrate-span.
                               72

-------
    FIVE POINT CALIBRATION OF MONITOR LAB MODEL 8410 A OZONE ANALYZER*

*This calibration can be performed only after completion of the NO,, five
 point calibration.

A.   Establishment of Proper Operating Parameters
     1)  Alter instrument number 7.   Instrument should be on line,  not reset,
         not storing, logging, 120 half second averaging, auto ranging and
         not calibrating.
     2)  Change dessicant in the photomultiplier tube housing.
     3)  Check the heat exchanger for the PMT cooler.  The heat exchanger
         should be warm to the touch.
     4)  Check the reaction chamber chopper assembly for bearing wear.
     5)  Measure the sample flow rate entering the instrument.  Acceptable
         flow rates are 200 to 350 cc/min.
     6)  Adjust the ethylene pressure into the instrument to 30 Ibs.
     7)  The calibration range is number 2 (0-0.5 ppm) and the time interval,
         20 sec.

B.   Five Point Calibration
     1)  Allow the instrument to sample zero dilution air for 5 min.   Display
         the ozone channel on the station display.  Noise in excess of 50 mv
         will require that the instrument be repaired or replaced.
     2)  Adjust the zero pot adjustment to give an output 60 sec.  voltage
         average of 40 to 60 mv.  The zero pot setting must remain  between
         490 and 515.  Failure to do so will require the instruments  replace-
         ment.  Record this result on the calibration form.
     3)  Span the instrument using 0.15 ppm 0,.  Adjust the ozone analyzer

                                     73

-------
    to approximately 1.550 volts.   Record the 60 sec.  voltage average
    on the five point calibration  form.
4)  Continue to span the analyzer  using  all  of the concentrations  asked
    for on the calibration form.   Record all  of the output voltages.
5)  Plot a graph for all of the concentrations versus  their voltage
    outputs.  If the plot is non-linear  at the higher  concentrations,
    check the ethylene flow rate.   It should be between 4 and 15 ml/min.
    Should the plot be non-linear  at the lower concentrations, check
    the instrument and the calibration system for any  leaks.
6)  Complete the five point calibration  form answering all questions.
7)  Return the analyzer and calibration  system to their normal ambient
    sampling modes.
8)  Re-alter instrument 7.  It should be on line, not  reset,  in storing,
    not logging, 120 half second averaging, auto ranging, and in
    calibrate span.
                               74

-------
        FIVE POINT CALIBRATION OF A TRACOR 270 HA SULFUR ANALYZER

A.   Preliminary Instrument Adjustment
     1)  Install an hLS permeation tube in the Haake water bath.   The water
         bath should be set at exactly 30°C.   Turn on the nitrogen flow
         across the H?S permeation tube and adjust the flow to 30 ml/min.
         Preferably the HLS permeation tube should remain in the  water bath
         for four hours prior to any quantitative use.
     2)  Adjust the air flow across the S02 permeation tube to 30 ml/min.
     3)  Alter instrument number 17.  Instrument should be on line, not
         reset, not storing, logging, 6 half second averaging, auto ranging,
         and not in calibrate span.
     4)  Adjust, if necessary, the hydrogen,  total sulfur, and column air
         pressures to the settings listed on  the instrument operating
         parameters tag.
     5)  Check that the limiter switches on the high and low range linearizer
         cards are off (turned to the CCW end).
     6)  Zero the Tracer electrometer in accordance with section  3-8, in the
         Tracer instrument manual.
     7)  Allow the instrument to sample hLS and SOp at normal span settings
         (MF1C, 5LPM).
     8)  Attach a chart recorder to the chromatograph low output  terminal  at
         the rear of the instrument.  The recorder should be run  at 60 mm/min.
         and 1 volt full scale.
     9)  Run a chromatogram of an auto injection cycle.  Mark on  the chromato-
         gram the valve and component gate activation times.  If  the elution
         times for the H^S and S02 peaks are  not close to the medians of the
         component gate times, adjust the column temperature as prescribed

                                     75

-------
         in section 3.3 of the Tracer manual.
         The maximum allowable noise level  for the instrument is 2% full
         scale.  If this should be exceeded as seen with a ragged baseline,
         measure the dynode voltage.  This  voltage is normally in the -600
         to -800 D.C. volt range.  If the voltage is out of this range,
         monitor the linearizer voltage at TP1 for 0.1 ppm S02-   The voltage
         should be measured as the maximum.voltage seen during an SOp peak
         elution.  Attach a pico-amp source to.the instrument electrometer
         and dial in an amperage until the voltage previously seen at TP1  is
         equaled.  This amperage should approximately equal  1.2 x 10   amps
         for 100 ppb.  If the amperage is less or more than this amount,
         increase or decrease the dynode. voltage respectively.
         Had the dynode voltage not been outside of the -600 to -900 volt
         range, other cuases of excessive noise could have been, internal  gas
         leaks, a defective photomultiplier tube, a defective electrometer,
         or a defective or dirty detector assembly.

B.    Five Point Calibration
     1)  Allow the instrument to sample 0.6 ppm SOp.  After 2 complete cycles,
         adjust the TS and SOp low span pots to give an output voltage of
         approximately 1.55 volts.  Record the exact voltage on the five
         point calibration form.
     2)  Span the instrument to all other low range points including zero.
         Record the output voltages and plot same versus concentration on
         graph paper.
     3)  If the graph results are linear and intersect at the zero concen-
         tration voltage, proceed to step 4.  If not, proceed to section C.
     4)  Span the instrument to 0.3 ppm SOp.  Adjust the SOp and TS high
         span pots to give an output voltage of 1.550 volts.  Record the
         exact voltages on the calibration form.
     5)  Span the instrument to all other high range concentrations and
         zero.  Plot all voltages versus concentrations.  If the plots are
         non-linear and do not go through zero, see section C.  If they are
                                     76

-------
         linear through zero proceed to step 6.
     6)  Turn off the S0? run calibrate valve and allow the instrument to
         sample HLS at 0.06 ppm for 2 cycles.  Adjust the H2S low span to
         3.05 volts.
     7)  Allow the Tracer to sample 0.2 ppm H2$ for 2 cycles.  Set the H2S
         high span to 1.05 volts.
     8)  Complete all span concentrations and zero for both ranges.   Record
         all results on the five point calibration form and plot voltages
         versus concentration.
     9)  Return MF1C and the run-calibrate valves to their normal  settings.
    10)  Remove the H?S permeation tube from the water bath and turn off the
         nitrogen flow.
    11)  Alter instrument 17.  Instrument should be on line, not reset, not
         storing, logging, 120 half second averaging, auto ranging and in
         calibrate-span.

C.   Tracer Linearizing Procedure
     1)  Adjust both high and low range linearizers according to sections
         3.9 and 3.10 in the Tracer instrument manual.
     2)  Return to step B.3 or B.5, depending on the interested range.
     3)  If the Tracer remains non-linear through zero, go to step 4.
     4)  Attach a chart recorder on a DVM to TP1 of the low range linearizer
         card.
     5)  Measure the maximum voltage output at TP1 for 0.03 and 0.2 ppm
         S02 during the S02 gate interval.
     6)  Measure the maximum voltage output at TP1 of the high range
         linearizer card for 0.4 and 0.05 ppm S0? during the S02 gate
         interval.
     7)  Using a pico-amp source,  determine the amps needed to give an
         equal  voltage at the two TP1 locations for the concentration in
         sections 5 and 6.
                                     77

-------
8)  Using the amperage determined in the above,  establish a new
    calibration curve for SOp.   Reset the linearizers as  in 3.9 and
    3.10 of the Tracor manual  using the calibration curves established
    in C.8.
9)  Return to step B.3 or B.5  and perform a five point calibration.
    If the instrument is not linear through zero, replace the instru-
    ment.
                               78

-------
        FIVE POINT CALIBRATION OF A BECKMAN 6800 GAS CHROMATOGRAPH

A.   Instrument Setup
     1)  Alter instrument number 10.  Instrument should be oh line,  not reset,
         not storing, logging, 6 half second averaging, inhibit auto ranging,
         using low range and not in calibrate-span.
     2)  Using a calibrated rotometer, check and adjust if necessary, the
         sample flow to approximately 400 ml/min.
     3)  Zero the electronics of the 6800 amp board  and component boards
         using the procedures outlined in the "Beckman 6800 Technical
         Training Program Manual".   Accuracy should  be to the nearest mv
         using either a chart recorder or DVM.
     4)  Allow the 6800 to sample span gas at normal cal-span concentrations.
     5)  Run a manual chromatogram using valve  A.  A chart recorder  should be
         attached to the chromatogram leads at  the front of the instrument.
         The recorder settings should be 60 mm/min.  with 50 mv full  scale.
         The 6800 attenuation and range settings should be set at 1.
     6)  Using the results in Section 5, adjust if necessary, the hydrogen
         carrier to elute the CO peak at 240 sec.  A one pound increase in
         Hp carrier should shorten the elution  time  by 10 seconds.  If the
         CO peak is excessively slow to return  to baseline, the space
         between the CO and CH. peak is shorter than 40 seconds, or  the ramp
         leading into the CH. peak is shorter than 15 seconds or not forming
         a level plateau at baseline, the analytical columns should  be
         replaced.
     7)  Using 5 second increments, run multiple manual chromatograms using
         varying valve A activation times.  Establish the correct valve A
         activation time by judging what time is needed for all of the methane
         to pass through the C-, stripper column.  To this time add 5 seconds
                                     79

-------
         as a  safety margin  to  attain  the  proper valve A  activation  time
         that  will  be used on the valve  A  timing board.
     8)   Determine  the proper air carrier  and  burner  air  pressure  settings.
         Air carrier should  be  adjusted  upward to a level  where  a  maximum
         peak  first occurs  (15-24 Ibs.).   The  burner  air  to  a  level  where
         the THC peak has a  flat plateau for a peak without  any  spikes or
         irregularities (14-23  Ibs.).
     9)   Run a manual chromatogram using the valve A  activation  time deter-
         mined in Section 7.  All timing boards should be set  In the
         following  manner:
         a) auto zero A; 1-5 seconds
         b) valve  B; 10-20  seconds
         c) auto zero B; 5  second interval  starting  ten  seconds before the
            beginning of the CH. peak
         d) valve  A; the time  duration  deduced in Section 7,  starting at  30
            seconds
         e) component 1; 11  to 19 seconds
         f) component 2; an interval  surrounding the CH. peak
         g) compenent 3; an interval  surrounding the CO  peak
    10)   Run an automatic chromatogram using the above timing  settings.
         Attach the manual  and  automatic chromatograms to the  completed
         calibration form for the 6800.
B.   Five Point Calibration
     1)   Allow the  instrument to sample  zero air for  ten  minutes.   Dilution
         air for this setting should be  5000 ml/min.   If  the THC,  CH4 and  CO
         output voltages do  not agree with those set  in Section  A-3, the MSA
         oxidizer needs to  be replaced.
     2)   Perform the MSA oxidizer test using zero gas readings for THC, CH»
         and CO at  2 and 15  LPM.
     3)   Span  the 6800 using 8  ppm CO.  While  using  the low  range, set the CO
                                    80

-------
    span pot to 4.050 volts.   Set the THC and CH^ low range span pot
    adjustments to their required voltages.
4)  With the alter in the low range, slide the CO - THC, CH4 switch to
    the THC, CH4 position.  This will switch the CO to high range.
    Switch the range toggle switches for CH. and THC to the high range
    position.
5)  Span the 6800 to 40 ppm CO.  Adjust the THC and CH4 high range pot
    settings to give the desired results.  Do not span the CO span pot
    as it has already been set at the low range.  All span adjustments
    should be made using the calibration features incorporated into the
    6800.  Record these results on the calibration form.
6)  Run the remainder of the calibration points, switching from high to
    low range when necessary.  The 6800 should be allowed to sample each
    span gas for 2 cycles prior to the sample injection used for cali-
    bration.  Record all results as required on the five point calibra-
    tion form.
7)  Plot all high and low range points on graph paper to insure
    linearity.
8)  Return all run calibrate valves, MF1C and MF1G to their normal
    operating modes.
9)  Alter instrument 10.  The 6800 should be on line, not reset, storing,
    not logging, 120 half second averaging, auto-ranging, and in
    calibrate-span.
                                81

-------
         APPENDIX B





MULTIPOINT CALIBRATION INDEX
             82

-------
                       MULTIPOINT CALIBRATION INDEX
STATION #101
PARAMETER
Ozone


Instrument
Date









PARAMETER
of Calibration
08/16/74
12/26/74
03/13/75
06/09/75
01/14/76
03/24/76
06/17/76
10/06/76
01/24/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
S/N
64
66
66
68
68
68
68
68
68

EPA S/N
007461
007463
007463
007464
007464
007464
007464 .
007464
007464

Instrument
Date









PARAMETER
of Calibration
08/15/74
12/26/74
03/13/75
06/09/75
01/14/76
03/24/76
06/17/76
10/08/76
01/24/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
S/N
38
46
46
46
20
20
20
52
52
EPA S/N
012773
012779
012779
012779
012770
012770
012770
012785
012785
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
Date









of Calibration
08/14/74
12/24/74
03/25/75
06/10/75
01/15/76
03/30/76
06/21/76
10/14/76
01/27/77
S/N
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
1000300
EPA S/N
007409
007409
007409
007409
007409
007409
007409
007409
007409
                                      83

-------
STATION #101 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur,  Sulfur Dioxide
           Date of Calibration
                08/22/74
                12/27/74
                03/21/75
                06/11/75
                01/28/76
                03/29/76
                06/17/76
                10/07/76
                01/21/77
                                              Instrument
S/N
134
134
122
122
129
129
129
136
136
EPA S/N
007450
007450
007439
007439
007446
007446
007446
007454
007454
STATION #102
     PARAMETER  Ozone
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                07/01/74
                01/21/75
                05/14/75
                12/02/75
                04/20/76
                06/30/76
                11/09/76
                02/21/77
     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                07/15/74
                01/20/75
                05/14/75
                12/02/75
                02/19/75
                04/20/76
                06/30/76
                11/09/76
                02/21/77
S/N
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
EPA S/N
007470
007470
007470
007470
007470
007470
007470
007470
Instrument
S/N
17
38
38
38
38
38
6
57
57
EPA S/N
012766
012773
012773
012773
012773
012773
012764
012791
012791
                                   84

-------
STATION #102 (continued)

     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Total  Hydrocarbons
           Date of Calibration
                06/27/74
                01/21/75
                05/16/75
                12/04/75
                02/20/76
                04/21/76
                07/01/76
                11/10/76
                02/22/77
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
1000267   007401
     PARAMETER  Total Sulfur
           Date of Calibration
                07/01/74
                01/21/75
                05/14/75
                12/03/75
                02/20/76
                04/22/76
                07/01/76
                11/10/76
                02/21/77
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L272    007434
 3L103    006869
 3L042    007432
STATION #103
     PARAMETER  Ozone
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                06/12/74
                08/26/74
                10/30/74
                01/16/75
                04/09/75
                06/04/75
                11/11/75
                02/27/76
                05/07/76
                08/19/76
                12/07/76
                03/10/77
S/N
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
78
78
78
EPA S/N
007457
007457
007457
007457
007457
007457
007457
007457
007457
007476
007476
007476
                                    85

-------
STATION #103 (continued)
PARAMETER

Date












PARAMETER
Oxides of Nitrogen

of Calibration
06/12/74
08/26/74
10/30/74
01/16/75
04/09/75
06/03/75
11/06/75
02/27/76
05/06/76
08/19/76
12/07/76
03/10/77


Instrument
S/N
19
56
43
55
55
55
55
6
6
56
56
56
EPA S/N
012768
012790
012777
012789
012789
012789
012789
012764
012764
012790
012790
012790
Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
Date












PARAMETER
of Calibration
06/15/74
08/26/74
10/28/74
01/15/75
04/30/75
06/04/75
11/25/75
03/05/76
05/06/76
08/20/76
12/06/76
03/09/77
Total Sulfur, Sulfur
S/N
1000276
1000276
1000276
1000276
1000276
1000276
1000298
1000298
1000298
1000298
1000298
1000298
EPA S/N
012746
012746
012746
012746
012746
012746
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
Date













of Calibration
06/21/74
08/27/74
10/29/74
01/17/75
04/28/75
06/04/75
12/03/75
03/04/76
05/07/76
08/19/76
11/05/76
12/08/76
03/09/77
S/N
126
126
126
126
126
126
137
137
137
126
126
126
126
EPA S/N
007443
007443
007443
007443
007443
007443
007452
007452
007452
007443
007443
007443
007443
                                    86

-------
STATION #104
PARAMETER Ozone

Date of Calibration
08/19/74
12/30/74
03/27/75
06/12/75
02/04/76
04/21/76
06/25/76
10/04/76
01/13/77
04/06/77
PARAMETER Oxides of Nitrogen

Date of Calibration
08/19/74
12/30/74
03/27/75
06/12/75
02/04/76
04/21/76
06/25/76
10/04/76
01/13/77
04/06/77
PARAMETER Carbon Monoxide, Methane,

Date of Calibration
08/17/74
12/31/74
03/25/75
04/08/75
09/26/75
02/05/76
04/19/76
06/28/76
10/05/76
01/10/77
04/13/77


Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478
83 007478

Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
50 012784
50 012784
50 012784
50 012784
47 012781
41 012775
41 012775
47 012781
40 012789
40 012789
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
1000315 007421
87

-------
STATION #104 (continued)

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur, Sulfur Dioxide,  Hydroqen Sulfide
           Date of Calibration
                08/20/74
                12/31/74
                03/28/75
                09/26/75
                02/06/76
                04/20/76
                10/06/76
                11/10/76
                01/18/77
  Instrument
S/N     EPA S/N
124     007441
124     007441
124     007441
124     007441
124     007441
124     007441
130     007448
130     007448
130     007448
STATION #105
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                07/29/74
                01/07/75
                05/14/75
                12/15/75
                03/03/76
                06/02/76
                09/01/76
                12/09/76

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                07/28/74
                01/07/75
                05/14/75
                12/15/75
                03/09/76
                06/02/76
                08/31/76
                12/09/76
  Instrument
S/N     EPA S/N
79      007474
81      007482
81      007482
81      007482
81      007482
81      007482
81      007482
66      007463
                                              Instrument
S/N
51
19
19
19
19
37
37
37
EPA S/N
012786
012768
012768
012768
012768
012771
012771
012771
                                    88

-------
STATION #105 (continued)

     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Total  Hydrocarbons
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                07/28/74
                01/08/75
                05/19/75
                05/29/75
                12/23/75
                03/22/76
                06/04/76
                09/07/76
                12/10/76
     PARAMETER  Total Sulfur, Sulfur Dioxide,  Hydrogen  Sulfide

                                              Instrument
S/N
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
1000303
EPA S/N
007415
007415
007415
007415
007415
007415
007415
007415
007415
           Date of Calibration
                08/06/74
                01/08/75
                05/15/75
                12/29/75
                03/09/76
                09/10/76
                12/20/76
        S/N
        132
        132
        134
        134
        134
        128
        128
EPA S/N
007447
007447
007450
007450
007450
007445
007445
STATION #106
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                05/06/74
                01/13/75
                05/21/75
                12/30/75
                03/08/76
                05/10/76
                08/12/76
                11/18/76
                03/04/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                05/06/74
                01/13/75
                05/20/75
                12/30/75
                03/08/76
                08/12/76
                11/18/76
                03/04/77
                                              Instrument
89
S/N
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
EPA S/N
007466
007466
007466
007466
007466
007466
007466
007466
007466
Instrument
S/N
20
40
40
46
46
46
46
20
EPA S/N
012770
012774
012774
012779
012779
012779
012779
012770

-------
STATION #106 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Total  Hydrocarbons
                                              Instrument
Date











PARAMETER
of Calibration
05/10/74
08/03/74
01/14/75
06/10/75
01/13/76
03/05/76
05/14/76
08/12/76
12/02/76
03/08/77
07/06/77
Total Sulfur, Sulfur
S/N
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
1000290
EPA S/N
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
007407
Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
Date









STATION #107
PARAMETER
of Calibration
06/06/74
11/06/74
01/14/75
06/05/75
01/12/76
03/08/76
05/12/76
11/24/76
03/03/77

Ozone
S/N
127
128
128
128
128
128
128
129
129


EPA S/N
007444
007445
007445
007445
007445
007445
007445
007446
007446


Instrument
Date










of Calibration
08/21/74
12/19/74
04/30/75
06/09/75
12/31/75
03/12/76
05/20/76
08/26/76
12/13/76
03/11/77
S/N
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
EPA S/N
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
007458
                                   90

-------
STATION #107 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
Instrument
Date











PARAMETER
of Calibration
08/21/74
12/19/74
04/30/75
06/09/75
12/31/75
03/12/76
05/20/76
08/26/76
09/28/76
12/10/76
03/11/77
Carbon Monoxide,
S/N
41
18
18
18
18
37
51
38
38
20
38
EPA S/N
012775
012769
012769
012769
012769
012771
012786
012773
012773
012770
012773
Methane, Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
Date










PARAMETER
of Calibration
08/21/74
12/20/74
06/11/75
01/19/76
03/11/76
05/24/76
08/30/76
12/09/76
03/14/77
03/29/77
Total Sulfur
S/N
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274
1000274

EPA S/N
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795
012795

Instrument
Date










of Calibration
08/21/74
12/19/74
05/01/75
06/11/75
01/02/76
03/15/76
05/20/76
08/26/76
12/13/76
03/14/77
S/N
3K132
3K132
3K132
3K237
3K237
3K237
3K237
3K237
3K237
3K237
EPA S/N
007428
007428
007428
007429
007429
007429
007429
007429
007429
007429
                                   91

-------
STATION #108
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Ozone
of Calibration
07/26/74
12/19/74
01/22/75
04/10/75
01/08/76
03/09/76
05/19/76
09/01/76
12/02/76
03/10/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
07/26/74
12/19/74
01/22/75
04/10/75
01/06/76
03/09/76
05/19/76
09/01/76
11/30/76
03/10/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
of Calibration
07/27/74
01/23/75
04/15/75
01/14/76
03/10/76
05/21/76
09/03/76
11/29/76
03/10/77
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
71 007467
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
5 012767
53 012788
53 012788
53 012788
48 012782
48 012782
48 012782
48 012782
18 012769
18 012769
Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
1000255 007403
                                    92

-------
STATION #108 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur,  Sulfur Dioxide,  Hydrogen  Sulfide
           Date of Calibration
                07/27/74
                01/24/75
                04/16/75
                01/14/76
                03/11/76
                05/19/76
                09/20/76
                12/02/76
                03/11/77
                                              Instrument
S/N
133
133
133
127
127
127
131
131
131
EPA S/N
007453
007453
007453
007444
007444
007444
007449
007449
007449
STATION #109
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                06/28/74
                11/12/74
                02/04/75
                05/01/75
                07/24/75
                01/29/76
                04/07/76
                06/16/76
                10/27/76

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                06/26/74
                11/17/74
                02/04/75
                05/01/75
                07/24/75
                01/29/76
                04/07/76
                06/16/76
                10/27/76
                01/31/77
                                              Instrument
S/N
68
68
68
70
70
70
70
70
70
EPA S/N
007464
007464
007464
007468
007468
007468
007468
007468
007468
Instrument
S/N
40
17
17
17
17
40
40
40
40
40
EPA S/N
012774
012766
012766
012766
012766
012774
012774
012774
012774
012774
                                    93

-------
STATION #109 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
           Date of Calibration
                06/26/74
                11/12/74
                01/31/75
                01/30/76
                04/13/76
                06/24/76
                11/05/76
                01/26/77

     PARAMETER  Total Sulfur
           Date of Calibration
                06/29/74
                11/07/74
                02/05/75
                07/21/75
                01/29/76
                04/14/76
                06/17/76
                11/03/76
                01/31/77
Total Hydrocarbons
    Instrument
S/N
1000291
1000291
1000291
1000291
1000201
1000291
1000291
1000291
EPA S/N
012792
012792
012792
012792
012792
012792
012792
012792
Instrument
S/N
3K216
3L003
3L003
3L003
3L003
3L003
3L003
3L003
3L003
EPA S/N
007425
007430
007430
007430
007430
007430
007430
007430
007430
STATION #110
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                08/01/74
                11/13/74
                03/04/75
                06/13/75
                01/13/76
                03/16/76
                05/21/76
                08/24/76
                12/09/76
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
  76
  76
  77
  77
  77
  77
  77
  77
  77
007475
007475
007472
007472
007472
007472
007472
007472
007472
                                    94

-------
STATION #110 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
Instrument
Date










PARAMETER
of Calibration
08/01/74
11/13/74
01/24/75
03/04/75
06/13/75
01/13/76
03/16/76
05/21/76
08/24/76
12/09/76
Carbon Monoxide,
S/N
52
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
EPA S/N
012785
012778
012778
012778
012778
012778
012778
012778
012778
012778
Methane, Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
Date









PARAMETER
of Calibration
07/31/74
11/14/74
03/05/75
07/02/75
01/20/76
03/26/76
05/25/76
08/26/76
12/16/76
Total Sulfur
S/N
1 000289
1000289
1000289
1000289
1000289
1000289
1000289
1000289
1000289

EPA S/N
007408
007408
007408
007408
007408
007408
007408
007408
007408

Instrument
Date









of Cal ibration
07/31/74
11/13/74
03/06/75
06/19/75
01/14/75
03/17/76
05/26/76
08/26/76
12/15/76
S/N
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
3K238
EPA S/N
007431
007431
007431
007431
007431
007431
007431
007431
007431
                                     95

-------
STATION #111
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                08/13/74
                01/02/75
                05/20/75
                12/09/75
                03/02/76
                04/27/76
                08/02/76
                11/16/76
                03/01/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                08/12/74
                01/02/75
                05/20/75
                12/09/75
                03/02/76
                04/27/76
                08/02/76
                11/16/76
                03/01/77
                                   Instrument
                                 S/N      EPA S/N
                                 65      007462
                                 65      007462
                                 65      007462
                                 80      007477
                                 80      007477
                                 80      007477
                                 80      007477
                                 80      007477
                                 80      007477
                                   Instrument
                                 S/N      EPA S/N
47
39
39
37
37
39
39
39
39
012781
012772
012772
012771
012771
012772
012772
012772
012772
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane,  Total  Hydrocarbons

                                              Instrument
                                            S/N      EPA S/N
                                          1000273   012793
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
Date of Calibration
     08/12/74
     01/03/75
     06/05/75
     12/11/75
     03/03/76
     04/29/76
     08/03/76
     11/17/76
     03/02/77
     06/25/77
                                          1000273
                                          1000273
012793
012793
012793
012793
012793
012793
012793
012793
012793
                                     96

-------
STATION #111 (continued)

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur


           Date of Calibration
                08/13/74
                01/02/75
                06/05/75
                12/10/75
                03/03/76
                04/29/76
                08/02/76
                11/16/76
                03/01/77
   Instrument
 S/N
3K237
3K237
3K132
3K132
3K132
3K132
3K132
3K132
3K132
EPA S/N
007429
007429
007428
007428
007428
007428
007428
007428
007428
STATION #112
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                08/13/74
                12/17/74
                04/16/75
                10/07/75
                02/02/76
                04/06/76
                06/17/76
                10/12/76
                01/19/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                08/13/74
                12/17/74
                04/15/75
                10/07/75
                02/02/76
                04/06/76
                06/17/76
                10/07/76
                01/19/77
Instrument
S/N
80
80
80
67
67
65
67
67
81
EPA S/N
007477
007477
007477
007465
007465
007462
007465
007465
007482
Instrument
S/N
6
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
EPA S/N
012764
012765
012765
012765
012765
012765
012765
012765
012765
                                    97

-------
STATION #112 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane,  Total  Hydrocarbons
           Date of Calibration
                08/10/74
                12/17/74
                04/18/75
                10/09/75
                02/03/76
                04/05/76
                06/18/76
                10/15/76
                10/21/76
                02/04/77

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur
           Date of Calibration
                08/10/74
                12/17/74
                04/16/75
                10/08/75
                02/04/76
                04/06/76
                06/21/76
                10/20/76
                01/21/77
                                              Instrument
S/N
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
1000301
EPA S/N
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
007410
Instrument
S/N
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
3M046
EPA S/N
007435
007435
007435
007435
007435
007435
007435
007435
007435
STATION #113
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                06/24/74
                11/05/74
                02/04/75
                05/20/75
                12/05/75
                03/09/76
                05/11/76
                08/16/76
                08/23/76
                11/22/76
                03/04/77
Instrument
S/N
66
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
EPA S/N
007463
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
007469
                                    98

-------
STATION #113 (continued)
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
03/09/76
05/11/76
08/16/76
11/22/76
03/03/77
Carbon Monoxide, Metf
of Calibration
06/17/74
11/07/74
02/06/75
05/27/75
12/10/75
03/09/76
05/17/76
08/19/76
12/07/76
03/08/77
Total Sulfur, Sulfur
of Calibration
06/18/74
06/07/74
11/06/74
02/05/75
05/22/75
12/16/75
03/10/76
05/17/76
08/17/76
12/07/76
03/10/77
Insti
S/N
41
55
55
19
19
lane, Total Hyc
Insti
S/N
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
1000269
Dioxide, Hydrc
Instr
S/N
66
131
131
131
131
131
131
131
124
124
124
"ument
EPA S/N
012775
012789
012789
012768
012768
Jrocarbons
"ument
EPA S/N
012800
012800
012800
012800
01 2800
012800
012800
012800
012800
01 2800
jgen Sulfide
"ument
EPA S/N
007479
007449
007449
007449
007449
007449
007449
007449
007441
007441
007441
                                    99

-------
STATION #114
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                08/15/74
                01/09/75
                04/02/75
                10/08/75
                02/10/76
                04/14/76
                06/23/76
                10/26/76
                02/18/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                10/08/75
                02/10/76
                04/14/76
                06/23/76
                10/26/76
                02/17/77
  Instrument
S/N     EPA S/N
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
007480
007480
007480
007480
007480
007480
007480
007480
007480
  Instrument
S/N     EPA S/N
45
45
45
45
45
48
012780
012780
012780
012780
012780
012782
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide, Methane,  Total  Hydrocarbons
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                10/10/75
                02/11/76
                06/24/76
                10/27/76
                02/17/77
     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur, Sulfur Dioxide,  Hydrogen  Sulfide
S/N
1000275
1000275
1000275
1000275
1000275
EPA S/N
012796
012796
012796
012796
012796
           Date of Calibration
                08/15/74
                01/10/75
                04/08/75
                10/16/75
                02/11/76
                04/27/76
                10/29/76
                02/23/77
  Instrument
S/N     EPA S/N
135     007451
135     007451
135     007451
135     007451
135     007451
122     007439
122     007439
122     007439
                                    100

-------
STATION #115
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Ozone
of Calibration
01/22/76
03/16/76
05/28/76
09/08/76
12/21/76
03/22/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
59 007456
59 007456
59 007456
59 007456
59 007456
59 007456
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
07/30/74 54 012787
12/04/74 48 012782
03/17/75 48 012782
07/18/75 6 012764
01/21/76 54 012787
03/16/76 54 012787
05/27/76 54 012787
09/08/76 54 012787
12/20/76 54 012787
03/22/77 54 012787
Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
of Calibration S/N EPA S/N
01/21/76
03/18/76
06/03/76
09/10/76
12/17/76
03/30/77
06/21/77
Total Sulfur, Sulfur
of Calibration
01/27/76
03/04/76
03/22/76
09/09/76
12/21/76
03/28/77
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
1000299 007414
Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1 30 007448
130 007448
130 007448
135 007451
135 007451
135 007451
101

-------
STATION #116
PARAMETER

Date









PARAMETER

Date













PARAMETER

Date








Ozone

of Calibration
07/07/74
11/08/74
02/08/75
05/06/75
02/17/76
04/28/76
07/08/76
11/11/76
03/02/77
Oxides of Nitrogen

of Calibration
07/06/74
11/08/74
02/08/75
05/06/75
10/30/7.5
02/17/76
03/10/76
04/28/76
07/08/76
07/13/76
07/15/76
11/11/76
03/02/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,

of Calibration
11/06/75
02/18/76
05/03/76
07/14/76
11/12/76
03/08/77
03/28/77


Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
70 007468
70 007468
76 007475
76 007475
76 007475
76 007475
76 007475
76 007475
76 007475

Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
43 012777
16 012765
52 012785
52 012785
52 012785
57 012791
46 012779
57 012791
57 012791
42 012776
42 012776
42 012776
42 012776
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
277 012794
277 012794
277 012794
277 012794
277 012794
277 012794
277 012794
102

-------
STATION #116 (continued)
     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur,  Sulfur Dioxide,  Hydrogen Sulfide
                                              Instrument
Date
STATION #117
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

of Calibration
07/20/74
05/13/75
12/16/75
02/19/76
05/03/76
11/12/76
03/02/77
Ozone
of Calibration
12/09/75
02/26/76
05/03/76
08/04/76
11/17/76
02/25/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
12/09/75
02/26/76
05/03/76
08/03/76
11/17/76
02/25/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
of Cal ibration
12/11/75
02/27/76
05/06/76
08/05/76
02/25/77
Total Sulfur
of Calibration
11/17/76
02/25/77
S/N EPA S/N
136 007454
136 007454
136 007454
136 007454
136 007454
137 007452
137 007452
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
63 007460
63 007460
63 007460
63 007460
63 007460
63 .007460
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
39 012772
18 012769
18 012769
18 012769
18 012769
5 012767
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1000268 007402
1000268 007402
1000268 007402
1000268 007402
1000268 007402
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
3K124 007423
3K124 007423
                                    103

-------
STATION #118
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                10/16/75
                02/04/76
                04/08/76
                06/25/76
                11/04/76
                02/10/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen


           Date of Calibration
                10/16/75
                02/03/76
                04/08/76
                06/25/76
                11/04/76
                02/08/77

     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane,


           Date of Calibration
                10/16/75
                02/12/76
                04/13/76
                06/29/76
                11/04/76
                02/08/77

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur
           Date of Calibration
                10/16/75
                02/04/76
                04/08/76
                07/01/76
                11/03/76
                02/09/77
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
  64
  64
  64
  64
  64
  64
        007461
        007461
        007461
        007461
        007461
        007461
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
          012767
          012767
          012767
          012767
          012781
 5
 5
 5
 5
47
47
          012781
Total Hydrocarbons

    Instrument
  S/N
1000302
1000302
1000302
1000302
1000302
1000302
        EPA S/N
        007413
        007413
        007413
        007413
        007413
        007413
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
 3K236    007424
 3K236
 3K236
 3K236
 3K236
 3K236
        007424
        007424
        007424
        007424
        007424
                                    104

-------
STATION #119
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Ozone
of Calibration
02/18/76
02/19/76
04/26/76
07/06/76
11/02/76
02/15/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
02/18/76
04/26/76
07/06/76
11/02/76
02/15/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
of Calibration
11/04/75
02/16/76
04/27/76
07/13/76
11/03/76
02/16/77
Total Sulfur
of Calibration
10/30/75
02/16/76
04/26/76
11/03/76
02/15/77
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
85 007481
75 007470
85 007481
85 007481
85 007481
85 007481
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
43 012777
43 012777
43 012777
43 012777
43 012777
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1000311 007417
1000311 007417
1000311 007417
1000311 007417
1000311 007417
1000311 007417
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
3K103 006869
3K103 006869
3K103 006869
3K216 007425
3K216 007425
105

-------
STATION #120
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Ozone
of Calibration
08/19/74
11/01/74
03/04/75
01/28/76
03/30/76
06/10/76
09/30/76
01/12/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
09/09/75
01/28/76
03/30/76
06/10/76
09/30/76
01/12/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
of Calibration
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
78 007476
78 007476
78 007476
74 007471
74 007471
74 007471
74 007471
74 007471
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
42 012776
42 012776
42 012776
47 012781
41 012775
53 012788
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
08/19/74 1000316 007419
10/31/74 1000316 007419
03/12/75 1000316 007419
09/11/75 1000316 007419
01/29/76 1000316 007419
04/01/76 1000316 007419
06/16/76 1000316 007419
10/18/76 1000316 007419
01/12/77 1000316 007419
Total Sulfur, Sulfur Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
of Calibration S/N EPA S/N
09/19/75
01/29/76
04/02/76
06/16/76
07/22/76
10/21/76
01/14/77
127 007444
126 007443
126 007443
126 007443
125 007442
125 007442
125 007442
106

-------
STATION #121
PARAMETER Ozone
Date of Calibration
09/18/75
01/22/76
03/24/76
06/08/76
09/21/76
12/22/76
05/03/77
PARAMETER Oxides of Nitrogen
Date of Calibration
09/18/75
01/22/76
03/24/76
06/08/76
09/21/76
12/22/76
04/22/77
PARAMETER Carbon Monoxide, Met!
Date of Calibration
09/20/75
01/26/76
03/25/76
06/10/76
09/29/76
05/04/77
PARAMETER Total Sulfur, Sulfur
Date of Calibration
09/30/75
01/25/76
03/30/76
06/11/76
09/27/76
01/04/77
04/22/77
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
58 007455
58 007455
58 007455
58 007455
58 007455
58 007455
66 007463
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
53 012788
53 012788
53 012788
53 012788
53 012788
38 012773
45 012780
lane, Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
1000259 012799
1000259 012799
1000259 012799
1000259 012799
1000259 012799
1000259 012799
Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
125 007442
125 007442
125 007442
125 007442
127 007444
127 007444
127 007444
                                   107

-------
STATION #122
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date
PARAMETER
Date

Ozone
of Calibration
08/06/74
01/28/75
04/17/75
10/22/75
02/26/76
05/05/76
07/14/76
11/15/76
03/18/77
Oxides of Nitrogen
of Calibration
01/28/75
04/17/75
10/22/75
02/24/76
05/05/76
07/14/76
11/12/76
03/17/77
Carbon Monoxide, Methane,
of Calibration
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
84 007479
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
51 012786
51 012786
51 012786
52 012785
52 012785
52 012785
50 012784
50 012784
Total Hydrocarbons
Instrument
S/N EPA S/N
08/07/74 1000271 007405
01/29/75 1000271 007405
04/17/75 1000271 007405
10/23/75 1000271 007405
02/24/76 1000271 007405
05/06/76 1000271 007405
07/23/76 1000271 007405
11/16/76 1000317 007420
12/16/76 1000317 007420
03/16/77 1000271 007405
Total Sulfur, Sulfur Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulfide
Instrument
of Calibration S/N EPA S/N
08/08/74
10/28/75
02/26/76
11/11/76
03/17/77
137 007452
123 007447
123 007447
133 007453
134 007450
108

-------
STATION #123
                                              Instrument
S/N
67
67
79
79
79
79
79
79
EPA S/N
007465
007465
007474
007474
007474
007474
007474
007474
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                08/07/74
                12/03/74
                03/25/75
                10/21/75
                02/11/76
                04/20/76
                06/29/76
                11/09/76

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
           Date of Calibration
                11/27/74
                04/09/75
                10/21/75
                02/11/76
                04/19/76
                06/29/76
                11/08/76
     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane,  Total  Hydrocarbons
                                              Instrument
S/N
49
57
49
49
49
49
49
EPA S/N
012783
012791
012783
012783
012783
012783
012783
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                08/05/74
                12/02/74
                04/03/75
                10/23/75
                02/12/76
                04/20/76
                07/01/76
                11/10/76

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur
           Date of Calibration
                08/05/74
                11/27/74
                04/01/75
                10/22/75
                02/11/76
                04/21/76
                06/30/76
                11/09/76
S/N
1000309
1000309
1000309
1000309
1000309
1000309
1000309
1000309
EPA S/N
007418
007418
007418
007418
007418
007418
007418
007418
   Instrument
 S/N     EPA S/N
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L042    007432
3L272    007434
                                    109

-------
STATION #124
     PARAMETER  Ozone

           Date of Calibration
                07/17/74
                03/14/75
                10/01/75
                01/29/76
                03/31/76
                06/07/76
                11/12/76
                02/02/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen

           Date of Calibration
                07/16/74
                11/18/74
                03/24/75
                07/24/75
                10/01/75
                03/31/76
                06/07/76
                11/12/76
                02/02/77

     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane.

           Date of Calibration
                07/24/74
                12/08/74
                03/26/75
                10/02/75
                01/28/76
                04/06/76
                06/14/76
                11/15/76
                02/02/77

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur

           Date of Calibration
                07/17/74
                12/03/74
                03/21/75
                10/02/75
                01/29/76
                03/31/76
                06/09/76
                11/12/76
                02/02/77
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
007473
007473
007473
007473
007473
007473
007473
007473
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
  46
   5
  54
  54
  47
  55
  19
  51
  51
012779
012767
012787
012787
012781
012789
012768
012786
012786
Total Hydrocarbons
    Instrument
S/N
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
1000296
EPA S/N
007416
007416
007416
007416
007416
007416
007416
007416
007416
    Instrument
  S/N     EPA S/N
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
 3L002    007426
                                   110

-------
STATION #125
     PARAMETER  Ozone
           Date of Calibration
                07/15/74
                10/25/74
                04/10/75
                10/03/75
                02/10/76
                04/07/76
                06/13/76
                11/01/76
                02/02/77
                07/08/77

     PARAMETER  Oxides of Nitrogen
                                              Instrument
S/N
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
EPA S/N
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
007459
                                              Instrument
           Date of Calibration
                07/09/74
                11/25/74
                04/10/75
                10/03/75
                02/10/76
                04/07/76
                06/24/76
                11/01/76
                02/01/77

     PARAMETER  Carbon Monoxide,  Methane,  Total  Hydrocarbons
S/N
49
57
47
56
56
56
56
6
6
EPA S/N
012783
012791
012781
012790
012790
012790
012790
012764
012764
           Date of Calibration
                07/09/74
                11/26/74
                04/21/75
                10/06/75
                02/12/76
                04/13/76
                06/23/76
                11/02/76
                02/08/77
                                              Instrument
  S/N
1000298
1000298
1000297
1000297
1000297
1000297
1000297
1000297
1000297
EPA S/N
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
007412
                                    111

-------
STATION #125 (continued)

     PARAMETER  Total  Sulfur


           Date of Calibration
                07/09/74
                11/26/74
                04/10/75
                10/07/75
                02/10/76
                04/15/76
                06/24/76
                10/01/76
                02/03/77
   Instrument
 S/N     EPA S/N
3L004    007433
3L004
3L004
3L004
3L004
3L004
3L004
3L004
3L004
007433
007433
007433
007433
007433
007433
007433
007433
                                    112

-------
           APPENDIX C




QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT ACTIVITY
               113

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
4/26/76
            NO
                            NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.440
.290
.140
.040 -
.000
%
DIFF.
-2.2
-3.3
-6.7
20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.450
.290
.140
.040
-.010
%
DIFF.
0.0
-3.3
-6.7
-20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.319
.164
.081
.000

%
DIFF.
6.3
8.6
9.5
0.0

             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.155
.106
.055
.000

%
DIFF.
3.3
6.0
10.0


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.121
4.957
2.736
0.591
0.007
%
DIFF.
1.5
-0.9
-8.8
-40.9

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.779
2.540
1.490
0.506
0.000
%
DIFF.
-7.1
0.0
-2.6
-0.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.9900
2.4900
1.4650
0.4482
0.0385
%
DIFF.
-1.9
-1.9
-4.2
HI. 9

                                       114

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
102
10/19/76
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.476
.314
.207
.071
-.002
%
DIFF.
5.8
4.6
3.7
-4.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.487
.323
.211
.073
-.070
%
DIFF.
8.3
7.5
5.6
-3.1







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.443
.318
.218
.107
.000
%
DIFF.
-1.5
6.1
8.9
6.7

             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0626
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1900
.1560
.1050
.0670
-.0095
%
DIFF.
0.0
4.0
4.6
6.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.670
4.045
1.923
0.890
-0.010
%
DIFF.
8.4
1.1
-3.8
-10.9

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.523
4.196
2.074
1.023
0.001
%
DIFF.
6.5
4.9
3.7
2.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.485
4.149
1.999
0.931
-0.023
%
DIFF.
6.1
3.7
-0.1
-6.9

                                       115

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_1Q3
DATE:	
5/28/76
            NO
                            NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.480
.310
.150
.050
-.002
%
DIFF.
6.7
3.3
0.0
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.502
.334
.163
.051
-.002
%
DIFF.
11.6
11.3
8.7
2.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.364
.192
.100
.000

%
DIFF.
21.3
27.2
35.1


             SO 2
                       TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.205
.161
.105
.050
-.001
%
DIFF.
7.9
7.3
5.0
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.201
.160
.104
.050
-.001
%
DIFF.
5.8
6.7
4.0
0.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.70
5.47
3.42
1,63
0.12
%
DIFF.
8.8
9.4
14.0
63.0

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.23
2.74
1.78
0.86
0.38
%
DIFF.
3.9
7.9
16.3
69.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.62
2.98
1.96
1.09
0.57
%
DIFF.
13.5
17.3
28.1
114.1

                                       116

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
            103
10/28/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.480
.310
.210
.070
-.002
%
DIFF.
6.6
3.3
5.0
-6.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.320
.212
.072
.002

%
DIFF.
6.5
6.1
-3.9








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.045
.300
.200
.100 .
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.427
.293
.198
.099
-.002
%
DIFF.
-5.0
-2.2
-1.2
-0.9

             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0648
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1870
.1470
.1000
.0650
.0000
%
DIFF.
-1.4
-2.1
0.0
0.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0648
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1830
.1450
.1000
.0649
.0000
%
DIFF.
-3.7
-3.4
0.0
0.1







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.955
4.227
1.926
0.839
-0.004
%
DIFF.
11.9
5.7
-3.7
-16.1

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.975
3.960
1.955
0.984
0.0146
%
DIFF.
-0.3
-1.0
-2.2
-1.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.003
3.960
1.939
0.962
0.004
%
DIFF.
0.04
-0.99
-3.07
-3.84

                                       117

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
            103
3/1/77
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2810
.0863
.0006


%
DIFF.
-6.3
-13.7









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm) _j
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2780
.0853
-.0026


%
DIFF.
-7.3
-14.7









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.003
.001
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2746
.0944
.0005


%
DIFF.
-8.5
-5.6



             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.062
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1324
.0553
.0000


%
DIFF.
-11.7
-10.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.062
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1285
.0542
.0000


%
DIFF.
-14.3
-12.6









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0172
4.6591
1.7649
-0.0276

%
DIFF.
2.2
-6.8
-11.8


                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.06
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.5685
4.5756
1.8903
-0.0011

%
DIFF.
-7.8
-10.8
-8.2


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.06
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.3324
4.3552
1.6931
-0.0650

%
DIFF.
-10.7
-15.1
-17.8


                                       118

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_]04
DATE:	
5/28/76
            NO
                            NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.460
.300
.150
.050
.000
%
DIFF.
2.2
0.0
0.0
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.470
.310
.160
.050
.000
%
DIFF.
4.4
3.3
6.7
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.350
.180
.092
.000

%
DIFF.
16.7
19.2
24.3


             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2410
.1900
.1220
.0570
.0048
%
DIFF.
26.8
26.7
22.0
14.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2360
.1870
.1200
.0550
.0059
%
DIFF.
24.2
24.7
20.0
10.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.88
5.88
3.80
DAS DOWN

%
DIFF.
11.0
17.6
26.7


                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.210
2.870
2.090
DAS DOWN

%
DIFF.
3.4
13.0
36.3


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.660
3.200
2.240
DAS DOWN

%
DIFF.
14.5
26.0
46.4


                                       119

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_[04
DATE:	
9/27/76
            NO
                            NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3950
.2600
.1700
.0587

%
DIFF.
-12.0
-13.0
-15.0
-22.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4040
.2580
.1710
.0587
-.0001
%
DIFF.
•10.0
h!4.0
-15.0
-22.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4100
.2705
.1829
.0916
.0002
%
DIFF.
-9.0
-10.0
-9
-8

             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.063
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.153
.101
.064
.000

%
DIFF.
2.0
1.0
2.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.063
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1970
.1560
.1037
.0650
.0000
%
DIFF.
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5000
4.0000
1.8800
0.8321
0.0570
%
DIFF.
6.0
0.0
-6.0
-17.0

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.300
4.200
2.120
1.110
0.038
%
DIFF.
4.0
5.0
6.0
10.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4000
4.1880
2.0650
0.9860
0.0102
%
DIFF.
5.0
5.0
3.0
-1.0

                                      120

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
2/28/77
            NO
                            NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2964
.0922
-.0007


%
DIFF.
-1.2
-7.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2953
.0913
-.0022


%
DIFF.
-1.55
-8.7









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2889
.0993
.0019


%
DIFF.
-3.7
-.07



             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.052
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.13810
.04750
.00019


%
DIFF.
-7.9
-8.7









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.052
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1460
.0471
.0007


%
DIFF.
-2.7
-9.4









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.6940
4.6510
1.5450
0.0118

%
DIFF.
-3.8
-7.0
-22.8


                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.101
5.097
1.930
-0.0097

%
DIFF.
-1.3
-0.64
-5.85


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.208
5.158
1.919
0.014

%
DIFF.
-0.02
0.55
-6.39


                                       121

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
105
4/27/76
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4758
.3120
.1544
.0454
-.0050
%
DIFF.
5.7
4.0
2.9
-9.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3141
.1566
.0484
-.0037

%
DIFF.
4.7
4.4
-3.2








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3284
.1698
.0857
.0003

%
DIFF.
9.5
12.5
15.8


             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1748
.1098
.0490
-.0056

%
DIFF.
16.5
9.8
-2.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.146
.0951
.0465
.0007

%
DIFF.
-2.7
-4.9
-7.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2500
4.9140
2.6589
0.6382
-0.0240
%
DIFF.
3.1
-1.7
-11.3
-36.2

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.1984
2.6083
1.5540
0.5256
-0.0205
%
DIFF.
3.2
2.7
1.6
3.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5593
2.8630
1.7300
0.5958
0.1476
%
DIFF.
12.0
12.7
13.1
17.1

                                       122

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_105__
DATE:        9/23/76
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.417
.275
.177
.058
-.006
%
DIFF.
-7.3
-8.3
-11.5
-22.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.450
.027
.194
.068
-.001
%
DIFF.
0.0
•10.0
-3.0
-9.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.466
.311
.210
.107
.001
%
DIFF.
3.6
3.7
5.0
7.0

             S02
TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
. .1000
.0632
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1920
.1520
.1000
.0640
-.0007
%
DIFF.
1.1
0.3
0.0
1.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0632
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1870
.1500
.1004
.0635
-.0004
%
DIFF.
-1.6
0.0
0.0
0.5

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.300
4.020
1.800
0.630
-0.0318
%
DIFF.
3.8
0.5
-10.0
-37.0

                    CH4
                  TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.3000
4.2000
2.0500
0.9950
-0.0291
%
DIFF.
3.8
5.0
2.5
-0.5

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2700
4.1900
2.0200
0.972
-0.0097
%
DIFF.
3.4
4.8
1.0
-2.8

                                       123

-------
                 QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
2/23/77
NO
                                       NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.257
.0797
-.0022


%
DIFF.
-14.3
-20.3









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2647
.0827
-.0022


%
DIFF.
-11.8
•17.25









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2486
.0858
.0005


%
DIFF.
-17.2
-14.2



 S02
                                  TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.052
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1454
.0496
.0000


%
DIFF.
-3.1
-4.5









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.052
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1457
.0489
-.0004


%
DIFF.
-2.86
-5.9



AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0 .

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.7579
4.5316
1.5966
-0.0415

%
DIFF.
-3.0
-9.3
-20.2


        CH4
                                                    TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.9354
4.8318
1.9243
-0.0122

%
DIFF.
-3.3
-5.8
-6.1


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.8441
4.7728
1.9005
-0.0245

%
DIFF.
-4.5
-4.5
-5.0


                            124

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE  AUDIT
            106
STATION #:_
nATF:;       4/48/76
            NO
     NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3213
.1510
.0445 •
-.0021

%
DIFF.
7.1
0.7
11.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5070
.3230
.1570
.0483
-.0061
%
DIFF.
12.7
7.7
4.7
-3.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3375
.1763
.0887
.0000

%
DIFF.
12.5
16.8
19.9


             S02
TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.378
4.666
2.810
0.781
-0.021
%
DIFF.
-7.8
-6.7
-6.3
-21.9

                     CH4
                  TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.5220
3.4710
1.3610
0.3584
-0.1180
%
DIFF.
-13.5
36.7
-11.0
-29.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.879
2.495
1.506
0.476
0.0362
%
DIFF.
-4.7
-1.8
-1.6
-6.5

                                        125

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:
            1Q6
            8/23/76
            NO
     NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.52329
.34165
.22906
.07823
-.00250
%
DIFF.
-16.3
-13.9
-14.5
-4.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.36018
.24194
.08134
-.00098

%
DIFF.
20.0
20.0
8.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.47395
.32220
.21568
.11472
.00233
%
DIFF.
-4.4
-7.3
-7.8
-14.7

             S02
TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.063
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
0.13596
0.09040
0.05900
0.00000

%
DIFF.
9.4
9.6
6.4








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.063
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.13532
.08935
.0688
.0000

%
DIFF.
9.8
10.7
6.7








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                  * CH4
                  TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





   No 6800 audit. Instrument appears to have bad flame amp board.




                                       126

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:__[06__
DATE:	9/1/76
            NO
     NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4818
.3195
.2132
.0752
-.0009
%
DIFF.
7.1
6.5
6.6
0.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5089
.3381
.2189
.0732
-.0033
%
DIFF.
13.0
12.7
9.5
-2.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.inn
.nnn

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.37?9
P4Q37
1?81d
nnnnfi

%
DIFF.
?d .3
?4 7
?H 1


             S02
TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.061
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1950
.1465
.0939
.0584
.0000
%
DIFF.
2.6
-2.3
-6.1
-4.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.061
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1975
.1467
.0953
.0586
.0000
%
DIFF.
4.0
-2.2
-4.7
-3.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4800
3.9764
1.8179
0.8380
0.0522
%
DIFF.
6.0
-5.9
-9.1
-16.2

                    CH4
                  TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.3700
4.1645
2.0376
0.9669
0.0313
%
DIFF.
4.6
4.1
1.9
-3.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5905
4.2557
2.0511
0.9936
0.0589
%
DIFF.
7.4
6.4
2.6
-0.6

                                       127

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
106
3/25/77
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3025
.0939
-.0027


%
DIFF.
0.8
-6.1









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(PPm)
.3028
.0945
-.0027


%
DIFF.
0.9
-5.5









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2769
.0964
.0010


%
DIFF.
-7.6
-3.6



             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0505
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1411
.0423
.0000


%
DIFF.
-5.9
16.3









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0505
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1463
.0440
.0000


%
DIFF.
-2.2
-12.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.fi??S
S.ORfi?
1.8448
-0.0262

%
DIFF.
7.8
1 1
-7.8


                    CH4
                                        TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5510
5.1175
1.9822
-0.0623

%
DIFF.
4.2
-0.2
-3.3


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5152
5.0220
1.9055
-0.0900

%
DIFF.
3.7
-2.1
-7.1


                                       128

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
107
5/27/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4600
.3000
.1500
.0460
-.0023
%
DIFF.
2.2
0.0
0.0
8.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4600
.3100
.1520
.0450
-.0035
%
DIFF.
2.2
3.3
1.3
-10.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3390
.1761
.0880
.0004

%
DIFF.
13.0
16.6
18.9


             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2100
.1620
.1050
.0520
.0022
%
DIFF.
10.5
8.0
5.0
4.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.390
6.130
3.630
1.530
0.469
%
DIFF.
17.4
22.6
21.0
53.0

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.4600
2.7900
1.740Q
0.6909
0.2173
%
DIFF.
9.6
9.8
13.7
35.7

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.6700
2.9900
1.8990
0.8721
0.4305
%
DIFF.
14.7
17.7
24.1
71.3

                                       129

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
107
10/20/76
            NO
                         NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.502
.330
.218
.073
-.004
%
DIFF.
11.6
9.9
9.1
-3.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.344
.226
.078
-.003

%
DIFF.
14. .6
12.9
3.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.045
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4580
.3190
.2160
.1060
.0007
%
DIFF.
1.8
6.2
7.9
6.2

             S02
                     TOTAL  SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.1000
.0624
.0000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2540
.1650
.0980
.0007

%
DIFF.
69.3
64.8
57.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.905
4.170
1.883
0.784
-0.025
%
DIFF.
11.3
4.2
-5.9
-21.6

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.897
4.380
2.174
1.065
-0.043
%
DIFF.
11.2
9.5
8.6
6.5

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.865
4.389
2.141
1.046
-0.044
%
DIFF.
10.8
9.7
7.0
4.6

                                       130

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
107
2/11/77
            NO
                         NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3127
.0989
-.0023


%
DIFF.
4.2
-1.1-









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3245
.1032
-.0026


%
DIFF.
8.2
3.2









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2825
.0985
.0007


%
DIFF.
-5.85
-1.47



             S02
                     TOTAL  SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0525
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1495
.049(1
.0000


%
DIFF.
-0.3
-fi 7








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.7217
5.1096
1.7464
-0.0120

%
DIFF.
9.0
2.2
-12.7


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.7423
5.2780
2.0830
-0.0088

%
DIFF.
6.5
2.9
1.6


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5487
5.1479
2.0213
-0.0154

%
DIFF.
4.1
0.3
-1.4


                                       131

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
108
5/17/76
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.461
.301
.1459
.0406
-.0004
%
DIFF.
9.1
0.3
-2.7
^18.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2895
.1448
.0465
.0044

%
DIFF.
-3.5
-3.5
-7.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3260
.1697
.0846
-.0002

%
DIFF.
8.7
12.4
14.3


             S02
                     TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1740
.1410
.0927
.0429 •
-.0019
%
DIFF.
-8.4
-6.0
-7.3
-14.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1753
.1413
.0945
.0436
.0000
%
DIFF.
-7.7
-5.8
-5.5
-12.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.9300
4.8200
2.7500
0.711
0.0189
%
DIFF.
-0.9
-3.fi
-8.3
-28.9

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.1061
2.5400
1.5000
0.4873
-0.0065
%
DIFF.
0.8
0.0
-2.0
-4.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.2378
2.6200
1.5500
0.4862
0.0956
%
DIFF.
4.1
3.1
1.3
-4.5

                                       132

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
108
8/30/76
            NO
                                                       03
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.460
.315
.199
.062 •
-.002
%
DIFF.
2.2
1.7
-0.5
17.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.480
.309
.207
.073
.003
%
DIFF.
6.7
3.0
3.5
-27.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.non
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.490
.329
.222
.112
.nm
%
DIFF.
8.9
9.7
in_n
9.1

             SO 2
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.066
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.156
.102
.064
-.001

%
DIFF.
4.0
2.0
-3.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.066
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.156
.101
.064
.000

%
DIFF.
4.0
1.0
-3.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.495
3.393
1.453
0.534
0.027
%
DIFF.
-6.3
-15.2
-27.4
-46.6

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.700
3.741
1.789
0.880
-0.014
%
DIFF.
-3.8
-6.5
-10.6
-12.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.925
3.835
1.819
0.860 -
-0.022
%
DIFF.
-0.9
-4.1
-9.1
14.0

                                       133

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:
            108
            3/24/77
            NO
     NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2965
.0941
-.0010


%
DIFF.
-1.2
-5.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3029
.0948
-.0027


%
DIFF.
0.-9
-5.2









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2715
.OQfiR
.nn?4


%
DIFF.
-9.5
-3.5



             S02
TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
:150
.051
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1503
.0537
.0006


%
DIFF.
0.2
5.4









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.051



INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1524
.0525



%
DIFF.
1.6
2.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4694
5.1366
1.8982
0.029

%
DIFF.
5.9
2.7
-5.1


                    CH4
                  TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.20
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.6198
5.2671
2.0419
-0.0115

%
DIFF.
5.1
2.7
-0.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.20
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.7481
5.2846
2.0257
0.0343

%
DIFF.
6.7
3.0
-1.2


                                       134

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
109
5/18/76
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4758
.3139
.1568
.0478
-.0024
%
DIFF.
5.7
4.6
4.5
-4.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4955
.3287
.1631
.0482
-.0042
%
DIFF.
10..1
9.6
8.7
-3.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3420
.1775
.0876
-.0007

%
DIFF.
14.0
17.5
18.4


             S02
                     TOTAL  SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1755
.1383
.0905
.0436

%
DIFF.
-7.6
-7.8
-9.5
-12.8

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.6922
5.0484
2.7611
0.4437
0.0482
%
DIFF.
8.7
1.0
-7.9
-55.6

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.0910
2.4900
1.4794
0.4498
0.0359
%
DIFF.
0.5
-2.0
-3.3
-11.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.1866
2.5527
1.4963
0.4609
0.0186
%
DIFF.
2.9
0.5
-2.2
-9.4

                                       135

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
10/15/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.474
.314
.207
.070
.002
%
DIFF.
5.2
4.6
3.4
-6.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.505
.334
.218
.072
-.003
%
DIFF.
12.3
11.4
9.1
-4.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.045
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.465
.316
.213
.104
.001
%
DIFF.
3.4
5.2
6.3
4.1

             S02
                       TOTAL  SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.062
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1730
.1420
.0940
.0570
-.0002
%
DIFF.
-8.9
-5.2
-6.2
-8.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.002
4.456
2.160
1.225
-0.017
%
DIFF.
12.5
11.4
8.0
22.5

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.080
4.030
2.013
0.930
0.046
%
DIFF.
1.0
0.7
0.7
-6.9

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.1770
4.1260
2.0890
1.0160
-0.0002
%
DIFF.
2.2
3.2
4.5
1.6

                                       136

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
109
2/15/77
            NO
                         NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2833
.0882
- . 0003


%
DIFF.
-5.6
•11.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2855
.0894
-.0015


%
DIFF.
-4.8
-10.6









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2584
.0919
-.0005


%
DIFF.
-13.88
-8.09



             S02
                     TOTAL  SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0497
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1415
.04507
.00010


%
DIFF.
-5.7
-9.3









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
2
0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2310
5.0160
1.9520
0.2198

%
DIFF.
2.9
0.3
-2.4


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.20
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2110
4.7830
1 . 7340
0.0166

%
DIFF.
0.1
-6.8
-15.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.20
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.9660
4.9540
1.9220
0.0202

%
DIFF.
-2.9
-3.4
-6.2


                                       137

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
110
4/23/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5060
.3311
.1650
.0515
- . 0028
%
DIFF.
12.4
10.4
10.0
3.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
. READING
(ppm)
.5229
.3400
.1700
.0520
-.0007
%
DIFF.
16. .2
13.3
13.3
4.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3470
.1818
.0896
-.0010

%
DIFF.
15.7
20.4
21.1


             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1780
.1005
.0456
.0012

%
DIFF.
18.7
5.0
-8.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
5
3
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.9355
5.2700
3.0200
0.9820
0.0014
%
DIFF.
11.7
5.4
0.7
1.8

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.460
2.689
1.590
.4794

%
DIFF.
9.6
5.9
3.9
-5.8

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.690
2.830
1.677
0.522

%
DIFF.
15.2
11.4
9.6
2.6

                                       138

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
110
10/1/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4640
.3080
.2000
.0680
-.0040
%
DIFF.
3.1
2.7
0.0
-9.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4820
.3190
.2060
.0690
-.0040
%
DIFF.
7.2
6.3
3.1
-7.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
( Ppm)
.489
.331
.224
.112
.001
%
DIFF.
8.7
10.2
12.0
12.2

             SO 2
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.063
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.206
.165
.107
.067
-.001
%
DIFF.
8.5
10.2
7.9
0.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.449
3.882
1.758
0.762
0.011
%
DIFF.
5.6
-2.9
-12.1
-23.8

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.152
4.054
1.978
0.937
-0.008
%
DIFF.
1.9
1.4
-1.1
-6.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.072
4.025
1.956
0.949
0.002
%
DIFF.
0.9
0.6
-2.2
-5.1

                                       139

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
111
5/29/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4100
.2700 -
.1300 -
.040 -
-.004
%
DIFF.
-8.9
10.0
13.3
20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
%
DIFF.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.356
.184
.090
-.001

%
DIFF.
18.7
21.9
21.6


             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.151
.096
.046
-.002

%
DIFF.
0.7
-4.0
-8.0


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.500
5.600
3.600
1.500
0.694
%
DIFF.
6.3
12.0
20.0
50.0

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.100
2.700
1.770
0.885
0.371
%
DIFF.
0.7
6.3
15.7
73.9

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
5.34
3.91
2.98
2.43
1.37
%
DIFF.
31.2
53.9
94.8
377.4

                                       140

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
9/28/76
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4170
.2750
.1830
.0610
-.0004
%
DIFF.
-7.4
-8.2
-8.6
-18.1







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4270
.2810
.1850
.0620
-.0040
%
DIFF.
-5..1
-6.5
-7.6
-17.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4290
.2920
.2010
.1020
.0017
%
DIFF.
-4.6
-2.7
0.3
1.6

             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.054
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1960
.1740
.1120
.0555
-.0008
%
DIFF.
3.2
16.0
12.0
2.7







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4 .
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.064
3.920
1.790
0.607
-0.027
%
DIFF.
0.8
-2.0
-10.5
-39.3

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.935
3.918
1.999
1.011
-0.007
%
DIFF.
-0.8
-2.1
-0.1
1.1

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8
4
2
1
0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.475
3.833
1.899
0.848
-0.035
%
DIFF.
-6.5
-4.2
-5.1
-15.2

                                       141

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
112
5/25/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4550
.3000
.1499
.0469
-.0020
%
DIFF.
1.1
0.0
-0.1
-6.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5100
.3300
.1657
.0502
-.0058
%
DIFF.
13.3
10.0
10.5
0.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3208
.1654
.0829
.0001

%
DIFF.
6.9
9.5
12.0


             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1590
.1030
.0483
.0000

%
DIFF.
6.0
3.0
-3.4








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2360
5.0868
3.0450
0.9668
0.1115
%
DIFF.
2.9
1.7
1.5
-3.3

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.1700
2.6750
1.6753
0.6908
0.2645
%
DIFF.
2.5
5.3
9.5
35.7

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.4828
2.8240
1.7277
0.7193
0.3446
%
DIFF.
10.1
11.2
12.9
41.3

                                       142

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
             112
9/9/76
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.410
.270 •
.170 -
.060 •
-.003
%
DIFF.
-8.9
10.0
15.0
20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4500
.2900
. 1 900
.0600
.0037
%
DIFF.
0.0
3.3
-5.0
-20.0
0.7






AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4700
.3200
.2200
.1100
-.0008
%
DIFF.
4.4
6.7
10.0
10.0

             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.064
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.152
.101
.064
.000

%
DIFF.
1.3
1.0
0.0
0.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.202
3.933
1.814
0.894
0.016
%
DIFF.
2.5
-1.7
-9.3
-10.6
0.2
                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.525
4.245
2.044
1.013
-0.012
%
DIFF.
6.6
6.1
2.2
1.3
-0.1
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.499
4.161
1.979
0.904
0.030
%
DIFF.
6.2
4.0
-1.1
-9.6
0.3
                                       143

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
112
1/6/77
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4816
.3206
.2086
.0750
-.0040
%
DIFF.
7.0
6.9
4.3
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4909
.3271
.2151
.0770
-.0025
%
DIFF.
9J
9.0
7.6
2.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4565
.3046
.2064
.1063
.noin
%
DIFF.
1.4
1.6
3.2
6.3

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
. .150
.100
.052
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1964
.1547
.1039
.0546
.0004
%
DIFF.
3.4
3.1
3.9
4.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5331
1.9951
0.9365
-0.0160

%
DIFF.
13.1
-0.3
-6.4


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.8463
2.3079
1.1243
0.0040

%
DIFF.
21.6
15.4
12.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.6329
4.6088
2.2236
1.0614
0.0400
%
DIFF.
20.4
9.5
11.2
6.1

                                       144

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
112
1/6/77
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4816
.3206
.2086
.0750
-.0040
%
DIFF.
7.0
6.9
4.3
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4909
.3271
.2151
.0770
-.0025
%
DIFF.
9.1
9.0
7.6
2.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.non
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4565
.3046
.2064
.1063
.nmn
%
DIFF.
1.4
1.6
3.2
6.3

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
. .150
.100
.052
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1964
.1547
.1039
.0546
.0004
.%
DIFF.
3.4
3.1
3.9
4.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5331
1.9951
0.9365
-0.0160

%
DIFF.
13.1
-0.3
-6.4


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.8463
2.3079
1.1243
0.0040

%
DIFF.
21.6
15.4
12.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.6329
4.6088
2.2236
1.0614
0.0400
%
DIFF.
20.4
9.5
11.2
6.1

                                       144

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE  AUDIT
STATION #:__HJL__
DATE:        2/18/77
            NO
     NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2940
.0900
-.0029


%
DIFF.
-2.2
-9.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2950
.0900
-.0030


%
DIFF.
-1.5
-10.0









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2640
.0935
.0026


%
DIFF.
-11.9
-6.5



             S02
TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0518
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.14490
.04515
.00087


%
DIFF.
-3.4
-12.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
2.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.2420
4.8840
1.9080
-0.0102

%
DIFF.
3.0
-2.3
-4.6


                    CH4
                  TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.14
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.3960
5.1130
2.1200
0.0239

%
DIFF.
2.3
-0.5
3.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.14
2.05


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.423
5.124
2.080


%
DIFF.
2.6
-0.3
1.4


                                      145

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
             113
5/19/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4860
.3190
.1579
.0482
-.0010
%
DIFF.
8.0
6.3
5.3
-3.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3260
.1605
.0504
-.0025

%
DIFF.
8.7
7.0
0.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3260
.1690
.0835
.0003

%
DIFF.
8.7
11.9
12.8


             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1720
.1355
.0882 •
.0408 •
.0001
%
DIFF.
-9.5
-9.6
11.8
18.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.500
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1690
.1330
.0882
.0415
.0001
%
DIFF.
-11.1
-11.3
-11.8
-17.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.080
4.970
2.877
0.9032
0:0694
%
DIFF.
1.0
-0.6
-4.1
-9.7

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.8001
2.3823
1 . 3540
0.4261
-0.0017
%
DIFF.
-6.6
-6.2
-11.5
-16.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.168
2.500
1.445
0.390
-0.012
%
DIFF.
2.4
-1.6
-5.5
-23.3

                                       146

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
113
8/24/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3388
.2104
.0736
-.0045

%
DIFF.
12.9
5.2
-1.9








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3536
.2155
.0729
-.0008

%
DIFF.
17.9
7.8
-2.8


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.100
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3210
.2196
.1161
-.0013

%
DIFF.
7.0
9.8
16.1


             S02
                    * TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.0851 -
.0545 -
.0000


%
DIFF.
43.3
45.5









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.0
2.0
1.0


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5738
1.9045
0.9885


%
DIFF.
14.4
-4.8
-1.2


                                * DAS Malfunction
                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.7072
4.1932
2.1067
1.0242
0.0248
%
DIFF.
8.8
4.8
5.3
2.4

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(Ppm)
8.3468
4.0374
1.9172
0.8457
-0.0327
%
DIFF.
4.3
0.9
-4.1
-15.4

                                       147

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
              113
2/25/77
            NO
                          NOv
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3042
.0942
.0033


%
DIFF.
-1.1
-5.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3030
.0954
-.0009


%
DIFF.
1.0
-4.6









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2690
.0932
.0004


%
DIFF.
-10.3
-6.8



             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.053
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1457
.0449 •
.0014


%
DIFF.
-2.8
15.3









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.053
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1472
.0453
.0017


%
DIFF.
-1.9
-14.6









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
2.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0063
5.0820
1.7350
0.1006

%
DIFF.
0.1
1.6
-13.3


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0848
4.8800
1.8955
-0.0129

%
DIFF.
-1.5
-4.9
-7.5


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.7343
4.5989
1.7314
-0.0232

%
DIFF.
-5.8
-10.4
-15.5


                                       148

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
114
4/19/76
            NO
                         NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3133
.1540
.0507
.0002

%
DIFF.
4.4
2.7
1.4








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3185
.1543
.0495
-.0006

%
DIFF.
6.2
2.9
-1.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2686
.1392
,0688
-.0002

%
DIFF.
-10.5
-7.8
-7.0


             SO 2
                    TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2679
.2071
.1312
.0538
.0000
%
DIFF.
41.0
38.1
31.2
7.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2650
.2054
.1344
.0574
.0000
%
DIFF.
39.4
36.9
34.4
14.8

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.00
4.79
3.00
1.00
0.00
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.6536
4.3264
2.5873
0.6807
-0.0103
%
DIFF.
-4.3
-9.7
-13.8
-31.9

                    CH4
                                      TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                                       149

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
114
10/7/76
            NO
                           NO,
03
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4740
.3110
.2060
.0680
.0006
%
DIFF.
5.3
3.7
2.9
-9.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4790
.3150
.2050
.0680
.0002
%
DIFF.
6.3
4.9
2.4
-9.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200 .
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4550
.3040
.2050
.1060
.0010
%
DIFF.
1.0
1.2
2.3
5.7

             SO 2
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.063
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.18300
.16900
.11100
.06900
-.00004
%
DIFF.
-3.5
12.8
11.2
9.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.063
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1890
.1690
.1110
.0700
-.0000
%
DIFF.
-0.6
12.9
10.9
11.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.839
4.059
1.769
0.724
-0.023
%
DIFF.
10.5
1.5
-11.6
-27.6

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.864
4.340
2.102
0.996
-0.066
%
DIFF.
10.8
8.5
5.1
-0.4

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.776
4.336
2.047
0.982
-0.104
%
DIFF.
9.7
8.4
2.4
-1.8

                                       150

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
              115
4/20/76
            NO
                         NOv
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.440
.290
.140
.050
.000
%
DIFF.
-2.2
-3.3
-6.7
0.0






AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.040
.000
%
DIFF.
0.0
0.0
0.0
•20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.297
.160
.079
.001

%
DIFF.
-1.0
5.9
6.8


             S02
                    TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.171
.136
.093
.045
.000
%
DIFF.
-10.0
-9.3
-7.0
-10.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.162
.130
.088
.044
.000
%
DIFF.
-14.7
-13.3
-12.0
-12.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.00
4.79
3.00
1.00
0.00
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.740
4.460
2.720
0.867
0.003
%
DIFF.
-3.3
-6.9
-9.3
-13.3

                    CH4
                                      TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.86




INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.6256




%
DIFF.
-4.8




AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.86




INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.6281




%
DIFF.
-4.8




                                       151

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
115
3/28/77
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2920
.0916
-.0020


%
DIFF.
-2.7
-8.4









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2843
.0889
-.0018


%
DIFF.
-5,2
-11.1









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2823
.0968
.0007


%
DIFF.
-5.9
-3.2



             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0505
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1305 -
.0457
-.0000


%
DIFF.
12.9
-9.4









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0505
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1329
.0465
-.0000


%
DIFF.
-11.4
-7.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
2.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0667
4.6902
1.8088
0.0743

%
DIFF.
0.8
-6.2
-9.6


                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4288
5.0721
2.0254
0.0666

%
DIFF.
2.7
-1.1
-1.2


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4006
5.0916
2.0331
0.0101

%
DIFF.
2.3
-0.8
-0.8


                                       152

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
116
5/12/76
            NO
                         NO,
AUDIT
. VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4354
.2845
.1418
.0433 -
.0002
%
DIFF.
-3.2
-5.2
-5.5
13.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4461
.2876
.1453
.0439 •
-.0024
%
DIFF.
-0.9
-4.1
-3.1
12.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3108
.1626
.0812
.0007

%
DIFF.
3.4
7.7
9.7


             S02
                    TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1886
.1427
.0845 -
.0403 -
.0000
%
DIFF.
-0.7
-4.8
15.5
19.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1832
.1400
.0910
.0420
.0000
%
DIFF.
-3.6
-6.7
-9.0
16.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.8330
4.8300
2.8500
0.8701
0.0167
%
DIFF.
-2.1
-3.4
-5.0
-13.0

                    CH4
                                      TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.4440
2.0682
1.1473
0.1635
-0.2917
%
DIFF.
-15.4
-18.6
-25.0
-67.9

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.5096
2.0681
1.0616
0.0601
-0.3524
%
DIFF.
-13.8
-18.6
-30.6
-88.2

                                       153

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
116
8/4/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4493
.3009
.1976
.0669 •
-.0012
%
DIFF.
-0.2
0.3
-1.2
10.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4649
.3138
.2049
.0702
-.0014
%
DIFF.
3.3
4.6
2.5
-6.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.452
.228
.100
.058
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4494
.2423
.1100
.0633
.0022
%
DIFF.
-0.6
6.3
10.0
9.2

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0626
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2116
.1649
.1054
.0615
.0009
%
DIFF.
11.4
9.9
5.4
-1.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0626
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1831
.1416
.0922
.0528
.0008
%
DIFF.
-3.6
-5.6
-7.8
-15.7







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.5
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5600
4.8276
2.7509
0.7385
0.1121
%
DIFF.
0.7
-3.5
-8.3
-26.2

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
3.960
2.330
1.400
0.466
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.0172
2.3627
1.4140
0.4509
0.0743
%
DIFF.
1.4
1.4
1.0
-3.2

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
3.960
2.330
1.400
0.466
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.0310
2.3471
1.3742
0.3965
-0.0244
%
DIFF.
1.8
0.7
-1.8
-14.9

                                       154

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
117
5/18/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4619
.3040
.1523
.0464
-.0019
%
DIFF.
2.6
1.3
1.5
-7.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4686
.3097
.1541
.0455
-.0035
%
DIFF.
4.1
3.2
2.7
-9.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
2.9007
1 .4998
0.7437
-0.0034

%
DIFF.
866.9
893.2
905.0


             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1580
.1042
.0417
-.0029

%
DIFF.
5.3
4.2
•16.6








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.002
4.791
2.728
0.823
-0.064
%
DIFF.
0.0
-4.2
-9.1
-17.7

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.8600
2.3654
1.3976
0.4155 •
0.0150
%
DIFF.
-5.2
-6.9
-8.7
18.4

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.8806
2.3508
1.3596
0.4209
0.0014
%
DIFF.
-4.7
-7.4
-11.1
r!7.3

                                       155

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_HZ
DATE:	
10/14/76
            NO
                            NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4770
.3160
.207
.0710
-.0020
%
DIFF.
6.0
5.3
3.4
-5.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4710
.3300
.2160
.0740
-.0009
%
DIFF.
4.5
10.1
8.0
-0.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4510
.3080
.2070
.1040
-.0260
%
DIFF.
0.2
2.8
3.6
3.5

             S02
                       TOTAL SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.063
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1970
.1630
.1050
.0670
-.0020
%
DIFF.
3.7
8.3
5.2
5.9

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.785
4.074
1.884
0.864
0.000
%
DIFF.
9.8
1.9
-5.8
-13.6

                    CH4
                                         TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.307
4.156
2.052
1.100
0.000
%
DIFF.
3.8
3.9
2.6
10.0

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.293
3.953
1.887
0.924
0.216
%
DIFF.
3.7
-1.2
-5.6
-7.6

                                       156

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
117
2/17/77
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3056
.0950
-.0002


%
DIFF.
1.9
-5.0









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2799
.0895
-.0008


%
DIFF.
-6.7
-10.6









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2791
.1024
.0009


%
DIFF.
-6.9
2.4



             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.053
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1440
.0500
.0006


%
DIFF.
• 3,9
-5.7









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
2.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5815
4.8051
1.5413
n.mqi

%
DIFF.
7.3
-rq
-??.q


                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.3874
4.9043
1.8713
0.0826

%
DIFF.
2.2
-4.4
-6.4


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.?1
5.13
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
ft fiinn
4.qq4?
1.8521
-0.0017

%
DIFF.
4 «
-?.7
-q 7


                                       157

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
             118
4/21/76
            NO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4753
.3106
.1550
.0490
.0001
%
DIFF.
5.6
3.5
3.3
-2.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.50
.32
.16
.05
.00
%
DIFF.
11.1
6.7
6.7
0.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.340
.174
.085
.000

%
DIFF.
13.3
15.2
14.9


             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.22
.17
.11
.06
.00
%
DIFF.
15.8
13.3
10.0
20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.37
5.02
2.84
0.83
0.00
%
DIFF.
4.6
0.4
-5.3
-17.0

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.91
2.38
1.36
0.36
-0.14
%
DIFF.
-3.9
-6.3
-11.1
-29.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                                       158

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
              118
8/18/76
            NO
                         NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4633
.3078
.2029
.0693
-.0034
%
DIFF.
2.9
2.6
1.4
-7.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4413
.2935
.1967
.0705
-.0038
%
DIFF.
-1.9
-0.3
-1.7
-6.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.200
.100
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3763
.2577
.128?
.0005

%
DIFF.
25.4
28.9
28.2


             S02
                    TOTAL SULFUR (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0598
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2300
.1695
.1018
.0554
.0000
%
DIFF.
21.1
13.0
1.8
-7.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0038
3.7323
1.5322
0.5036
-0.0407
%
DIFF.
0.0
-6.7
-23.4
-49.6

                    CH4
                                      TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
7.99
4.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.3015
3.6986
1.8332
0.8939
0.0030
%
DIFF.
-8.6
-7.5
-8.3
^10.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
7.99
4.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.9675
4.0250
1.9565
0.9291
0.0073
%
DIFF.
-0.3
0.6
-2.2
-7.1

                                       159

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
118
2/26/77
            NO
                           HO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.264 -
.080 -
.000


% •
DIFF.
12.0
20.0









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.269
.079
.000


%
DIFF.
-10.3
-21.0









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.284
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.245
.093
.000


%
DIFF.
-13.7
-7.0



             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.053
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.140
.054
.000


%
DIFF.
-6.6
1.9



AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
5.30
1.98
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
5.27
1.78
0.00


%
DIFF.
-0.6
-10.1



                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
5.45
2.03
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
5.40
1.80
0.00


%
DIFF.
-0.9
-11.3



AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
5.45
2.03
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
5.390
1.770
0.034


%
DIFF.
-1.1
-12.8



                                       160

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:__	
118
3/18/77
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.050
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1488
.0504
.0012


%
DIFF.
-0.8
0.8









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
7.48
2.45
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.0800
2.3400
0.0257


%
DIFF.
8.0
-4.5



                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
7.99
2.26
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.6000
1.9600
-0.0104


%
DIFF.
7.6
-13.3



AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
7.99
2.26
0.00


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.540(1
1.9231
-0.0113


%
DIFF.
6.9
-14.9



                                       161

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION
DATE:
119
5/5/76
            NO
                         NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4298
.2808
.1400
.0419
-.0025
%
DIFF.
-4.5
-0.6
-6.7
-16.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4299
.2830
.1402
.0482
.0026
%
DIFF.
-4.5
-5.7
-6.5
-3.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3488
.1778
.0879
-.0003

%
DIFF.
16.3
17.7
18.8


             S02
                    TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                    CH4
                                      TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                                      162

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
119
5/10/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.5758
4.6636
2.7007
0.8445
0.0025
%
DIFF.
-5.3
-6.7
-9.9
-15.6

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.9429
2.3921
1.4482
0.4476
-0.0124
%
DIFF.
-3.1
-5.8
-5.3
-12.1

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5377
2.7039
1.5825
0.5229
0.1007
%
DIFF.
11.5
6.5
3.4
2.7

                                       163

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
119
7/29/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4270
.2810
.1340
.0600
-.0030
%
DIFF.
-5.1
-6.3
-10.7
-20.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4580
.3010
.1420
.0649
-.0029
%
DIFF.
1.8
0.3
-5.3
-13.5







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.452
.228
.113
.058
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5000
.2560
.1260
.0640
-.OOOfi
%
DIFF.
10.6
12.3
11.5
10.3

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR   (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE '
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.061
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.15500
.09880
.05640
-.00001

%
DIFF.
3.3
-0.1
-7.5








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0 -
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
6.8160
4.1301
2.3745
0.6909
-0.0077
%
DIFF.
-14.8
-17.4
-20.9
-30.9

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.7199
2.2708
1.3133
0.3705
0.0027
%
DIFF.
-8.6
-10.6
-13.6
-13.8

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
I^TRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.63721
2.27680
1.37908
0.41604
0.03266
%
DIFF.
-10.6
-10.4
-9.3
-18.3

                                      164

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
120
5/4/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4705
.3070
.1538
.0480
-.0027
%
DIFF.
4.6
2.3
2.5
-4.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4790
.3137
.1560
.0497
-.0025
%
DIFF.
6.4
4.6
4.0
-0.6







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3400
.1750
.0868
-.0005

%
DIFF.
13.3
15.9
17.3


             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1720
.1339
.0875
.0426
.0002
%
DIFF.
-9.5
-10.7
-12.5
-14.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1802
.1400
.0921
.0457
-.0005
%
DIFF.
-5.2
-6.7
-7.9
-9.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)

.



INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                    CH4
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.8504
2.4225
1.4641
0.4357
-0.0585
%
DIFF.
-5.4
-4.6
-4.3
-14.4

TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
ITOTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.1993
2.6164
1.5562
0.4961
.10390
%
DIFF.
3.2
3.0
1.7
-2.5

                                       165

-------
                             QUALITY  ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:_L20
DATE:	
5/7/76
            NO
                           NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)

,



INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0 -
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.8041
4.7715
2.7230
0.8686
0.0175
%
DIFF.
-2.4
-4.6
-9.2
-13.1

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
3.8804
2.3902
1.3851
0.3699
-0.1203
%
DIFF.
-4.7
-5.9
-9.5
-27.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.07
2.54
1.53
0.509
0.000
rT&TRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.2150
2.6033
1.5045
0.4253 -
-0.0436
%
DIFF.
3.6
2.5
-1.7
16.4

                                      166

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
120
7/27/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.32100
.15108
.07322
.00017

%
DIFF.
7.0
0.7
-2.4








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.075
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.33610
.16781
.08090
.00270

%
DIFF.
12.0
11.9
7.9








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.452
.228
.113
.058
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.52358
.26682
.13357
.06900
.00140
%
DIFF.
15.8
17.0
18.2
18.9

             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0642
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.15496
.12079
.08141
.05392
.00331
%
DIFF.
-18.4
-19.5
-18.6
-16.0







• AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1900
.1500
.1000
.0642
.0000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.16131
.12649
.08547
.05606
.00314
%
DIFF.
-15.1
-15.7
-14.5
-12.7







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0 .
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.1712
4.8110
2.4485
0.4479
-0.0008
%
DIFF.
2.1
-3.8
-18.4
-55.2

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.24157
2.62166
1.57731
0.57633
0.10238
%
DIFF.
4.2
3.2
3.8
13.2

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
ll&TRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.19280
2.61907
1.55400
0.48030
0.11612
%
DIFF.
3.0
3.1
2.2
-5.6

                                       167

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
             120
2/10/77
            NO
                           NOv
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2948
.0896 •
-.0027


%
DIFF.
-1.7
10.3









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2999
.0935
-.0027


%
DIFF.
0.0
-6.5









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.100
.000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2726
.0961
.0007


%
DIFF.
-9.1
-3.9



             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0535
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1395
.0471 •
.0002


%
DIFF.
-6.9
11.9









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.0535
.0000


INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1377
.0470
.0001


%
DIFF.
-8.2
-12.1









AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
2.0
0.0

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.3748
5.0065
1.8576
-0.0135

%
DIFF.
4.7
0.1
-7.1


                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.14
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5437
5.0770
1.8704
-0.0013

%
DIFF.
4.1
-1.2
-8.7


AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.21
5.14
2.05
0.00

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.5388
5.0618
1.8438
-0.1395

%
DIFF.
4.0
1.2
-10.1


                                       168

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
121
4/15/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4188
.2784
.1381
.0436
-.0010
%
DIFF.
-6.9
-7.2
-7.9
-12.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4561
.3000
.1496
.0453
-.0017
%
DIFF.
1.4
0.0
0.0
-9.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(PPm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(PPm)
.2974
.1547
.0762
-.0035

%
DIFF.
-0.8
2.5
2.9


             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1556
.0979
.0361
.0010

%
DIFF.
3.7
-2.1
-27.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.150
.100
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.15475
.09858
.04274 •
.00112

%
DIFF.
3.2
-1.4
14.5








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0 •
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.3925
4.4595
2.6553
0.6973
0.0184
%
DIFF.
-7.6
-10.8
-11.5
-30.3

                    CH4
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





I^TRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                                       169

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
              121
8/26/76
            NO
                          NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.49700
.32820
.21590
.07200
.00205
%
DIFF.
10.4
9.4
7.9
-4.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.54373
.35869
.23649
.07980
-.00118
%
DIFF.
20.8
19.6
18.2
6.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.48868
.33078
.22445
.11653
.00197
%
DIFF.
8.6
10.3
12.2
16.5

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.064
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.18200
.14300
.09384
.06000
.00030
%
DIFF.
-4.2
-4.7
-6.2
-6.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.064
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.18300
.14500
.09609
.06100
-.00035
%
DIFF.
-3.8
-3.4
-4.1
-4.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.34189
3.50710
1.28650
0.23155
-0.00897
%
DIFF.
4.3
-12.3
-35.7
-76.9

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.21570
3.92440
1.86412
0.87724
-0.00025
%
DIFF.
2.6
-1.9
-6.8
-12.1

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.20567
4.32817
1.99690
0.88929
-0.02562
%
DIFF.
15.1
8.2
-0.2
-11.1

                                       170

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
122
5/26/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4044
.2662
.1316
.0398
-.00?2
%
DIFF.
-10.1
-11.3
-12.3
-20.4







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.150
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4082
.2696 -
.1316 -
.0394 -
- . 0038
%
DIFF.
-9.3
10.1
12.3
21. 2~







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3514
.1810
.0884
-.0005

%
DIFF.
17.1
19.9
19.5


             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2344
.1784
.1105
.0440
.0024
%
DIFF.
23.4
18,9
10.5
-12.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.2604
.1976
.1213
.0523
.0042
%
DIFF.
37.1
31.7
21.3
4.6

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0 •
3.0 .
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.9766
4.9260
2.9048
0.9902
0.0906
%
DIFF.
-0.3
-1.5
-3.2
-0.9

                    CH4
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.2731
2.7895
1.7975
0.8554
0.4140
%
DIFF.
5.0
9.8
17.5
68.1

TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.530
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.5700
3.0220
1.9838
0.9962
0.6609
%
DIFF.
12.3
18.9
29.7
95.7

                                       171

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
122
10/12/76
            NO
                          NO,
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.442
.296
.197
.069
-.001
%
DIFF.
-1.9
-1.2
-1.7
-8.2







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.453
.302
.199
.068
-.002
%
DIFF.
0.7
0.7
-0.6
-9.9







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.100
.nnn
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.453
.302
.201
.104
.nn?
%
DIFF.
0.7
n.fi
0.6
3.7

             S02
                     TOTAL SULFUR
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1900
.1470
.0970
.0002

%
DIFF.
0.0
-1.8
-2.5








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1940
.1490
.0980
-.0038

%
DIFF.
2.1
-0.4
-2.2








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
7.860
3.949
1.729
0.657
-0.023
%
DIFF.
-1.8
-1.3
-13.5
-34.3

                    CH4
                                       TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.4180
4.1950
2.0540
1.0230
0.0093
%
DIFF.
5.2
4.9
2.7
2.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
8.297
4.139
2.016
0.967
-0.007
%
DIFF.
3.7
3.5
0.8
-3.3

                                       172

-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
123
5/11/76
            NO
                          NOv
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3325
.1650
.0513
-.0019

%
DIFF.
10.8
10.0
2.6








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.150
.050
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.337900
.168500
.052900
.007006

% '
DIFF.
12.6
12.3
5.8








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.300
.151
.074
.000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.3299
.1733
.0875
.0006

. %
DIFF.
9.9
14.8
18.2


             S02
                      TOTAL  SULFUR  (MELOY)
rco
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.190
.150
.100
.050
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1698
.1340
.0884
.0431
.0000
' %
DIFF.
-10.6
-10.7
-11.6
-13.8







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)

,



INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





                    CH4
                                      * TOTAL  HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.





 * NO  6800 AUDIT DUE  TO  BAD  H-2  GENERATOR.
                                       173
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





IraTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.






-------
                             QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT
STATION #:.
DATE:	
123
8/2/76
            NO
                           NOV
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4530
.2912
.1892
.0613 •
- . 0081
%
DIFF.
0.7
-2.9
-5.4
18.3







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.450
.300
.200
.075
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.4660
.2920
.1814
.0447
-.0286
%
DIFF.
3.6
-0.2
-9.3
-40.0







AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.452
.228
.113
.058
.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.5040
.2780
.1330
.0725
.0077
%
DIFF.
11.5
21.9
17.7
25.0

             S02
                      TOTAL SULFUR  (MELOY)
CO
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)





INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)





%
DIFF.











AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
.1500
.1000
.0636
.0000

INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
.1810
.1280
.0910
.0054

%
DIFF.
20.7
28.0
43.0








AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
8.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
9.099
5.760
3.289
0.947
0.43
%
DIFF.
13.7
15.2
9.6
-5.3

                    CH4
                                        TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.4370
2.7790
1.4540
0.2834
-0.1891
%
DIFF.
9.0
9.4
-4.3
-44.3

AUDIT
VALUE
(ppm)
4.070
2.540
1.520
0.509
0.000
INSTRUMENT
READING
(ppm)
4.3200
2.6180
1.4140
0.2247
-0.2929
%
DIFF.
6.1
3.1
-6.9
-55.9

                                       174

-------
                                 SECTION 2
                        UPPER AIR SOUNDING NETWORK

1.0  INTRODUCTION
     The primary objective of the Regional  Air Pollution Study (RAPS) was  to
provide a comprehensive air quality data base to enable  the  evaluation  of
mathematical models that simulate urban area pollution processes.   Pollutant
measurements at the surface and in the near vertical  must be correlated with
the existing weather and atmospheric boundary layer structure to  determine
the mechanisms available for transport processes.   The Regional Air Monitor-
ing System (RAMS) provided a relatively dense data base  of surface  tempera-
ture, pressure, winds, moisture and pollutant concentrations.  Consequently,
it was the purpose of the Upper Air Sounding Network (UASN)  to obtain the
needed meteorological information aloft through the use  of balloons and
airborne instrument packages.
     The Upper Air Sounding Network consisted of four stations staffed  and
equipped to release radiosondes every six hours with pibal observations each
hour in between.  The contractor, Rockwell  International Air Monitoring
Center, operated all or part of the network as requested by  the RAPS Opera-
tions Coordinator from November 18, 1974 through May 31, 1977. Station
operations were conducted on a normal five day (Monday-Friday), 24  hours per
day schedule which was expanded to seven days per week during RAPS  Field
Expeditions.
     The contractor was also responsible for control  of  all  government
furnished equipment and expendables (GFE).   Complementing the GFE items, the
contractor provided the personnel, materials and services for the routine
operation and maintenance of equipment and instrumentation at the UASN  sites.
     The successive stages of the UASN were each funded  by separate Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) contracts.   Contract No.  68-02-1080,

                                     175

-------
Modification No.  8, provided for the initial  site  selection, acquisition,
preparation, and development of the facilities  and services needed  for  the
operation of the network, while Contract No.  68-02-1081,  Task Order No.  31,
allowed for the operation and maintenance of  the UASN  from November 18,  1974
through August 15, 1975.   Contract No.  68-02-2093  was  a continuation of
Contract 68-02-1081, extending the operation  and maintenance effort from
August 16, 1975 through May 31, 1977.
                                    176

-------
2.0  WORK PERFORMED
     The contractor operated and maintained a network  of upper air  sounding
stations collecting meteorological  data as  part of the Regional Air Pollution
Study from November 18, 1974 through May 31,  1977.

2.1  SITES AND PREPARATION
     Selection, acquisition, preparation, and development of sites  needed
for operation of the UASN were provided by  the Regional  Air Monitoring
System Contract No. 68-02-1080, Modification  Number 8.
     During October 1974, four site locations were selected by the  contractor
and subsequently approved by the EPA.   The  site locations chosen were the
urban station, designated station 141,  located in  downtown St.  Louis and the
rural stations designated 142, 143 and  144  located to  the southwest, south-
east and northeast of the St.  Louis Metropolitan Area.   These site  locations
formed a triangle nearly centered on the urban station (Figure 1).   This
configuration provided an approximation to  cross sectional  measurement
across the urban area from all prevailing wind directions.
     Sketches of each station's design  and  facilities  are shown in  Figures
2 through 5.   Specific site locations and other site-specific information
are contained in Table 1.

2.2  STATION OPERATIONAL PERIODS
     During routine operation the Missouri  stations, 141  and 142, collected
upper air data on a five days per week, Monday through Friday schedule.  When
RAPS Field Expeditions ^intensives) were in progress,  UASN operations were
correspondingly expanded by switching the Missouri  stations to a seven days
per week schedule or by activating the  Illinois sites,  143 and 144,  and
operating the entire network on the seven days per week schedule.   Unlike
Station 141,  Station 142 was closed on  holidays occurring during normal oper-
ation.  However, holidays were not observed at any station during intensives.
                                    177

-------
                                     0 Permanent Network Sites
                                         Q        11 km (Approx.)
FIGURE 1.   LOCATION  OF  UPPER AIR  SOUNDING NETWORK SITES
                         178

-------
      TO MARKET ST.
                                    INSTRUMENT PAD
                                      SCALE 1" = 20'
                                  SITE 141
                                  200 South 22nd Street
                                  St. Louis, Missouri
FIGURE 2.   UASN  SITE  141
            179

-------
      en
      <=.
      po
00
o
                                                              36" CONCRETE

                                                                WALKWAY
                                                     LEWIS ROAD
                                                                                        1.1 Ml. to U.S. 66-
SITE  142


Pevely Farms

Lewis  Road, 1.5 mi. from 1-44

off Ramp       Crwcem, Mo.

-------
CD



m i


*» ';
00
      CO
                                                                   -300'-
              N
           NO SCALE
                 o
                 o
                 C")
                f-
                                                                                     10' x 10' THEODOLITE PAD
                                                                                        x
                                                                                        o
                                                                                        IT
                                                                                        Q.
                                                                                        Q.
                                                                                                   2-4' GATES

                                                                                                   2-6' GATES
                                                                                  10' x 42'

                                                                                  TRAILER
                                                                                               GRAVEL

                                                                                               PARKING

                                                                                            AREA 50' x 150
                      FREEBURG-MILLSTADT HIWAY
                                                                                       10* x 10' RAMP
SITE 143


St. Clair County Park

Freeburj-Millstadt Highway

1.9 mi. West of State 159

Belleville. III.

-------
    SD
    ci
    73
    m

    en
00  fc
i"o  S;

CO

X
               EXISTING ILLINOIS    !

               STATE HIGHWAY

               MAINTENANCE YARD
                                                                                                                     NO SCALE
                                                                  APP.ROX. 2000' TO CONTROL TOWER
                                             10' x 10' INSTRUMENT PAD —


                                                           WALKWAY
                                                    EXISTING 20' GATE
                                                  .•n

                                                ^x—i—x	x—
                                               40' x 150' ASPHALT AREA —

                                              	X	X	#~
                                                COUNTY BOAD
                                               c- 1400' TO STATE
                                                                       Civic Memorial Airport
                                                                                                                                      1
                                                                                    20' GATE & DRIVEWAY     "400' East of State III, on

                                                                                                              South psrimeter of Airport

                                                                                                            Bethalto/East Alton, 111.

-------
          TABLE 1.   SITE LOCATION AND SITE  SPECIFIC  INFORMATION*

Site 141 - Location:  200 South 22nd Street
                      St. Louis, Missouri
           Latitude:  38°38'N (38°37'43")
           Longitude:   90°13'W (90°12'33")
           Elevation:   149 Meters MSL
           Orientation Data - Theodolite:   Light on  Arch  -  280.8°
                              Light on microwave tower -  345.3°
                              Center of 6MD pedestal  - 198.3°
                        GMD:   Light on microwave tower -  344.5°
                              Insulator on  power pole - 192.0°

Site 142 - Location:  Pevely Farms
                      Lewis Road
                      Crescent, Missouri
           Latitude:  38°3TN (38°3T15")
           Longitude:   90°36'W (90°35'56")
           Elevation:   179 Meters MSL
           Orientation Data - Theodolite:   Light on  water tower -  196.7°
*Latitudes, longitudes and elevations were  determined from  U.S. Geological
Survey maps (Series V863, scale 1:24000, contour interval  10 feet).   All
angles are with respect to True North, obtained in December, 1975,  using  the
solar equal angles method in accordance with Federal  Meteorological  Handbook
#5 (Winds Aloft Observations).
                                                                 (continued)
                                     183

-------
                            TABLE  1  (continued)
                              Center of trailer running lights -  355.0°
                        GMD:  Light on water tower - 197.0°
                              45° elbow on power pole - 348.6°
Site 143 - Location:  St. Clair County Park
                      St. Clair, Illinois
           Latitude:  38°26'N (38°25'32")
           Longitude:  90°OTW (90°01'06")
           Elevation:  176 Meters MSL
           Orientation Data - Theodolite:  Top of microwave  tower to NW  -
                                           152.6°
                              Top center of tallest substation pole - 286.0°
                              Top center of trailer antenna  -  023.8°
Site 144 - Location:  Civic Memorial  Airport
                      East Alton, Illinois
           Latitude:  38°53'N (38°53'10")
           Longitude:  90°03'W (90°03'01")
           Elevation:  166 Meters MSL
           Orientation Data - Theodolite:   Center of T on  Texaco sign  -
                                           165.9°
                              Center  of airport  beacon  pole  -  163.6°
                              Top center  light on Ralston Purina  tower -
                              195.2°
                              Top center  of  rear  trailer light pole - 352.6°
                                   184

-------
     Table 2 indicates the UASN periods of operation,  the stations operational
during that period and the type of operation (5 day or 7 day).   Figure 6 is
a graphical representation of the same.
     The UASN sites were deactivated according to the  schedule  presented
in Table 3.
     Radiosondes were released at six hour intervals with pibals released
hourly between radiosonde observations.  The hours of  the radiosonde releases
were varied, being seasonally adjusted so that the first radiosonde each day
(0400, 0500 or 0600 CST) was released during the hour  preceding sunrise to
measure maximum stability.  The variable schedule of release times is shown
in Table 4.  Since radiosondes were only released during shift  overlaps, a
radiosonde wasn't scheduled on Friday night (2200, 2300 CST Friday or 0000 CST
Saturday), but replaced with additional hourly pibal releases.   This release
schedule during five days per week operation yielded 19 radiosondes and 103
pibals per week per station while the seven days per week continuous schedule
yielded 28 radiosondes and 140 pibals per week per station.

2.3  PERSONNEL ACQUISITION AND TRAINING
     Routine staffing of the UASN consisted of an operations supervisor, a
quality control engineer, an electronics technician, a warehouseman and nine
observer/operators.  Four observers were assigned to each Missouri station
while the remaining observer either assisted with quality control  functions
or substituted for an absent observer.
     The contractor obtained the necessary personnel to staff the network
stations and support the quality control effort during all  intensive study
periods except two.  During these two intensives (1975), a subcontractor,
Environmental Quality Research (EQR) provided the supervisory,  quality
control and observer personnel to operate the two Illinois stations.
     The initial observer training program consisted of six days of classroom
instruction followed by four days and nights of on-site training.   The
observers were instructed in the use of 403 MHz receivers, 1680 MHz GMD-1
ground tracking equipment, theodolites, and radiosonde release  techniques.
Emphasis was placed on accurate data reduction and the establishment of con-
sistent observational and reduction procedures.  All procedures were in
                                     185

-------
TABLE 2.  UASN STATION OPERATIONAL PERIODS
Dates of
11/18/74
12/23/74
1/6/75
2/2/75
2/3/75
3/1/75
3/10/75
5/26/75
5/27/75
7/4/75
7/7/75
7/13/75
7/14/75
8/18/75
9/1/75
9/2/75
11/27/75
12/1/75
12/22/75
1/5/76
2/9/76
3/15/76
5/31/76
6/1/76
7/5/76
7/6/76
7/12/76
8/16/76
9/6/76
9/7/76
10/25/76
11/22/76
11/25/76
11/29/76
12/24/76
Operation Stations Operational
- 12/20/74
- 1/3/75
- 1/31/75

- 2/28/75
- 3/7/75
- 5/23/75

- 7/3/75

- 7/11/75

- 8/15/75
- 8/29/75

- 11/26/75
- 11/28/75
- 12/19/75
- 1/2/76
- 2/6/76
- 3/12/76
- 5/28/76

- 7/2/76

- 7/9/76
- 8/13/76
- 9/3/76

- 10/22/76
-11/19/76
- 11/24/76
- 11/26/76
- 12/23/76
- 5/31/77
141,
141
141,
141,
141,
141,
141,
141
141,
141
141,
141,
141,
141,
141
141,
141
141,
141
141,
141,
141,
141
141,
141
141,
141,
141,
141
141,
141,
141,
141
141,
141
142

142
142
142, 143, 144
142
142

142

142
142
142, 143, 144
142

142

142

142
142
142

142

142
142, 143, 144
142

142
142
142

142

5
5
5
7
7
7
5
5
5
5
5
7
7
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
7
5
5
5
5
5
7
5
5
5
7
5
5
5
5
5 days/week, 7 days /week
Intensive, or Holidays
days /week
days /week
days/week
days /week
days /week
days/week
days /week
days/week
days /week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days /week
days/week
days /week
days/week
days/week
days /week
days/week
days /week
days /week
days/week
days/week
days/wek
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days/week
days /week

(141),

Intensi
Intensi
Intensi

(141),

(141),

Intensi
Intensi

(141),

(141),

(141),

Intensi

(141),

(141),

Intensi

(141),

Intensi

(141),



Hoi

ve
ve
ve

Hoi

Hoi

ve
ve

Hoi

Hoi


idays





iday

iday




iday

iday

Holidays

ve




Holiday

Hoi

ve

Hoi

ve

Hoi



iday



iday



i days



(142)





(142)

(142)




(142)

(142)

(142)



(142)

(142)



(142)



(142)


                     186

-------
                                     UASN  PERIODS OF  OPERATION
        STATION
                 1974
1975
                                                                               1976
                                                                                                           1977
                Mov.iDecjJan.iFeb.iMarjApr.MayiJun.Jul. |AugJSep,Oct.iNov.,Dec.Jan. Feb.IMar.iApr.May Jun
                                        Jul. Aug Sep. Oct. Nov.
Dec.|Jan.|Feb.|Mar. Apr. May
oo
--4
          141
          142
          143
          144
                                                                                                5 days/week
                                                                                                7 days/week
                                                                                                   Holidays I
                                          FIGURE 6.   UASN PERIODS  OF OPERATION

-------
TABLE 3.
Site
141
142
143
144
SITE DEACTIVATION DATES
Deactivation Date
5/31/77
12/23/76
8/13/76
8/13/76
TABLE 4.   VARIABLE SCHEDULE OF RADIOSONDE RELEASE TIMES

    Period of Operation        Release Times  (CST)
    11/18/74	2/22/75        0000,0600,1200,1800
     2/23/75	5/3/75        2300,0500,1100,1700
      5/5/75	8/15/75        2200,0400,1000,1600
     8/18/75—10/24/75        2300,0500,1100,1700
    10/27/75	3/12/76        0000,0600,1200,1800
     3/15/76	4/23/76        2300,0500,1100,1700
     4/26/76	9/10/76        2200,0400,1000,1600
     9/13/76—10/30/76        2300,0500,1100,1700
    10/31/76	3/4/77        0000,0600,1200,1800
      3/7/77	4/22/77        2300,0500,1100,1700
     4/25/77	5/31/77        2200,0400,1000,1600
                          188

-------
accordance with the latest National  Weather Service (NWS) and EPA procedures
for low level radiosonde and pibal soundings as contained in the Reference
Manual for Low Level Radiosonde and Pibal  Soundings (see Section 2.6).
     Similar training programs were conducted before intensive study periods
to provide qualified observers for expansion of operations at sites 141  and
142 to seven days per week and identical operation of the Illinois sites for
the duration of the intensives.  Observers hired to fill staff vacancies
during routine operation were individually trained on the job.
     All pre-intensive training periods after the 1975 Winter intensive  were
expanded to fourteen days allowing the observers time to gain more experience.
This expanded training period also allowed for quality control personnel to
review the initial work of each observer and provide the necessary feedback
required to correct their mistakes.
     In addition to the training program,  observers received periodic
critiques from quality control and supervisory personnel.  To further develop
their skills in reduction and interpretation of upper air data, five observers
were rotated through a two week course on quality control methodologies  by
assisting the quality control engineer.

2.4  MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
     The contractor provided administrative support and all  items necessary
for the successful operation of the UASN which were not supplied by the
government.  A government furnished warehouse and office space were utilized
for control and storage of materials required for network operation.  An
inventory log was kept for the GFE expendables, with requests for supplies
being submitted to the EPA whenever necessary.  All GFE shipments were
received at the warehouse and distributed by the contractor to the stations.
Table 5 lists the GFE equipment used and/or maintained at each UASN station.

2.5  MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF GFE EQUIPMENT
     The contractor provided a skilled electronics technician familiar with
the GFE equipment.  The tests and calibrations shown in Table 6 were per-
formed on the equipment and instrumentation at each station during the periods
of operation as routine maintenance to assure continuous operation.
                                     189

-------
TABLE 5.  UASN STATION EQUIPMENT
Site 141
Quantity Equipment Description
1 GMD Recorder Set - 1680 MHz
1 GMD-1A Rawin Set
1 GMD Control Recorder
2 GMD Rawin Receivers
2 GMD Antenna Control Units
1 Radio, 2-way Motorola floor model
1 Antenna, 2-way radio
1 Aneroid Barometer
1 Microbarograph
1 Baseline Test Box
1 Battery Tester, radiosonde
1 Acoustic Sounder
1 Surface Wind Sensor Set
1 Theodolite Stand, Steel Pedestal Mounted
2 Theodolites, w/case
1 Timer, 30 seconds, A.C. (Fixed)
1 Timer, 30 seconds, Battery (Portable)
1 Instrument Shelter and stand
1 Psychrometer, sling, with 2 thermometers °C
2 Regulators, gas (helium tank)
1 Rain Gauge
1 Board, winds aloft plotting
1 Board, winds aloft graphing
1 Chart Set, horizontal distance out
1 Calculator, psychrometric, °C
1 E valuator, temperature °C, slide stick
1 E valuator, relative humidity wheel
1 Drift Correction Scale for radiosonde 912
chart paper

Installation
Date
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
3/76
11/74
11/74
1/14/75
1/75
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
(continued)
                190

-------
TABLE 5 (continued)
Site 142
Quantity Equipment Description
1 GMD Recorder Set - 1680 MHz
1 GMD-1A Rawin Set
1 GMD Control Recorder
2 GMD Rawin Receivers
2 GMD Antenna Control Units
1 GMD Radome
1 Radio, 2-way Motorola floor model
1 Antenna, 2-way radio
1 Aneroid Barometer
1 Microbarograph
1 Baseline Test Box
1 Battery Tester, radiosonde, w/2 meters
1 Surface Wind Sensor Set
2 Theodolites, w/case
1 Theodolite Stand, Steel Pedestal Mounted
1 Timer, 30 seconds, A.C. (Fixed)
1 Timer, 30 seconds, Battery (Portable)
1 Instrument Shelter and stand
1 Psychrometer, sling, w/2 thermometers °C
2 Regulators, gas (helium tank)
1 Rain Gauge
1 Board, winds aloft plotting
1 Board, winds aloft graphing
1 Chart Set, horizontal distance out
1 Calculator, psy chrome trie, °C
1 Evaluator, temperature °C, slide stick
1 Evaluator, relative humdity wheel
1 Drift Correction Scale for radiosonde 912
chart paper

Installation
Date
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
3/18/76
11/74
11/74
11/74
3/76
11/74
11/74
1/75
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
11/74
(continued)
       191

-------
TABLE 5 (continued)
Site 143
Quantity Equipment Description
1 403 MHz Radiosonde Recorder
1 403 MHz Antenna with coaxial cable
1 Radio, 2-way Motorola floor model
1 Antenna, 2-way radio
1 Aneroid Barometer
1 Baseline Test Box
1 Battery Tester, radiosonde
1 Theodolite with case
1 Theodolite Stand, Steel Pedestal Mounted
1 Timer, 30 seconds, A.C. (Fixed)
1 Timer, 30 seconds, Battery (Portable)
1 Instrument Shelter and stand
1 Psychrometer, sling, with 2 thermometers °C
2 Regulators, gas (helium tank)
1 Rain Gauge
1 Board, winds aloft plotting
1 Board, winds aloft graphing
1 Chart Set, horizontal distance out
1 Calculator, psychrometric, °C
1 E valuator, temperature °C, slide stick
1 Evaluator, relative humidity wheel
1 Drift Correction Scale for radiosonde 912
chart paper
1 Dwyer hand-held wind gauge

Installation
Date
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
7/14/76
                                     (continued)
        192

-------
TABLE 5 (continued)
Site 144
Quantity Equipment Description
1 403 MHz Radiosonde Recorder
1 403 MHz Antenna with coaxial cable
1 Radio, 2-way Motorola floor model
1 Antenna, 2-way radio
1 Aneroid Barometer
1 Baseline Test Box
1 Battery Tester, radiosonde
1 Theodolite with case
1 Theodolite Stand, Steel Pedestal Mounted
1 Timer, 30 seconds, A.C. (Fixed)
1 Timer, 30 seconds, Battery (Portable)
1 Instrument Shelter and stand
1 Psychrometer, sling, with 2 thermometers °C
2 Regulators, gas (helium tank)
1 Rain Gauge
1 Board, winds aloft plotting
1 Board, winds aloft graphing
1 Chart Set, horizontal distance out
1 Calculator, psy chrome trie, °C
1 Evaluator, temperature °C, slide stick
1 Evaluator, relative humidity wheel
1 Drift Correction Scale for radiosonde 912
chart paper
1 Dwyer hand-held wind gauge

Installation
Date
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
1/75
7/14/76
        193

-------
     In addition, all equipment and instrumentation utilized at stations 143
and 144 during each intensive period were tested and/or calibrated before
station operation.  After intensive periods the equipment used at the Illinois
sites was removed and stored in the warehouse or used as auxiliary equipment
at the Missouri sites.
     Timeliness was an important factor in UASN equipment repair.  Although
most repairs could be accomplished before the next scheduled release, little
could be done for an equipment failure that occurred during a release unless
the electronics technician was present at the station.  This problem was even
more acute during intensives when complete reserve systems were not available.
Consequently, observers were trained to install the spare rawin receiver and
antenna control units which were kept at the stations as replacement parts
for the GMD-1.  This method of repair proved effective and prevented the Toss
of several scheduled radiosonde releases.
     Radiosondes rejected by observers were repaired by the electronics
technician.  This recycling was accomplished by installing spare parts from
other defective radiosondes.  The technician was also able to repair radio-
sondes by fixing cold solder joints, adjusting transmitter bias, repairing
faulty relays, etc.  Defective pibal lighting units were sometimes repaired by
replacing the light bulb with a #13 lamp.  This repair, effected by observers,
often prevented the long delay and consequent late release that would occur
while activating another lighting unit.  Although radiosonde batteries could
not be recycled, they could sometimes be salvaged by observers reheating a
cold solder joint in the three pin connector.
     After a check of the original (November 1974) orientation points indi-
cated possible discrepancies as to the location of true north, the orienta-
tion points were reestablished during December 1975 at all four stations.
The primary method used was the solar equal angles method described in
Federal Meteorological Handbook #5 - Hinds Aloft Observations (FMH #5).  The
secondary method employed was tracking the sun to culmination (solar noon).
The results of these methods as well as the differences between the original
and corrected orientation points for the UASN stations can be found in the
February 1976 RAPS Quarterly Report.
                                     194

-------
                 TABLE 6.  ROUTINE TESTS AND/OR CALIBRATIONS
                  OF STATION EQUIPMENT AND INSTRUMENTATION
Tests and/or Calibrations
Barometers calibration setting
     comparison
Theodolites collimated check
     leveling check
     orientation check
Wind Indicators
     speed calibration check
     direction check
Rawin Sets operational check
     power supply check
     tracking and sensitivity check
     level and orientation check
     B+ adjustment
     IF alignment
     local oscillator adjustment
     AFC Alignment
     line and phasing adjustment
     antenna control adjustment
     counterbalance adjustments
     cleaning and lubrication
Radiosonde Recorders
     linearity check
4    waveform check
     power supply adjustment
     alignment
     cleaning and lubrication
Normal Frequency
every 30 days

every 30 days
before and after each observation
before and after each observation

every 30 days
every 30 days
every 7 days
every 7 days
every 7 days
every 30 days
every 30 days
as required
as required
every 30 days
every 30 days
every 30 days
as required
as required

every 7 days
every 30 days
every 30 days
as required
as required
                                     195

-------
     After the orientation points were corrected, two methods were used to
check GMD alignment.  One method was the temporary positioning of a remote
transmitter at an orientation point and allowing the GMD to home in on the
signal.  The angle recorded by the GMD would then be compared to the known
angle and adjusted if necessary.  This method proved to be superior to
optical alignment as demonstrated by its repeatability.  The second method
(described in FMH #5) involved a comparison between the angles recorded by
the GMD and those of a theodolite while simultaneously observing the same
radiosonde sounding.  Although this method was found not to be directly
applicable to UASN soundings because ofi time-altitude considerations, it did
provide a check relative to the two methods of observation.

2.6  DATA COLLECTION
     Prior to the observer training in November 1974, the need for a compre-
hensive operational guide for radiosonde and pibal operators conducting low
level data acquisition was realized.  In response to this need, the Reference
Manual for Low Level Radiosonde and Pibal Soundings was compiled.  Federal
Meteorological Handbooks #3 (Radiosonde Observations) and #5 (Winds Aloft
Observations) along with NWS and EPA specifications for low level soundings
were used as the basis for the text.  A copy of the Reference Manual was
presented to the EPA Task Coordinator and approved prior to the first train-
ing program.  Throughout the UASN program, this manual was used both as the
text for training and as the guide for observation, reduction, and analysis
procedures for radiosonde and pibal soundings.
     All four stations made radiosonde observations every six hours and
pibal observations every intervening hour when in operation.  All observations
were taken in accordance with the procedures contained in the Reference
Manual for Low Level Radiosonde and Pibal Soundings and as amended in the
Task Order No. 31 Final Report.
     In August 1976 additional changes in the Reference Manual consisted of
reducing the missing temperature classification from 3.0°C or greater to
2.0°C or greater and reducing the doubtful temperature range from 1.0°-3.0°C
to 1.0°-2.0°C.  The allowable stratum of missing angular wind data which
could be interpolated was reduced from 3.0 minutes or less to 1.5 minutes or

                                    196

-------
less.  Data levels were inserted at the top of each temperature trace during
periods of variable ascent rate.
     Theodolites were oriented at 180° when aimed true north for compatibility
with the RAPS pibal computer programs.  All observations for winds  aloft were
performed with angular readings obtained at 30 second intervals.  Pibal  obser-
vations with favorable meteorological  conditions were performed for 10
minutes.
     Termination criteria for all radiosonde observations was 700mb except
for those soundings obtained at station 144 during the Summer 1975  intensive
period when the criteria was 500mb.  Reduced radiosonde data in the form of
ordinate values, pressure, temperature, relative humidity, dew point and
pressure altitude were listed and plotted on standard low-level sounding
(D-31) adiabatic charts.  Radiosonde and pibal wind data were submitted  on
formatted forms (GFE) with on-site wind reduction performed by the  observers
during the intensive study periods.
     All data were checked by the quality control staff.  It was then sub-
mitted the following week in one week chronological packages with the
appropriate forms and radiosonde recorder records.  Accompanying each week's
submission of data was a status matrix for each type of data showing scheduled
and completed observations and reasons for missed observations.  Also included
was a graph depicting the observed height of the mandatory pressure levels
(850, 700mb) for all radiosonde observations taken during the week.
     During the intensive study periods, reduced data, prior to quality  con-
trol, was transmitted to the RAPS Operations Coordinator via radio  or tele-
phone within 1.5 hours after release to provide upper air information on a
real-time basis to aid in planning field operations.
     The plan for station operation was approved by the EPA prior to commence-
ment of data collection.  Operation of the stations was accomplished with four
staggered eight-hour shifts per site each day allowing a two-hour shift  over-
lap to accommodate the requirement for two operators during radiosonde data
collection.  During intensive periods all shifts were extended one  hour  to
provide a three hour overlap to enable verbal transmission of reduced data
1.5 hours after release.  Radiosonde observations were taken in accordance

                                    197

-------
with the schedule established by the EPA Task Coordinator.

2.7  QUALITY CONTROL
     Prior to the operation of the UASN on November 18,  1974,  a quality con-
trol (QC) program was developed specifically to insure the accuracy and con-
sistency needed for the UASN objectives.  This quality control  program is
contained in Appendix B of the Task Order No. 31  Final Report.   However,
shortly after the UASN quality control work was initiated, it  was apparent
that the number of checks needed to be expanded.   Consequently the checklist
shown in Table 7 was derived under Task Order No.  31  and revised under
contract 68-02-2093.
     When errors were detected, quality control followed through correcting
all resulting errors.  Summary sheets were compiled for all  data permitting
observer evaluation.  These errors were then periodically related to the
observer allowing future correction and improved performance in the initial
data reduction phase.
     Quality control personnel carried out transcription verification pro-
cedures on all UASN radiosonde data.  Radiosonde identification, baseline
calibration data and values of time, pressure, temperature ordinate and
relative humidity were checked for correct transcription from the D-31
adiabatic chart to the RAPS coding sheets.  A list of all discrepancies was
submitted to the RAPS Operations Coordinator for subsequent correction.
     Two sources of non-pibal/radiosonde data were reduced by the UASN QC
group.   Microbarograph data, normally utilized in data analysis, was reduced
from strip charts, placed on coding sheets, keypunched and submitted to the
RAPS Project Officer.  The other source of data was the surface observations
taken by the UASN observers on a volunteer basis.   These too were coded,
keypunched and submitted to the Project Officer.
     In addition to the routine QC of incoming upper air data the quality
control staff processed data for a number of related projects.   A complete
list of all pibal and radiosonde data processed is shown in Table 8.
                                     198

-------
                TABLE 7.  FINAL QUALITY CONTROL WORK CHECKLIST
                              Pibal Data Checks
1.   Check pibal form against station logbook and data tapes, if necessary, to
     confirm 10 or 30 gram balloon usage.
2.   Review elevation and azimuth angles for angular continuity.
3.   Verify that all numbers are clear and legible.
4.   Check values of wind direction and speed for obvious discontinuities.
5.   Check all  information blocks and sequential  numbers.
6.   Code the RAPS formatted pibal forms for computerized reduction.
                           Radiosonde Data Checks
1.   Pre-Flight Checks
     a.  Check  to insure that all forms are present.
     b.  Surface pressure is read correctly from the barometer.
     c.  Release contact is read correctly from the  calibration  chart and the
         detent click setting is properly computed.
     d.  Baseline computations of temperature, dew point, and relative humidity
         are correct.
     e.  Surface computations of temperature, dew point,  and relative humidity
         are correct.
     f.  1000,  850,  and 700 mb-contact values are correct.
2.   Baseline Checks
     a.  Check  pre-baseline record and instrument tests.
     b.  Low reference of each baseline cycle is  95.0 ordinates.
     c.  Temperature and relative humidity baseline  ordinates are  assigned
         correctly.
     d.  Temperature evaluator setting is correct and within limits.
     e.  Surface temperature ordinate is computed correctly.
                                                                  (continued)

                                     199

-------
                            TABLE  7 (continued)
      f.   Relative humidity evaluator  is  properly  set.
      g.   Surface relative humidity ordinate  is  computed  correctly.
 3.    Recorder Record Checks
      a.   Temperature and relative  humidity are  plotted correctly  on  the
          surface level.
      b.   Release contact on the recorder record agrees with  the computed
          value from the  baseline form, and corrections,  if necessary,  are
          properly applied.
      c.   All  drift lines are drawn correctly.
      d.   Drift value assignment is correct at each  selected  level.
      e.   Recheck trending of temperature to  verify  all selected significant
          levels and add  any new levels needed.
      f.   Recheck relative humidity evaluation for significant  level  selection.
      g.   1000, 850, and  700 mb  mandatory levels are properly placed.
      h.   Elapsed time values are correct for each level.
      i.   Assigned contact value for each level  is correct and  successive
          levels are separated by not  more than  four contact  values.
      j.   Assigned temperature ordinate at each  level  is  correct.
      k.   Assigned relative humidity ordinate at each  level is  correct.
      1.   All  drift corrections  are properly  added.
      m.   No  zero recording error is present  at  the  end of the  recorded traces.
      n.   A careful  level  to level  comparison of the temperature and  relative
          humidity traces on the recorder record to  the plotted curves  on the
          adiabatic charts is performed.
 4.    Adiabatic Chart Checks
      a.   All  entries in  the informational  blocks  are  correct.
      b.   All  information in Data Block A is  transcribed  correctly.
      c.   All  conversions from contact values to mb  are correct.
      d.   Conversions from contact  value  to mb are correct.
      e.   Values of relative humidity  are derived  correctly.
      f.   Dewpoint temperatures  and depressions  are  computed  correctly.
	g.   Each  level  is plotted  at  the correct mb  value.	

                                      200

-------
                           TABLE 7 (continued)
     h.  Each temperature value is plotted correctly.
     i.  Relative humidity values are properly plotted.
     j.  Recheck all superadiabatic lapse rates.
     k.  Recheck the graphic determination of virtual temperatures and thick-
         nesses.
     1.  Recheck thickness entries from the required tables and recompute the
         pressure altitude data.
     m.  Sight pressure - altitude curve to ensure proper plotting.
5.   Time-Altitude Table and Winds Checks
     a.  Check ascent rate criteria from recorder record.
     b.  Check pressure values in time-altitude table.
     c.  Check time values in time-altitude table.
     d.  Verify above sea level altitudes extracted from pressure-altitude curve.
     e.  Above ground level values are determined correctly.
     f.  All resulting half minute interval altitudes are correct.
     g.  Horizontal distance out values are determined correctly.
     h.  Wind direction and speed are correctly computed.
     i.  For rawinsondes, all elevation angles below 12° are smoothed by the 3
         value running average.
     j.  For rawinsondes, elevation and azimuth angles are checked to determine
         those readings obtained in the limiting angle zone and marked on the
         wind forms if necessary.
6.   Miscellaneous Checks
     a.  Any height or pressure values in doubt are checked against available
         meteorological charts.
     b.  The 850 and 700 mb heights for the week's data are graphed and checked
         for height anomalies.
     c.  All dates and times are correct according to Standard Time in the
         coding blocks.
     d.  Station identification is clear on each form.
     e.  All forms for the period are included, or if a regularly  scheduled
         observation was not taken, the required documentation is  attached.
                                     2Q1                           (continued)

-------
                      TABLE  7 (continued)
f.   Forms for all special  observations are labeled with the reason for the
    observation.
g.   All forms are in chronological  order and are stacked in the predescribed
    manner.
                                202

-------
   TABLE 8.   PIBAL AND RADIOSONDE  DATA PROCESSED  BY  UASN QUALITY  CONTROL
                          ROUTINE  RAPS  PIBAL  DATA

 1)  T.O.  46:    RAPS Pibals  (July  25, 1974  through  August  28,  1974).
                Number = 1,129.   Interval:  few  = 20  sees;  majority =
                30 sees.

 2)  T.O.  31:    RAPS Pibals  (November 18, 1974 through  August  15,  1975).
                Number = 9,963.   Interval = 30 sees.

 3)  Contract 2093:   RAPS Pibals  (August 18,  1975 through  May  31,  1977).
                     Number  = 18,359.   Interval  = 30  sees.


                       SPECIAL STUDY RAPS PIBAL  DATA

 1)  T.O.  4:     McElroy August 1973 Pibals.   Number = 94.   Interval =  30  sees.

 2)  T.O.  18:    McElroy February-March  1974 Pibals.   Number =  144.
                Interval = 30 sees.

 3)  T.O.  33:    Brookhaven June 1974 Pibals.  Number  =  18.   Interval = 30 sees,

 4)  T.O.  41:    Wilson August 1974 Pibals.  Number  =  88.   Interval = 30 sees.

 5)  T.O.  47:    McElroy July-August 1974 Pibals.  Number =  626.   Interval  =
                20 sees.

 6)  T.O.  59:    Brookhaven July 1975 Pibals.  Number  =  96.   Interval = 30 sees,

 7)  T.O.  61:    MISTT July-August  1975  Pibals.   Number  = 372.   Interval =
                30 sees.

 8)  T.O.  105:   Brookhaven September-October  1975 Pibals.   Number  = 130.
                Interval = 30'sees.

 9)  T.O.  109:   McElroy/Ching February-March  1976 Pibals.   Number  = 378.
                Interval = 20 sees.

10)  T.O.  Ill:   EMI  March 1976 Pibals.   Number = 140.   Interval  =  30 sees.

11)  T.O.  114:   DA VINCI May-July  1976  Pibals.   Number  = 134.   Interval =
                30 sees.

12)  T.O.  115:   MISTT June-July 1976 Pibals.  Number  =  573.   Interval  =
                30 sees.

13)  Training:   RAPS July 1976 Training Pibals.  Number 153.   Interval  =
                30 sees.
                                                                  (continued)

                                    203

-------
                             TABLE  8 (continued)
14)  T.O.  116:   Ching/McElroy July-August 1976  Pibals.  Number = 192.
                Interval  = 20 sees.

15)  T.O.  118:   Ching/McElroy October-November  1976 Pibals.  Number = 410.
                Interval:   few = 30  sees; majority =  20 sees.

16)  T.O.  119:   Shair/Schiermeier November 1976 Pibals.  Number = 69.
                Interval  = 30 sees.

17)  T.O.  126:   Cobb/Andrus May 1977 Pibals.  Number  = 155.  Interval =
                30 sees.

18)  T.O.  130:   Cobb/Andrus/Breed October-November 1977 Pibals.  Number =
                139.   Interval  = 30  sees.
                             RAPS  RADIOSONDE  DATA

 1)  T.O.  7:     Wilson September-October  1973 Radiosondes.  Number = 20.

 2)  T.O.  18:    McElroy February-March  1974 Radiosondes.  Number = 17.

 3)  T.O.  46:    RAPS Radiosondes  (July  25, 1974  through August 28, 1974).
                Number = 230.

 4)  T.O.  31:    RAPS Radiosondes  (November 18, 1974 through August 15, 1975)
                Number = 2,025.

 5)  Contract 2093:   RAPS Radiosondes  (August 18,  1975 through May 31, 1977)
                     Number =  3,481.

 6)  Training:   RAPS July 1976 Training Radiosondes.  Number = 25.
                                     204

-------
2.8  MISCELLANEOUS
     In addition to the routine operation of the Upper Air Sounding Network,
UASN personnel engaged in a number of activities related to network opera-
tion.  These activities ranged from the fabrication of supplemental  equip-
ment to providing tours for student groups and news media.  The following
paragraphs describe some of these efforts.
     Supplemental equipment manufactured by the UASN included pre-baseline
control boxes, portable timers and an aspirated psychrometer.  The pre-
baseline control boxes were essentially a rotary switch with alligator clip
leads (Figure 7) which were used to control radiosonde signals during the
pre-baseline checks.  These control boxes provided an improved electrical
connection between the radiosonde test leads.   Poor connections often led
to the mistaken rejection of radiosondes.  Consequently, fewer radiosondes
were rejected and the observer, relieved from holding the test leads, could
concentrate on signal quality.  The portable timers that were fabricated
were an improved version of the ones previously used by the UASN and mobile
pibal teams.  These timers featured shorter tone bursts, a modified
calibrator unit and very low current drain for improved battery life.  A
complete schematic for this timer can be found in Figure 8.  The aspirated
psychrometer was fabricated out of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe and an
electric motor driven fan.  This psychrometer shown in Figure 9 was not
extensively tested but it appeared to be accurate and was constructed at
a very low cost.
     During station operation, UASN personnel  routinely maintained the
acoustic sounder that was being operated under Task Order No. 110.  The
observer also compiled a log of acoustic and meteorological phenomena to
aid in data reduction.  UASN maintenance personnel installed a cover on
the acoustic sounder cuff in January 1976.  The cover consisted of a fine
mesh fiberglass screening supported by a wire grid of #12 vinyl-coated
clothesline.  This prevented snow and other debris from entering the cuff
and further loss of the acoustic foam sound barrier from the cuff walls.
     Members of the UASN quality control staff assisted the EPA in^the
development and testing of the RAPS radiosonde and pibal computer programs.
                                    205

-------
       HUMIDITY
        YELLOW
    HIGH REFERENCE
          RED
     LOW REFERENCE
         BLUE
      RELAY TEST
COLOR CODED ALLIGATOR
CLIP COVER USED TO
IDENTIFY 91.4 cm LEADS.
                FIGURE  7.   PRE-BASELINE  CONTROL  BOX SCHEMATIC
TIME CONSTANT OF
20/30 SECOND IN-
TERVAL DEPEND ON
VALUE OF Rr


j*

' a
V Ui
niery

Ok

•10k





7
6
2
1
~100 Mfd.


8 4
555


2
5
J

•|N.O.
I But

_L
~|~.001
                                                        Push
            FIGURE 8.  PORTABLE PIBAL TIMER (20/30 sec. timer)
                                    206

-------
 9.2 x 5.1 cm PVC
     REDUCER
                           THERMOMETER  POSTS
 1/50  HP   3000 RPM
  110  VAC   MOTOR
n   n  n   n   n
HHR
                                   20.3  cm.  SECTION  OF
                                     9.2 cm.  PVC  PIPE
                               .15.2 x 9.2 cm. 8vc REDUCER
                            RUBBER FEET
FIGURE 9.  ASPIRATED PSYCHROMETER
                207

-------
Manually reduced pibal data were compared to computer results while the
radiosonde program was tested by formulating a test radiosonde sounding.
This sounding incorporated a number of possible variations such as missing
data, doubtful data, ascending balloons, descending balloons and extreme
temperature changes.
     In an effort to increase the accuracy and speed of field data reduction,
two observers created programs for small hand-held programmable calculators.
These programs, based on the equations found in the NOAA technical memorandum
entitled Rawinsonde Observation and Processing Techniques at the National
Severe Storms Laboratory (ERL-53), essentially replaced the slide evaluators
and plotting boards.  However, the pibal wind reduction program was the only
one used with any frequency in the field as several observers had personal
programmable calculators.  Copies of the programs were submitted to the RAPS
Project Officer.
     Public relations activities included tours of UASN Station 141 for
student groups from St. Louis University, Kansas State University's American
Chemical Society Chapter and the film crew from television station KSD.  A
limited number of 100 gram balloons were also donated to the cities of
Overland and Flat River, Missouri, for the 1976 Bicentennial Celebration.
     In order to see if any two radiosondes would yield comparable results
when encountering the same meteorological conditions, a simultaneous release
of a 1680 MHz and 403 MHz radiosonde was made.  Although dual 1680 MHz or
dual 403 MHz radiosondes might have provided a better comparison, they were
not utilized because of the difficulty in moving the GMD-1 and the frequency
conflict of the 403 MHz.  A special train was constructed consisting of
two 100 gram balloons and one parachute connected by 25 meters of string
to two radiosondes spaced one meter apart.  The radiosondes were then
observed with dual theodolites as well as with the 6MD.  The temperature
and relative humidity profiles are shown in Figure 10 while complete results
are contained in the September 1977 Monthly Report.
     Another investigation determined the amount of missing wind data as  a
result of the radome at Station 142.  The radome, installed at Station 142
to protect the GMD against adverse meteorological conditions which affected
                                    208

-------
  1000
        0%
50%
100%  0°C      5°C      10°C     15°C
20°C
25°C
          RELATIVE HUMIDITY

               1680 MHz Radiosonde

          	403 MHz Radiosonde
                                 TEMPERATURE
FIGURE 10 - SIMULTANEOUS 403 MHz AND 1680 MHz RADIOSONDE  TEMPERATURE AND  RELA-
            TIVE HUMIDITY PROFILES.
                                     209

-------
its operation, also prevented observers from visually aligning the  GMD  dish
on the radiosonde.  One observer would site the radiosonde with the theodolite
while the other would attempt to remotely position the GMD dish.  The longer
this process, the more data that was lost.   The investigation consisted of
reviewing the wind data during the month of September 1976 at Stations
141 and 142 (assuming wind conditions at the two stations were similar).
Wind data were also reviewed from Station 142 during September 1975. The
amounts of missing data were recorded and are shown in Table 9.  The results
indicate that 4-1/2 times more wind data were lost at Station 142 than  at
141 during the same period.  Station 142 lost more than 2-1/2 times the
amount of data lost during the same month the previous year.   Although  most
of this data was lost during the first few minutes of the flight, it should
be noted that this long alignment time often affected the quality of the
radiosonde's temperature and relative humidity data as well.
     Prior to developing a mixing depth climatology (under Task Order
Number 128), it was noted that numerous shallow surface-based inversions
appeared on RAPS radiosonde soundings even during mid-afternoon unstable
conditions.  There were several possible explanations for these inversions.
They could be caused by improper baseline calibrations, improperly  executed
surface observations or by the methodology used to reduce the data.  Improper
baseline calibrations were unlikely as most baseline calibrations were
double checked by the observers.  Improperly executed surface observations
were also dismissed as a possible explanation as they were duplicated if
a discrepancy of ±0.5°C existed.  However, a closer look at the methodology
used for reducing the data before the first low reference was different in
the manner which drift corrections were made.  A review of soundings with
shallow surface-based inversions was made which indicated the majority  had
surface drift corrections.  The methodology presented in FMH #5 dictates that
the first low reference be extrapolated vertically to obtain the surface
drift correction.  This is unlike the other drift corrections which are
obtained by linear interpolation between the references.  Vertical  extrapola-
tion is a logical method (and assumption) for obtaining the surface drift
correction, particularly if a long period of time (unrecorded) has  elapsed
since the last reference.  However, the recording of a low reference prior
to release would allow linear interpolation consistent with data reduction
                                      210

-------
                           TABLE 9.  MISSING  WIND  DATA  DUE TO RADOME INSTALLATION
MISSING WIND DATA
(TIME IN MINUTES AFTER RELEASE)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5

TOTAL AMOUNT OF MISSING WIND DATA
STATION 141
SEPTEMBER 1976
5
0
1
0
0

4.0 Min.
STATION 142
(WITH RADOME)
SEPTEMBER 1976
27
3
1
0
0

18.0 Min.
STATION 142
(WITHOUT RADOME)
SEPTEMBER 1975
5
2
0
0
1

7.0 Min.
ro

-------
methods above the first low reference.   Coincidentally, many UASN observers
routinely recorded a low reference prior to release while the recorder was
running, but this information was not used in data reduction.  With this
extra information, an attempt to demonstrate that this new method was more
accurate was initiated.  A preliminary inspection of the data indicated that
this was not the case.  Further investigation suggested that the conditions
under which the surface observations were taken would have to be more
restrictive to prove this new method.  The surface observation according
to FMH #5 could be taken up to 10 minutes before release or as soon as
possible after release.  This time interval would have to be decreased to
prevent small differences in temperature between the release time and the
surface observation time from interfering with the testing of the new method.
     As a result of this investigation, the following suggestions were made:
     1.  Obtain a pre-release low reference leaving the recorder run until
         release.  Now the pre-release low reference can be used as one point
         in the linear interpolation of the drift correction.
     2.  Provide an adequate shaded area for surface observations and
         restrict the allowable time interval to five minutes before or
         after release.
     3.  Test the new method as soon as possible to confirm its accuracy.
                                     212

-------
3.0  PERFORMANCE
     The Upper Air Sounding Network performance summary for the period of
August 18, 1975 through May 31, 1977 (Contract 68-02-2093)  is  shown  in
Table 10.  The summary indicates that during this period UASN  observers
obtained 99.85% of all possible pibal releases and 99.40% of all  possible
radiosonde releases.  The 33 special pibal  releases,  not included in the
submitted total, were released to provide wind data in support of radiosonde
observations whenever equipment problems caused a loss of wind data.   Radio-
sonde releases were always considered meteorologically possible;  however,
seven radiosonde soundings were unattainable because  of power  outages.
     The cumulative performance summary for the UASN  is shown  in  Table 11.
This summary, which encompasses the entire operational period, "indicates
that UASN observers obtained 99.18% of all  possible pibal releases and
98.90% of all radiosonde releases.  Overall data capture was 99.13%.   Only
968 out of 35,028 releases or 2.76% of all  radiosonde and pibal releases
were cancelled due to adverse meteorological conditions or power outages.
                                     213

-------
                         TABLE  10.   UPPER  AIR  SOUNDING NETWORK PERFORMANCE SUMMARY.
                                                                                          August 18, 1975
                                                                                  MONTH -»  May 31. 1977
p
I
B
A
L
S
R
A
D
I
0
S
0
N
D
E
S
STATION
141
142
143
144
TOTAL
STATION
141
142
143
144
TOTAL
SCHEDULED
10,028
7333
663
663
18,687
SCHEDULED
1873
1374
131
131
3509
METEOROLOGI-
CALLY POSSIBLE
9862
7178
655
659
18,354
METEOROLOGI-
CALLY POSSIBLE
1873
1370
129
130
3502
SPECIAL
RELEASES
14
8
5
6
33
SPECIAL
RELEASES
0
0
0
0
0
SUBMITTED
9847
7176
648
655
18,326
SUBMITTED
1863
1367
121
130
3481
% OF
SCHEDULED
98.20
97.86
97.74
98.79
98.07.
% OF
SCHEDULED
99.47
99.49
92.37
99.10
99.20
% OF
POSSIBLE
99.85
99.97
98.93
99.39
99.85
% OF
POSSIBLE
99.77
99.78
93.80
100.00
99.40
ro

-------
TABLE 11.   UPPER AIR SOUNDING NETWORK CUMULATIVE  PERFORMANCE  SUMMARY
t\>
en

P
I
B
A
L
S
STATION
141
142
143
144

SCHEDULED
14,350
11,411
1,847
1,847

METEOROLOGI-
CALLY POSSIBLE
13,964
11,021
1,754
1,755

SPECIAL
RELEASES
35
10
9
9

SCHEDULED
SUBMITTED
13,850
10,973
1,730
1,707

November 18, 1974
MONTH -»• May 31, 1977

% OF
SCHEDULED
96.52
96.16
93.67
92.42

% OF
POSSIBLE
99.18
99.56
98.63
97.26


-------
4.0  PROBLEMS
     There were two major problems encountered in the operation of the Upper
Air Sounding Network.  The first problem was the use of the radiosonde
tracking equipment (specifically the GMD) which was received in poor or
inoperative condition.  Extensive repairs and frequent malfunctions plagued
efforts to produce quality data during the course of the program.  However,
the replacement of gaskets, constant power on operation (antenna control
unit only), and the extensive replacement of marginal parts finally
alleviated the majority of the previous operational-difficulties.  The
installation of the radome at Station 142 appeared to slightly reduce the
problems associated with adverse weather and provided a more hospitable
place for the electronic technician to perform maintenance but was also
the cause of some lost data.
     The second major problem was the periodic shortages of government
furnished expendables or the shipment of defective expendables.  The UASN
suffered shortages of pibal lighting units and D-31 Adiabatic charts.  In
the case of the lighting units, the UASN manufactured its own with penlight
cells and a flashlight bulb.  The D-31s were finally printed locally until
a  shipment arrived.  The primary defective materials received by the UASN
were meteorological balloons.  In fact, the UASN received defective ship-
ments of all sizes of balloons, but the defective 100 gram balloons are
most noteworthy.  The 100 gram balloons were received in a variety of con-
ditions ranging from a noninflatable deteriorated condition to an inflatable,
short-lived, (burst at low altitude) condition.  These balloons are directly
responsible for the loss of eight scheduled radiosondes as well as for
numerous late releases and the loss of associated expendables when they
burst at low altitudes which did not meet the minimum altitude requirements.
Several defective shipments were received during the Summer 1976 Intensive.
The problem was finally solved when the contractor purchased fresh balloons
directly from the manufacturer, thus bypassing the extensive shelf life
                                     216

-------
inherent in the government supply system.
     Other lesser problems included the fogging of theodolite lenses which
was prevented with a heating pad, the cold weather effects on the tape
recorders and interval timers which was remedied by remoting the tape
recorders in the trailer and building a small shelter for the timer, and
the lack of a precision barometric standard.  The Negretti Zambra precision
aneroid barometer (GFE) was only made available to the UASN three times
throughout the project.  The delay in receiving the barometer resulted in
two weeks of data reduced using the old calibration which had to be repro-
cessed.
                                    217

-------
5.0  RECOMMENDATIONS
     The following changes in procedures and additional  equipment are
recommended for future programs of similar type:
     1.  Provide a complete meteorological instrument system at each station.
         A minimum system would include sensors to measure wind speed,  wind
         direction, ambient temperature, dew point, precipitation and
         barometric pressure.  Preferably this system would allow observers
         access to a direct digital  readout in engineering units as well
         as digitally record the information for latter use by quality  con-
         trol .
     2.  Provide sufficient time prior to data collection for an operational
         check of the equipment and time to properly refurbish the equip-
         ment if necessary.
     3.  Orient the station balloon exit towards the least prevalent wind
         direction and maintain the greatest practical distance from fences,
         highway signs, overhead wires, utility poles, etc.
     4.  Provide a permanent barometric standard for the network and a
         routine barometer calibration procedure.   An NBS traceable tempera-
         ture measurement device would also be appropriate for thermometer
         calibration.
     5.  Permanently locate a remote transmitter for GMD orientation checks.
     6.  Automate the data reduction process by providing computer terminals
         or programmable calculators for accurate real-time field data  or
         at least provide computer assisted quality control with a graphics
         terminal allowing inter-and intra-station comparison of data,
         rapid editing and selection of mixing depth levels.
     .7.  Revise the UASN Reference Manual with more specific examples and
         incorporate mandatory manual determination of the detent click value
                                     218

-------
    allowing more accurate measurement of altitude.
8.  Provide an adequate shaded area for surface observations while
    restricting them to within five minutes before or after release.
9.  Obtain a pre-release low reference and utilize it in interpolating
    the drift corrections prior to the first low reference after
    release.
                                219

-------
6.0  REFERENCES
Waldron, T. L., UASN Reference Manual for Low-Level Radiosonde and Pibal
  Soundings.  Rockwell International Air Monitoring Center, Newbury Park,
  California.  EPA Contract 68-02-1081.
Waldron, T. L., Operation of Regional Air Pollution Study Upper Air
  Sounding Network St. Louis.  Rockwell International  Air Monitoring Center,
  Creve Coeur, Missouri.  Task Order Number 31 Final Report, EPA Contract
  68-02-1081.  December 1975.
Myers, R. L., Regional Air Pollution Monthly Progress Reports.  Rockwell
  International Air Monitoring Center, Creve Coeur, Missouri.  EPA Contracts
  68-02-1081 and 68-02,-2093.  December 1975 - January 1978.
                                      220

-------
                                SECTION 3

                        SUMMARY OF RAPS TASK ORDERS

1.0  INTRODUCTION
     The Regional Air Pollution Study was a dynamic research program requiring
specialized atmospheric sampling, sample analysis, data processing and data
analysis.  These specialized functions were conducted under a mechanism
whereby individual Task Orders were issued as the need arose.  There were
88 Task Orders completed as part of the RAPS field measurement program.  The
following are brief summaries of each Task Order; more detailed information
has already been presented in the respective Task Order final reports.
                                    221

-------
2.0  PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
          Task Order No.  1    - RAPS Program Planning
          Task Order No.  5    - RAPS Office Relocation
          Task Order No.  9    - RAPS Program Objectives  and Plans
          Task Order No.  50  - RAPS Expedition Research Program
          Task Order No.  122 - RAPS Data Base Augmentation

     With a large, interdisciplinary program such as the RAPS,  effective
program management was essential  if the established objectives  were  to  be
met.  Management efforts  had to be successful in planning, organizing,
directing and controlling the resources of the program  while staying within
the boundaries of the temporal, budgetary and technical constraints.   In
order to assist the EPA in  its management and planning  efforts, five task
orders were issued.
     In these task orders,  Rockwell developed a work plan for the  RAPS  field
experiments, made recommendations to the EPA regarding  future tasks,  created
a detailed experimental coordination plan, and relocated the RAPS  office.
As time progressed, efforts were directed towards the extension and  updating
of the original study plans, resulting in the development of a  detailed plan
for the summer 1975 expeditionary research program.  In the final  task  order
of this group, Rockwell documented the activities of the Regional  Air Pollu-
tion Study and of related investigations in the St. Louis Air Quality Control
Region in order to furnish  a compendium of studies and  data sources  for
investigators employing information from these many RAPS components.
    The resultant products  of these efforts can be found in the Task Order
Nos. 1, 5, 9, 50, 122 Final Reports.  The Task Order No. 122 Final Report
(RAPS Compendium, EPA-600/4-79-076) is available upon request from the  EPA
at Research Triangle Park,  North Carolina.
                                    222

-------
3.0  REGIONAL AIR MONITORING SYSTEM (RAMS)

3.1  EVALUATION OF RAMS MEASUREMENTS
          Task Order No. 57  - Modification of RAMS Dew Point Sensors
          Task Order No. 121 - C02 Effect on RAMS Sulfur Monitors
          Task Order No. 125 - Evaluation of RAMS CO Data
     It was the objective of the RAMS network to provide a comprehensive,
continuous and accurate data base of aerometric measurements.   In addition
to the routine quality assurance activities, several  task orders  provided
for investigations into factors which might affect data accuracy.  Investi-
gations were conducted of instrument response, factors suppressing instrument
response and equipment modifications aimed at improved instrument performance.
     The purpose of Task Order No. 57 was to determine the feasibility of
modifying the EG&G International Model 880 dew point hygrometer for accurate
dew point determinations during continuous operation.   Rockwell  modified
five of the sensors, collected test data, and analyzed the results.   In
another task two flame photometric sulfur gas analyzers, the Tracer Model
270HA sulfur gas chromatograph and Meloy Model SA185 total sulfur analyzer,
were tested in order to verify and quantify the effect of sample  gas carbon
dioxide content.  Rockwell collected experimental  data for this task via wet
chemical techniques and by the simultaneous operation of the two  analyzers.
In a third task order, Rockwell reviewed RAMS carbon monoxide data and
corrective maintenance records for the Beckman Model  6800 gas chromatograph
to determine the scope and magnitude of a carbon monoxide cutoff phenomenon.
     These task orders are documented in the Task Order Nos. 57,  121, 125
Final Reports.
                                    223

-------
3.2  RAMS STATION RELOCATION
          Task Order No. 120 - RAMS Transition Support
          Task Order No. 123 - RAMS Station Relocation

     'At the conclusion of the RAPS field measurement program, RAMS facilities
were transferred to other government and non-government agencies.   In order
to facilitate this transfer, task orders were used to provide training to
the receiving agencies along with assistance in the initial  start-up of the
stations.
     Two task orders were included in this effort.  In one,  Rockwell simply
provided the necessary receiving agencies with training and  assistance.
Informal briefings which provided detailed descriptions of the equipment
and its operational history were held along with classes in  the operation
and maintenance of the data acquisition system.  In the other task, Rockwell
relocated two.RAMS stations to Research Triangle Park.  One  of the stations
was restored to operating condition and full multipoint calibrations were
performed.
     Additional information can be found in each task order's respective
final report.
                                    224

-------
4.0  UPPER AIR SOUNDING NETWORK (UASN)

4.1  UASN OPERATION
          Task Order No. 46 - Summer 1974 Meteorological  Upper Air Support
          Task Order No. 31 - RAPS Upper Air Sounding Network
     The RAMS network provided a relatively dense data base  of surface  winds,
temperature and relative humidity.  However, to achieve a truly 3-dimensional
representation of the state of the atmosphere, it was necessary to supple-
ment these measurements by monitoring the meteorological  parameters aloft
using balloons and airborne instrument packages.   It was  the objective  of
the Upper Air Sounding Network to provide this needed upper  air meteorological
information.  The Upper Air Sounding Network, during its  existence from July
1974 through May 1977 consisted of both a temporary (Task Order No. 46) and
a permanent network (Task Order No.  31 and Exhibit B of Contract 68-02-2093).
The temporary network was to provide data for the Summer  1974 Field Expedition,
while Task Order No. 31 provided for the establishment and initial operation
of the permanent network.
     Rockwell operated the network on a 24 hour,  5 days per  week schedule
(7 days per week during intensives).  Hourly wind data were  collected with
pilot balloons using the single theodolite method and upper  air soundings
using radiosondes were collected every six hours.  Rockwell  performed all
data reduction and quality control work.  The data were submitted in weekly
segments to the RAPS Operations Coordinator one week after its acquisition.
     Additional details concerning the operation  of the Upper Air Sounding
Network can be found in the Task Order Nos. 46, 31 Final  Reports and in
Section 2 of this report.

4.2  UASN MIXING DEPTH DETERMINATION
          Task Order No. 128 - UASN Mixing Depth  Determination
     Approximately 5,700 radiosondes were released and tracked by the Upper
                                    225

-------
Air Sounding Network to assist in defining transport and dispersion of
airborne pollutants.  One of the critical parameters to be derived from
these data is the mixing depth, a surface-based layer in which pollutants
are usually assumed to be uniformly vertically mixed.  The purpose of this
task order was to create a mixing depth climatology composed of existing and
maximum mixing depths and associated transport winds and ventilation factors
for use by RAPS modelers and principal investigators in their analyses of
RAPS air quality measurements.
     Rockwell provided qualified personnel to subjectively determine the
mixing depths from computer generated radiosonde plots and to record selected
data from printouts for subsequent determination of transport winds and ven-
tilation factors.  These data were submitted as they became available to the
EPA for incorporation into the RAPS data bank.  Guidelines used in the
evaluation of the radiosonde data can be found in the task order final report.
                                    226

-------
5.0  AERIAL MONITORING SYSTEM
         Task Order No. 25 - RAPS Helicopter Aerial  Monitoring
                             System Installation
     In order to complement the extensive surface-based data collected by
RAMS and the meteorological data supplied by the UASN, the aerial  monitoring
system was to provide a data base of aerometric measurements aloft.  The
purpose of this task order was to modify and install air pollution instru-
mentation in the three Sikorsky S-58 helicopters that comprised the aerial
monitoring system.
     Rockwell, through its International Flight Test Operations Group,
performed the mechanical installations, structural modifications and elec-
trical wiring in the three helicopters.  Work performed included the in-
stallation of the air monitoring equipment, communication and navigational
gear, and the sample intake probes and manifolds.  Engineering drawings were
then provided to the EPA.
     Additional information with respect to the actual equipment installed
in the helicopters can be found in the task order final report.
                                    227

-------
6.0  POLLUTANT TRANSPORT AND DISPERSION STUDIES
6.1  BOUNDARY LAYER STRUCTURE AND ENERGETICS STUDY
          Task Order No. 2

          Task Order No. 4
          Task Order No. 15

          Task Order No. 18  -

          Task Order No. 47  -
          Task Order No. 48  -

          Task Order No. 60  -
          Task Order No. 109 -
          Task Order No. 110 -
          Task Order No. 116 -
          Task Order No. 118 -
Summer 1973 Boundary Layer Study Helicopter
Support
Summer 1973 Boundary Layer Study Pibal  Support
Winter 1974 Boundary Layer Study Helicopter
Support
Winter 1974 Boundary Layer Study Pibal  and
Radiosonde Support
Summer 1974 Boundary Layer Study Pibal  Support
Summer 1974 Boundary Layer Study Helicopter
Support
Summer 1975 Boundary Layer Study
Winter 1976 Boundary Layer Study
Acoustic Echo Sounder Operation
Summer 1976 Boundary Layer Study
Fall 1976 Boundary Layer Study
     In order to develop mathematical  dispersion formulations  for  the  Regional
Air Pollution Study, it was necessary  to recognize and define  those  properties
and conditions of the boundary layer structure which  contributed to  the
transport and dispersion of pollutants.   To help achieve  this, a series  of
field experiments on atmospheric boundary layer structure was  conducted  in
the St. Louis Metropolitan Area.
     The objective of these experiments  was to obtain time  and three dimen-
sional space temperature, moisture, and  pollutant data in order to describe
the spatiotemporal variations in an urban/rural  setting.  To help  achieve
this objective, an instrumented helicopter obtained vertical profiles  of
temperature, dew point temperature, sulfur dioxide concentration,  and  total
light back scattering by aerosols via  soundings (vertically ascending
spirals) from near the surface through the vertical extent  of  the  boundary
                                    228

-------
layer.
     To distinguish those features of the boundary layer structure  elusive
to the helicopter at ground level, an instrumented van obtained surface
measurements of temperature, dew point temperature, sulfur dioxide  concen-
tration, and total light scattering by aerosols.   Rockwell  personnel  assisted
in the helicopter and instrumented van data collection and reduction.
     As an integral part of these studies, mobile pibal  and radiosonde
observations were effected by Rockwell to obtain  a three-dimensional  repre-
sentation of temperature, pressure, moisture, wind speed and direction with-
in the atmospheric boundary layer. *
     A NOAA Mark VII monostatic acoustic echo sounder system was installed
at UASN Site 141 in downtown St. Louis to describe the spatial  and  temporal
variations in the boundary layer caused by varying thermal  and  mechanical
properties of the urban surface.  After one year's operation by the NOAA
Wave Propagation Laboratory, Rockwell was assigned complete responsibility
for the operation, maintenance, and data reduction of the acoustic  echo
sounder system.
     As part of the RAPS Energetics studies conducted in the St. Louis
Metropolitan Area, EPA Mobile Fluxatrons were used to derive the sensible
heat flux term of the energy balance equation by  taking the product of
the coincidental measurements of turbulent vertical velocity and temperature
fluctuations.  Mobile pibal observations provided descriptions  of the low-
level wind fields.  In addition, selected RAMS tower sites were used to
measure turbulent momentum and sensible heat fluxes by the eddy correlation
technique.
     Detailed descriptions of the preceding efforts can be found in the  Task
Order Nos. 2, 4, 15, 18, 47, 48, 60, 109, 110, 116, 118 Final Reports.

6.2  SUBSURFACE HEAT FLUX STUDY
          Task Order No. 104 - Subsurface Heat Flux Study
     As part of the RAPS boundary layer and energy budget studies,  this
task was designed to measure the storage term of  the energy balance equation.
Data from this task combined with the RAPS land use inventory would provide
                                     229

-------
modeling data for lower boundary conditions.
     A network of thermistors was implanted in a grassy area,  in and below
a portion of concrete runway and in and below a black painted  area of the
concrete runway.  Net radiometers were installed above each surface area and
additional equipment to measure the various meteorological  parameters was
installed at the site.  Rockwell operated and maintained this  installation
for its sixteen month duration.  Rockwell also provided data reduction under
Task Order No. 107.
     Details on the installation, its equipment and its operation can be
found in the task order final report.

6.3  BOUNDARY LAYER TRACER STUDY
          Task Order No. 119 - Fall 1976 SFC Plume Tracer Study
                                           o
     Seven atmospheric tracer experiments were conducted in the St. Louis
Area between November 8 and 14, 1976.  These experiments, part of the pollu-
tant transport and dispersion studies, were directed towards understanding
and subsequently describing vertical  dispersion during unstable conditions
in the atmospheric boundary layer as  a function of travel time from a source.
Particular attention was given to the spatial and temporal  variations in
SFg tracer plumes caused by varying thermal and mechanical  properties of
the underlying urban surface.
     Rockwell provided technical support for this task by providing a
helicopter with pilot and observer to measure temperature and  sulfur dioxide,
a mobile pibal unit to take single theodolite pibals, and driver-observers
to launch constant altitude balloons.  Personnel were also provided to
install and dismantle the tracer gas  release apparatus.  At the conclusion
of the experiments, a final report which contained all the data collection
logs was submitted to the EPA.
                                    230

-------
7.0  POLLUTANT TRANSFORMATION AND REMOVAL STUDIES

7.1  PLUME MAPPING PROGRAM (MISTT)
         Task Order No. 19  - Winter 1974 EPA Aerosol  Lab Trailer Support
         Task Order No. 41  - Summer 1974 Aerosol Characterization Study
                              Aircraft and Pibal  Support
         Task Order No. 61  - Summer 1975 MISTT Plume Study Pibal Support
         Task Order No. Ill - EMI Plume Study Pibal Support
         Task Order No. 115 - Summer 1976 MISTT Plume Study Pibal Support

     One objective of the MISTT Plume Mapping Program was to mathematically
describe the nature and role of pollutant transformation and removal processes
downwind of urban sources.  Various phases of this program were undertaken to
study the rate processes acting on aerosols and aerosol precursor gases in
urban plumes and in tall stack plumes from local  generating stations.  In
order to derive the rate processes from aircraft plume measurements, it was
necessary to know the effective transport mechanism.  Mobile pilot balloon
observations were utilized to obtain wind data for derivation of the trans-
port wind profile over the St. Louis Metropolitan Area and surrounding areas
of Missouri, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana and Kentucky.  Since many of the
objectives of MISTT and RAPS were the same or complementary, several task
orders were issued to provide support for the plume mapping program.
     In one of these support task orders, Rockwell provided for the operation
of an EPA furnished aerosol laboratory trailer located on the Washington
University campus.  Equipment in the trailer consisted of a sulfur dioxide
analyzer, an aerosol-particle monitor and a condensation nuclei counter.
In the other task orders, Rockwell provided mobile pibal teams to take
pibals using the single theodolite method.  The pibal  data were then reduced,
subjected to the standard quality control procedures, and submitted to the
EPA at the conclusion of each study.  Final reports for each task order were
also submitted.

                                    231

-------
7.2  POWER PLANT PLUME MAPPING
         Task Order No. 33  - Summer 1974 Brookhaven Plume Study Pibal
                              Support
         Task Order No. 59  - Summer 1975 Brookhaven Plume Study Pibal
                              Support
         Task Order No. 105 - Fall 1975 Brookhaven Plume Study Pibal Support

     Three phases of the Brookhaven Plume Study were conducted in the
St. Louis Area in support of the RAPS Point Source Plume Studies.  The
objective of these field experiments was to determine the conversion rates
of sulfur dioxide to particulate sulfate and nitric oxide to nitrogen dioxide
within tall stack plumes from power generating plants.  In order to correlate
the results obtained by stack sampling and airborne measurements of the plume
with the existing meteorological conditions, it was necessary to characterize
the low-level wind field to determine the existing transport mechanism.
Consequently, task orders were issued to provide mobile pibal support for
these studies.
     Rockwell provided mobile pibal units to take pibals using the single
theodolite method.  Rockwell then reduced the pibal data, subjected it to
quality control and submitted it to the EPA along with a final report for
each study.

7.3  PLUME TRACER STUDY
         Task Order No. 63 - Summer 1975 SFg Plume Tracer Study

     As part of the RAPS pollutant transformation and removal studies, five
tracer field studies were conducted in St. Louis to characterize the trans-
port and dispersion of plumes emitted at ground and elevated levels.  The
objectives of this study were to determine the relative contribution of
high versus low level sources to sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide ambient
concentrations and determine the pattern and concentration of single plumes
for model evaluation.  Task Order No. 63 was issued to provide technical
support for the study.
     In this study Rockwell provided the necessary labor and materials for
the installation and removal of the SFg release apparatus and the syringe

                                    232

-------
collectors at 25 RAMS sites.   Rockwell  personnel  also assisted in the
selection of release sites and data collection.   Pibals were occasionally
released to determine wind direction.   At the conclusion of the study,
Rockwell shipped the equipment to the California  Institute of Technology
and submitted a final report to the EPA.

7.4  HYDROCARBON CHARACTERIZATION
         Task Order Nos. 3, 21, 53, 103,  ITS - Gas Chromatography
                                               Laboratory Operation

     A Gas Chromatography Laboratory was  set-up,  operated, and maintained by
Rockwell at the RAPS Central  Facility in  St. Louis.   The laboratory was
equipped to chemically analyze bag samples originating from several different
RAPS activities.  Among the sources of bag samples were:  RAMS stations,
airborne sampling, highway sampling, plume tracking, and photochemical model
verification studies.
     Over its three years of operation, the gas  Chromatography laboratory
made significant changes in instrumentation and  analytical procedures.
Initially, Rockwell performed sample analyses as  part of the set-up and
development of standard analytical procedures.  While bag samples were being
collected from RAMS sites at variable intervals,  a study of diffusion losses
through Teflon and Tedlar sample bags was accomplished.  The Tedlar bags
were found to have a high THC build-up and consequently their use was
limited to CO and CH, analysis.  However, the CO  and CH. analysis was
affected by problems of methane contamination in  the hydrogen carrier gas
of the Beckman 6800.
     In addition to bag sampling, two related investigations were conducted
by Rockwell:  an evaluation of 2 mil versus 5 mil Teflon bags, and a test
of a modified bag sampling system.  In evaluating the 2 mil and 5 mil bags,
the 2 mil bags proved susceptible to leakage and  too fragile for normal
handling use.  The 5 mil Teflon bags appeared to  be leak-free; however,
further experimentation proved the permability of both Teflon bags to hydro-
carbons.  To minimize this problem, laboratory analyses of sample bags took
place within 12 hours of sampling.  In an attempt to improve the performance
of the bag sampling system in the RAMS stations,  a prototype installation of

                                    233

-------
a proposed improved sampling system was made at one of the RAMS stations.
However, when over-filling of the Teflon bags was identified as a major
problem in the sampling program, plans to modify more bag sampling systems
were dropped and the prototype installation removed.
     All NOX bag analyses were discontinued and past results invalidated as
a result of a laboratory experiment indicating that NCL significantly
decreased upon storage in the 5 mil Teflon bags.
     Another problem was the contamination of samples by impurities in the
helium carrier gas used in the gas chromatographs.   Special cryogenic traps
were installed to remove contaminants from the helium carrier and backflush
gas.
     All chromatograms and PEP-1 computer outputs were transferred to coding
forms and stored on magnetic tape.  Data tapes were submitted to the RAPS
Data Bank.  Further documentation of the Gas Chromatography Laboratory
operation can be found in the aforementioned Task Order final reports.

7.5  AEROSOL SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION
         Task Order No. 6 - Summer 1973 Aerosol Characterization Study
                            Aircraft Support
         Task Order No. 7 - Summer 1973 Aerosol Characterization Study
                            Meteorological Support

     As Rockwell's subcontractor, Meteorology Research, Inc. (MRI) provided
the aircraft monitoring support for a RAPS aerosol  characterization study
undertaken in St. Louis during September 1973.
     Rockwell's primary objective during the field test was to demonstrate
the feasibility of using a fixed-wing, single-engine aircraft (instrumented
by MRI for air pollution sampling) in upcoming RAPS studies.  The successful
completion of a wide variety of flight patterns and special sampling require-
ments demonstrated the achievement of this goal.  Other objectives that were
realized include the characterizations of both the St. Louis urban plume and
Labadie power plant plume at various downwind distances.
     Data generated from the aircraft flights are contained in the Task
Order No. 6 Final Report as computer generated profiles.  All aircraft data

                                     234

-------
were recorded on tape cartridges and transferred to two magnetic tapes which
in turn were given to Dr.  R. Husar at Washington University for analysis.
     The purpose of Task Order No. 7 was to provide meteorological  support
for a RAPS aerosol characterization study, relating to further analysis of
the influence of the St. Louis urban build-up on localized circulation; and
to determine the impact such a study may have on future field experiment
planning and RAPS transport/trajectory model  specification.
     To meet these objectives, Rockwell's subcontractor, Environmental
Quality Research, provided twofold meteorological support, aside from
preparation of routine planning forecasts.  One function was the real-time
monitoring and interpretation of urban and mesoscale circulation patterns
for pre-flight briefing of the MRI aircraft.   A second activity centered
on the integration of various data records into .a unified picture of the
time evolution of those urban-scale circulation features affecting boundary
layer air parcel trajectories.
     All meteorological support analyses and abbreviated data records are
contained in the Task Order No. 7 final report.  Radiosonde data were
entered into the RAPS Data Bank.

7.6  PARTICULATE MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS
         Task Order No. 35  - Summer 1974 Nelson Streaker Study
         Task Order No. 62  - Summer 1975 Nelson Streaker Study
         Task Order No. 102 - LBL Dichotomous Aerosol Sampling Network
                              (included Nelson Streakers)
         Task Order No. 117 - Streaker and Radiometer Operation

     Over the period 1974 - 1976, a series of aerosol characterization
studies utilizing Nelson Streaker samplers were conducted as part of RAPS.
The Nelson Streaker is a time sequence sampler which collects particulate
matter on a Nucleopore filter in the form of a trace for up to eight days.
Nelson Streaker samplers were installed at various RAMS sites at the 10 meter
level on the station towers.  Following installation, Rockwell provided for
the operation and maintenance of the samplers.  For each week of sampling,
there were 84 individual time steps corresponding to the sequential operation
                                    235

-------
of the streaker.  Thus, aerosol  compositional  variations  were  determined
with two hour time resolution.
     Sampled data is available through the RAPS Data Bank,  while installation
and analysis procedures can be found in the Task Order final  reports.

7.7  HIGH VOLUME FILTER SAMPLING NETWORK
          Task Order No. 49  - Summer 1974 High Volume Filter  Measurements
          Task Order No. 51  - High Volume Filter Measurements of Suspended
                               Particulate Matter
          Task Order No. 101 - High Volume Filter Measurements of Suspended
                               Particulate Matter

     As part of the RAPS Pollutant Transformation and Removal  Studies,
Rockwell installed, operated, and maintained a high volume  filter sampling
network for the collection and analysis of suspended particulate matter.
Ten RAMS stations were furnished with twin high volume air  samplers  equipped
with constant flow controllers.   During the sampling network's three year
period of operation, filter samples were collected and transported to
Rockwell's chemical laboratory (Newbury Park, CA) where total  suspended
particulates (TSP) were determined and wet chemical analyses  performed  for
sulfates (SO^) and nitrates (NOp.
     The one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique was used to  test  the
significance of the variations in TSP, SO^, and NO^ concentrations.  The
results of the ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference in  con-
centrations between stations and also between quarters or seasons of the
year.
     The high volume filter sampling data are available on  SAROAD nine-track,
800 BPI, odd parity tapes.  The data produced were incorporated into the
RAPS aerometric data base.  Detailed information on operation, maintenance,
and analysis procedures are contained in the Task Order final  reports.
                                    236

-------
7.8  LBL DICHOTOMOUS SAMPLING NETWORK
         Task Order No. 27  - LBL Dichotomous Aerosol Sampling Network
         Task Order No. 29  - RAMS Aerosol Inlet Modification for LBL
                              Automatic Dichotomous Aerosol Samplers
         Task Order No. 102 - LBL Dichotomous Aerosol Sampling Network

     In support of the RAPS aerosol modeling studies, a network of ten LBL
Automatic Dichotomous Air Samplers was installed and operated in the RAMS by
Rockwell International.  Mass measurements and analyses of the samples were
performed by the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL), University of California,
under a separate contract with the EPA.
     The samplers were originally calibrated at Berkeley.   After shipment to
St. Louis, their calibrations were re-checked and no variance from the original
calibration was found.  A routine flow check was made every time the samplers
were loaded or cleaned.  The RAMS data acquisition and control system was
used for surveillance of the sampling network to detect sampler malfunction.
     Additional information on sampler installation and operation may be
gleaned from the Task Order final reports.

7.9  AEROSOL SOURCE DOCUMENTATION
         Task Order No. 124 - Fugitive Dust Survey and Inventory
         Task Order No. 131 - Documentation of Sources and Land Use Around
                              RAPS Sites

     Ten RAMS stations and two special study stations where high volume
filter samplers had been used to collect particulate data  as part of RAPS
were surveyed and inventoried by Rockwell  personnel to assess the impact of
ground-level fugitive dust sources within a 1.6 km radius  of each site.  In
addition, the special high volume study sites operated by  the City of
St. Louis were surveyed.
     Once particulate sources were identified, their emissions were calculated
using emission factors.  Fugitive dust factors frequently  required special
adjustment for applicability to the St. Louis area, whereas industrial
particulate emission factors were the standard AP-42 factors.  Significant
point sources of particulates were identified by their RAPS identification

                                    237

-------
codes.   Site survey, emission factors, and emission calculations are docu-
mented in the Task Order No. 124 Final Report.
     To complement the Fugitive Dust Survey and Inventory Study (Task Order
No. 124), Rockwell assembled pertinent information on the area in each
compass quadrant at a radial distance of between 1.6 kin and 4.8 km around
the ten RAMS stations and the two special  study sites.   Additionally,  the
EPA compiled a list of all point sources and emissions  wi.thin an 8.0 km
radius of the RAMS and special study stations,  and forty-seven agency
operated sites located in Missouri and Illinois.  Documentation of all
sources and land use surrounding RAPS sites and the computer listing of
particulate point sources can be found in the Task Order No. 131 Final
Report.
                                    238

-------
8.0  POLLUTANT MEASUREMENT PROGRAM

8.1  POLLUTANT VARIABILITY
          Task Order No.  32 - Winnebago Laboratory Van  Instrumentation
          Task Order No.  43 - Summer 1974 Long Path - Pollutant Variability
                              Study
          Task Order No.  44 - Winnebago Laboratory Van  Operation

     In the RAPS, the primary source of continuous aerometric  data  was  the
25 stationary RAMS stations.  In order to quantitatively assess the repre-
sentativeness of the air quality observations  and measurements being per-
formed by elements of the RAMS instrumentation network, sub-grid scale
characterization studies were required.  Consequently,  the objective of these
task orders was to provide operational support for studies to  determine the
pollutant heterogeneity (or homogeneity) in order to describe  the relation-
ship between point (station) measurements and  grid-average measurements.
Other objectives of these tasks included the characterization  of certain area
and line source emissions, the tracking of urban and stack plumes,  and  the
verification of long path monitor measurements.
     The purpose of Task Order No. 32 was to instrument the Winnebago labo-
ratory van with equipment to measure oxides of nitrogen, ozone, total sulfur
and light scattering coefficient.  It was also equipped to collect  bag  samples
for subsequent analysis by the gas chromatography laboratory.   In Task  Order
No. 43, Rockwell provided personnel to fabricate backpacks for collecting bag
samples and for carrying the backpacks during  pollutant variability studies
and for studies which verified long path monitor measurements.  Task Order
No. 44 consisted of calibration cross checks,  a plume study, sub-grid pollu-
tant distribution studies, mobile source pollutant characterizations and an
urban tracer study.  These studies were conducted with  the EPA Winnebago
laboratory van which was manned by a Rockwell  subcontractor, Ryckman, Edgerly,
Thomlinson and Associates.
                                    239

-------
     Although a final  report was submitted for each task order,  only the
Task Order No.  44 contained pollutant data.

8.2  AUDITS AND CROSS CALIBRATIONS
         Task Order Nos.  58 and 106 - RAPS Quality Assurance Audits

     As part of the RAPS quality assurance efforts, a Ninnebago  van  was
outfitted for performing comparison audits and cross calibrations  on the
air monitoring systems used either in RAPS or in related studies in  the
St. Louis area.  Task Order No. 58 funded the operation of the van during
the summer of 1975 while Task Order No.  106 provided for the installation
of new equipment in the van, its continued operation and for several special
investigations.
     In these tasks, the Winnebago van was instrumented, with several
ambient air analyzers, a Bendix portable calibration system and  a  variety
of calibration gas sources.  Multipoint calibrations or audits were  per-
formed at various RAMS sites, on EPA/RAPS helicopters, Illinois  EPA  sites,
St. Louis City and County sites and several  miscellaneous sites.  Special
projects also conducted by the van and its operating personnel included the
documentation of the effects of new and used Teflon filters placed in the
inlet of instruments measuring atmospheric pollutants, and the investigation
of several variables on the accuracy of SO ~ gas mixtures prepared  with a
modified Bendix calibration system.
     Descriptions of the special projects, audit data and results  as well as
an operational  summary are contained in the final  reports submitted  for the
task orders.
                                    240

-------
9.0  POLLUTANT EFFECTS STUDY
          Task Order Nos.  26 and 112 - Effects of Airborne Sulfur Pollutants
                                       on Materials

     The Environmental Protection Agency issued Task Order No.  26 to  conduct
an exposure field study which would assess the damaging effects of sulfur
pollutants on various materials.  The field study was initiated to complement
the laboratory work carried out by the Materials Section of the EPA which
used controlled environment chambers for evaluating  the interaction of
pollutants with various materials.  This study was later extended under
Task Order No. 112.
     In this task, Rockwell (Science Center) personnel  developed a study
plan, acquired material and equipment, erected exposure racks  at selected
test sites and commenced the exposure program.  Samples were then removed at
pre-determined intervals during the 2.5 year study and subjected to analysis
to assess the corrosion damage using several different methods  (i.e., gravi-
metric, reflectance, electrochemical, etc.).  Detailed analyses of statistical
relationships between corrosion data and corresponding RAMS air quality data
were then performed.  These analyses, the corrosion  data, and  an operations
summary were presented in annual progress reports and in the project's final
report.
                                    241

-------
10.0  RELATED INVESTIGATIONS

10.1  FLIGHT IMPACT ON STRATOSPHERIC AEROSOLS
         Task Order Nos.  11  and 52 - Investigation of the  Significance  of
                                     Aircraft Emissions  on Stratospheric
                                     Aerosols

     These tasks were a cooperative effort between the Department of Trans-
portation (DOT) and the EPA.  Their purpose was to investigate the signifi-
cance of aircraft emissions  on the aerosol population in the  lower strato-
sphere with emphasis on the  photochemistry of SO^ oxidation.   Although  the
Department of Transportation was specifically interested in the upper
atmosphere, much of the work on both chemistry and physics in the develop-
ment of an aerosol kinetic model would be applicable to  the RAPS program  as
the modeling of sulfur pollutants, S0?and sulfate, were set  at the top of
the RAPS modeling effort.   Consequently,  this project was  of  interest to
both the EPA and DOT.
     The results discussed in the final  reports review aircraft and space
vehicle emission inventories and discuss  possible perturbations of the
stratosphere.  The evolution of aerosols  was modeled with  a kinetic equation
limited to one spatial dimension.  Sulfate concentrations  were estimated
with a simple convective diffusion model.  Finally, sulfate precursor results
were used to investigate the evolution of the stratospheric aerosol  by  a
condensation growth—Brownian coagulation—gravitational fallout dominated
kinetic mode.

10.2  CATALYST SULFATE STUDY
         Task Order No. 23 - Catalyst Sulfate Study Design and Installation
         Task Order No. 36 - Catalyst Sulfate Study Sample Analyses

     The possibility that catalytic converters installed on 1975 and later
automobiles could cause increased oxidation of sulfur dioxide to sulfate
                                    242

-------
prompted the EPA to conduct a field study.   The purpose of these task orders
was to provide support to the EPA during the setup and operation of the
monitoring program.
     In these tasks Rockwell provided assistance in the design, selection
and acquisition of a suitable sampling location to monitor vehicular
emissions.  Methods for determining the number, mix (ratio of catalytic
converter equipped cars versus non-equipped) and speed of vehicles passing
the proposed site were formulated and a recommendation of the best approach
made.   The historical data concerning ambient sulfate, particulate and
sulfur dioxide levels for the Southern California area were collected and
evaluated.  Finally, Rockwell provided for sample analyses which included
high volume samples, membrane filters, cascade samples and SCL bubbler
samples.
     A final report was submitted for each task order with SAROAD data cards
submitted for the sample analyses.

10. 3  VISIBILITY MODEL DEVELOPMENT
         Task Order No. 28 - Visibility Model--Correlation of Light
                             Scattering with Other Atmospheric Parameters

     The purpose of this task order was to statistically examine the data
from the Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACHEX) to determine what
atmospheric parameters or combination of parameters correlate with
visibility reduction as measured by b   ., and to contribute to the develop-
ment of simulation models of air pollution processes.
     Rockwell analyzed the ACHEX meteorological, gaseous pollutant and
aerosol data, applied statistical tests and interpreted the results.  The
results along with several recommendations for future studies were presented
in the final report.  A copy of the data base on magnetic tape was also sub-
mitted to the EPA at the conclusion of the study.

10.4  AEROSOL EFFECTS ON VISUAL RANGE
         Task Order No. 127 - Aerosol Effects on Visual Range
     The purpose of this task order was to examine the data collected in the

                                    243

-------
St. Louis Area during RAPS to provide an improved understanding  of the
influence of aerosols on visibility.
     In this task, Rockwell provided qualified personnel  to assemble, screen
and analyze data to quantify aerosol  influences on visibility.   The task  was
originally conceived and funded as a four part project,  however, only the
first two parts were completed due to the limitation of  funds  and unavail-
ability of timely dichotomous sampler data.   The first part involved the
location and description of the available relevant data,  while  in the second
part the nephelometer data were validated and analyzed for temporal  and
spatial patterns.  Interim reports were prepared for the  first  two parts  of
the task and submitted with all of the relevant data generated  to the EPA.

10.5  CAMP STATION OPERATION
          Task Order No. 14 - St.  Louis CAMP Station Operation

     The Continuous Air Monitoring Program (CAMP) Station was  operated by
the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency's Quality Assurance and Environ-
mental Monitoring Laboratory for nearly eleven years. During  the last year
of operation, January 1, 1974 to December 1, 1974, the station  was operated
by Rockwell under a task order to  provide a  reference base for  RAPS data
and to serve as an additional data source for cross-checking with the RAMS
stations then being installed.
     Rockwell operated and maintained the station which  collected gaseous
pollutant, total suspended particle and coefficient of haze data.  Beckman
colorimetric analyzers were used to measure  total oxidants, nitrogen dioxide
and nitrogen oxide while a Technicon Auto Analyzer was used for sulfur
dioxide.  Beckman analyzers with flame ionization detectors were used for
total hydrocarbons and methane, but Bendix chemiluminescent analyzers were
used for ozone and oxides of nitrogen.  Carbon monoxide  concentrations
were determined by an Intertock non-dispersive infrared  radiation absorption
analyzer.
     All 1974 CAMP station data including the hi-vol samples were submitted
to the EPA at RTP.  A final report detailing station operation  was also
submitted.

                                   244

-------
10.6  DA VINCI MANNED BALLOON FLIGHT
          Task Order No. 114 - DA VINCI II and III Pibal  Support

     Project DA VINCI consisted of a series of instrumented balloon flights
to study the long range transport and transformation of air pollutants.
Interest was focused on the ways in which gaseous effluents from urban
industrial and power production activities are slowly transformed into more
hazardous pollutants in the lower atmosphere.  Since the objectives of
DA VINCI were within the scope of RAPS, a task order provided mobile pibal
support to the two 24 hour flights launched from St. Louis.
     In this task order, Rockwell provided mobile pibal teams to collect
wind data during the flights.  The pibals were taken using the single
theodolite method with data reduced in the field and made available for real
time use.  At the conclusion of the second flight the data were subjected to
quality control procedures and submitted to the EPA with a final report.

10.7  PARTICIPATION IN THE SULFATE REGIONAL EXPERIMENT (SURE)
          Task Order No. 126 - Cobb/Andrus Plume Study Pibal  Support
          Task Order No. 130 - Cobb/Andrus/Breed Plume Study Pibal  Support

     The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) as part of the Sulfate
Regional Experiment (SURE) conducted a point source plume study to  examine
aerosol transformation and transport.  The rate processes acting on aerosols
and aerosol precursor gases were studied by injecting a conservative tracer,
sulfur hexafluoride, into the power plant stack to label  a segment  of the
plume.  The Environmental Protection Agency assisted in this effort by
providing two mobile pilot balloon teams to define the low level wind fields.
     Two mobile pibal teams from Rockwell collected single theodolite pibal
data from the Cobb Power Plant in Muskegon, Michigan, the Andrus Power Plant
near Greenville, Mississippi and the Breed Power Plant in Terre Haute,
Indiana.  Real time data was transmitted from one mobile unit to allow
coordination of instrumented aircraft flights and the selection of  sub-
sequent pibal sites.  At the conclusion of each study, the pibal data were
reviewed by quality control personnel and submitted to the EPA with an
appropriate final report.
                                    245

-------
11.0  EMISSION INVENTORIES

11.1  EMISSION INVENTORY METHODOLOGIES
          Task Order No. 16 (Phase I)  - Point Source Criteria  Pollutant
                                        Emission Inventory Methodology
          Task Order No. 17 - Field Experiment Emission  Inventory  Methodology

     Emission inventories were a major division of the RAPS field  measurement
program.  The accuracy of any attempt  to predict air quality through  regional
air quality simulation models is directly proportional to  the  overall
accuracy of these inventories.  The Emission Inventories activity  consisted
of three basic subdivisions:  Emission Inventory Methodologies,  Individual
Emission Inventories, and Data Handling and Verification.
     As part of the Emission Inventory Methodologies section,  Rockwell
developed a methodology for inventorying criteria pollutant emissions from
point sources.  This included proposing a method of measuring  and/or
estimating hourly emissions for the principal  sources of pollution in the
St. Louis Air Quality Control Region (AQCR).  The criteria pollutants of
interest were SOp, CO, N0», HC, particulates, and heat emissions.
     Existing emission inventories were reviewed, and the  role of  the National
Emission Data System (NEDS) was discussed.  The RAPS emission  inventory
utilized the NEDS information on criteria pollutant annual  emissions  as a
starting point and general guideline.   Emission sources  were classified
according to mobile or stationary, point or area.  Though  the  methodology of
Task Order No. 16 dealt exclusively with stationary point  sources, some of
the techniques discussed were of general applicability.  Procedures for the
acquisition, recording, and storage of point source data were  proposed.  A
complete description of the point source emission inventory methodology can
be found in the Task Order No. 16 (Phase I) Final Report.
     Supplementing the studies in the  mainstream of the  RAPS program were

                                    246

-------
various field experiments.  It was realized that these special  field studies
required more detailed information on pollutant emissions than  was available
from the RAPS emission inventory data base.  To obtain the needed emission
data, Rockwell established procedures by means of which special  emission
inventories would be procured.  These procedures, with the normal times
required to execute each step, can be found in the Task Order No. 17 Final
Report.  A general survey of RAPS emission inventory data is included in
the final report along with a description of the system for handling and
storing the data.

11.2  INDIVIDUAL EMISSION INVENTORIES
          Task Order No. 16 (Phase II) - Point Source Criteria  Pollutant
                                         Emission Inventory
          Task Order No. 38 - Point and Area Source Heat Emission Inventory
          Task Order No. 54 - Point Source Non-Criteria Pollutant Emission
                              Inventory
          Task Order No. 55 - Point Source Criteria Pollutant Emission
                              Inventory
          Task Order No. 56 - Sulfur Compounds and Particulate  Size Distri-
                              bution Inventory
          Task Order No. 108A - Point Source Criteria Pollutant Emission
                                Inventory
          Task Order No. 108D - Stationary Industrial Area Source Emission
                                Inventory
          Task Order No. 108E - Off-Highway Mobile Source Emission Inventory
          Task Order No. 108F - Hydrocarbon Emission Inventory
          Task Order No. 108G - Point and Area Source Heat Emission Inventory
          Task Order No. 1081 - Point and Area Source Organic Emission
                                Inventory

     Individual  Emission Inventories was a major section of the RAPS Emission
Inventory program.  The methodology developed during Task Order No. 16 Phase
I was implemented under Task Order No. 16 Phase II.  Rockwell started data
collection by inventorying emissions from point sources, such as power
generating stations.  The general  approach was to request from  the major
sources hourly fuel  consumption or related process data, as well as sulfur
analyses of the fuel or processed materials.  In a few cases, stack gas
                                    247

-------
measurements were available.   Data from the minor sources were based on
annual fuel usage or process  data.  Data collection of point source emissions
continued under Task Order No. 55.  However, the emphasis was shifted from
an SCL inventory to include all other criteria pollutants (TSP, NO.,, THC,  and
CO).  A limited amount of source testing was undertaken by Rockwell to verify
emission factors.  Task Order No. 108A made possible the continuation of data
collection through 1976.  Hourly and annual data were recorded for most
criteria pollutants from numerous point sources.  Additional  source tests
were also carried out.  The RAPS point source data base contains hourly data
for criteria pollutants for the St. Louis AQCR for all of 1975 and 1976.   The
data are stored in the RAPS data bank, while information concerning inventory
procedures and data collected can be found in the Task Order Nos.  16 Phase II,,
55, and 108A Final Reports.
     As part of the RAPS, Rockwell assembled a heat emission inventory.   Heat
emissions to the atmosphere originate, directly or indirectly, from the com-
bustion of fossil fuels.  The determination of point source heat emissions
involved the development of appropriate heat emission factors that were
applied to fuel consumption or material through input data.  The major
portion of heat emissions found in the atmosphere was from area sources.
Area source heat emission inventories were divided into three categories:
heat emission inventories of the bunting of fuel in stationary installations,
heat emission inventories of the consumption of electric power, and heat
emission inventories of the burning of fuel in mobile sources.  Heat emissions
inventory data collected can  be found in the Task Order Nos.  38 and 108G
Final Reports, the latter task order being the continuation of the former.
     An emission inventory of non-criteria pollutants, i.e., pollutants
other than THC, CO, S02, NO,,, or particulates was compiled by Rockwell.
Emissions of a given pollutant were estimated from process data using emission
factors.  The source of process data was the NEDS inventory data,  supplemented
with RAPS emission inventory data, while the emission factors for the non-
criteria pollutants were taken from the series of EPA reports entitled
National Inventory of Sources and Emissions.  Detailed descriptions of the
point source non-criteria pollutant emission inventory procedures  and data
collection can be found in the Task Order No. 54 Final Report.  All emissions

                                     248

-------
data have been incorporated into the RAPS data bank.
     Task Order No. 56 was a combination of point source sulfur compounds
and particulate size distribution emission inventories.   The  sulfur compounds
inventory dealt with SCL emissions from stationary point sources.   At  combus-
tion sources, both SC^ and SO-, originate from the oxidation of sulfur  or
sulfur containing compounds.  Both SCL and S03 emissions were determined
experimentally in the field and the laboratory.  Particulate  emissions from
point sources were broken down into representative particle sizes.   The
breakdown was based on data from characteristic particle size distribution,
fractional efficiency of control equipment and average practices for indus-
trial sources, based on the EPA report—Fine Particulate Emission Inventory
And Control Surveys.  In addition, a limited number of source tests were
performed using an Anderson Cascade impactor.  Data obtained  experimentally
were incorporated into the RAPS inventory for the specific sources  tested.
Documentation of the sulfur compounds and particulate size distribution
emission inventories can be found in the Task Order No.  56 Final Report.
     In the RAPS emission inventory, the category, major stationary point
sources, included all sources which individually contributed  more than
approximately 0.1% of the total emissions of a given pollutant in the  St.
Louis AQCR.  Minor sources were those emitting more than 0.01% of a given
pollutant.  The remaining emissions are included in area source emissions.
These include industrial area sources as well as residential  and commercial
area sources.  All area emission sources were assigned to a system  of  grid
squares developed for RAPS which divided the St. Louis AQCR into squares
                2
from 1 to 100 km .  Rockwell analyzed the data for 1975 through 1976 and
entered it into the RAPS emission inventory data base.  Further information
on the stationary industrial area source emission inventory can be  found  in
the Task Order No. 108D Final Report.
     The purpose of the off-highway mobile source emission inventory was  to
calculate emission for the St. Louis AQCR of a variety of unregulated  sources
with a spatial resolution corresponding to grid elements.  Six equipment
categories were dealt with:  motorcycles, lawn and garden equipment, con-
struction equipment, industrial equipment, farm equipment, and outboard
motorboats.  Annual emission totals of the several off-highway mobile  source
                                    249

-------
types were temporally distributed over the year to reflect diurnal  and
seasonal variation of usage.  A Fortran program was prepared in order to
compute emissions from the grid squares for each of the six equipment types.
The procedures involved in arriving at grid element emission values were
described in detail in the Task Order 108E Final Report, while all  emissions
data were entered into the RAPS data bank,.
     The hydrocarbon emission inventory included all stationary point sources
in the St. Louis AQCR emitting more than one ton per year of total  hydrocar-
bons.  Point source emissions were considered to be those released  through a
stack or vent.  Data were also obtained for evaporative emissions of hydro-
carbons.  Methodology was developed for separating the total hydrocarbon
emissions into methane and non-methane components and to analyze stack
samples for methane and total hydrocarbons at expected stack concentrations.
Actual stack sampling was performed at three sites.  The results of this
study were incorporated into the Point and Area Source Organic Emission
Inventory.  All data collected are contained in the RAPS data bank  and
documentation of procedures and analyses can be found in the Task Order No.
108F Final Report.
     The RAPS point and area source hydrocarbon inventory was designed to
provide emissions data for the evaluations of photochemical reaction models.
As the reactivity of organics varies widely, it was important to determine
not only the amount emitted, but also the compositions.  In order to make a
breakdown of hydrocarbon emissions according to chemical structure, Rockwell
applied an appropriate compositional analysis to each category of emissions
within the available total hydrocarbon inventory.  The composition  of
petroleum products was ascertained and adjustments were made in the tabula-
tion of emissions arising from refinery operations, evaporative losses, and
automotive exhaust.  Emissions from coal combustion and coke ovens  were also
investigated.  The organic emissions inventory data are included in the RAPS
data base.  Detailed descriptions of the work accomplished and results
obtained can be found in the Task Order No. 1081 Final Report.
                                    250

-------
'11.3  DATA HANDLING AND  VERIFICATION
           Task Order No.  20  -  RAPS  Emission  Inventory Data Handling System
           Task Order No.  37  -  RAPS  Emission  Inventory Handbook
           Task Order No.  39  -  Emission  Inventory Precision Analysis
           Task Order No.  108B  -  Criteria  and Non-Criteria Pollutant Source
                                 Testing Program
           Task Order No.  108C  -  Emission  Inventory  Data Handling System
                                 Enhancement
           Task Order No.  108H  -  Emission  Inventory  Handbook Update and Review
           Task Order No.  108J  -  Emission  Inventory  Summarization
           Task Order No.  129 - RAPS Emissions  Inventory Quality Assurance
                               Program

      The emission  inventory  data handling system, developed by Rockwell,
 was  designed to accommodate  the  emission  data  from  point, line, and area
 sources  which were collected as  a part  of the  basic RAPS program.  Designed
 to provide maximum flexibility,  no  actual  emissions data were recorded and
 stored.   Instead,  the files  contain fuel  consumption or process data, which
 were converted to  mass emissions by appropriate manipulation as part of the
 output program.   Consequently, new  or additional emission factors were added
 without  disturbing the data  base.   The  system  was conceived to edit, input,
 and  update the collected data  independent of the time interval, method, data
 types or units and to provide  emissions data on an  hourly basis.  While Task
 Order No. 20 described initial development of  the emission inventory data
 handling system, its final report is no longer representative of the data
 handling system.  Both the Univac 1110  and System 2000 underwent major
 system upgrades as the data  handling system  was modified and expanded.
      The implementation  of the RAPS data  handling system, that is, the
 creation of the data base containing the  RAPS  emission inventory, was carried
 out through Task Order No.  108C. The data base ultimately grew to contain
 over 23  million characters.  Thirteen emission inventory categories were
 developed by Rockwell, with  the  largest being  the point source data base
 (over 11 million characters).  All  the  emission inventories were incorporated
 into the RAPS data base.  Detailed  descriptions of  data base developments
 can  be found in the Task Order No.  108C Final  Report.
                                     251

-------
     In order to make the experience gained in the RAPS Emission  Inventory
endeavor available for possible future studies, complete documentation  of all
efforts connected with the collection of the emission inventory was  assembled
by Rockwell in the Emission Inventory Handbook.  This five volume Handbook
consists of eight sections:  Introduction, An Overview of RAPS, Scope of the
RAPS Inventory, Point Source Emissions, Area Source Emissions,  RAPS  Emission
Inventory Data Handling System, and Evaluation and Validation of  RAPS
Emission Models.  The handbook was originally prepared under Task Order No.
37, then revised and updated under Task Order No. 108H.
     As RAPS Task Order No. 39, the emissions data' gathered under various
task orders were to be evaluated by subjecting the data to precision and
weighted sensitivity analyses.  However, neither the weighted sensitivity
analysis, nor the precision analysis became operational on the  EPA computers
by May 1975, and at the direction of the EPA Task Coordinator the task  order
was terminated.
     In order to improve the accuracy of the RAPS emission inventories,
Rockwell sampled a number of representative sources and analyzed  their
stack effluents.  In general, the test methods specified in the Appendix of
Part 60, CFR Title 40, Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources
were used to sample a wide variety of the larger point sources.  Particle
size testing was performed with an Anderson Stack Sampling head coupled with
the apparatus used for the standard EPA method for particulates.   Experimental
emission factors were calculated for criteria pollutants for the  sources
tested and used in the RAPS inventory.  The results and data collected  from
all sources were entered into the RAPS data bank.  Documentation  of the
criteria and non-criteria pollutant source testing program can  be found in
the Task Order No. 108B Final Report.
     The purpose of Task Order No. 108J was to summarize the emission
inventory aspects of the RAPS.  The Task Order No. 108J Final Report discusses
the historical background and overall goals of the RAPS Emission  Inventory
study, and describes the individual inventories in some detail.  The con-
tribution of each type of pollutant sources was summarized and  sample print-
outs of the available outputs were given.  As part of Task Order  108J,  all
available raw and formatted data were gathered, organized by type and source,
                                    252

-------
and entered into the RAPS data bank.
     Efforts were continuously expended under various task orders  in  the
formation of a RAPS Emission Inventory for the St.  Louis AQCR.   As the RAPS
modelers used these data in the verification of regional and urban models,
it was imperative that the accuracy of the various  component inventories  be
established.  The purpose of Task Order No. 129 was to perform  an  extensive
quality assurance program on the emissions data.  Quality assurance of the
point, line, and area source emission inventories,  determined independently
of one another, were conducted by Rockwell.  System 2000 immediate access,
procedural language programs, and Calcomp plots were the primary tools used
to provide data for review.  Any errors found during the investigation were
corrected.  Descriptions of input data checks, all  test runs, hand calcula-
tions, comparisons and documentation of methodology modifications  were sub-
mitted on status sheets to the EPA Project Officers.  These status sheets
were accepted in lieu of a formal final report.
                                    253

-------
12.0  DATA MANAGEMENT

12.1  RAPS DATA BANK

          Task Order No. 10 - Computer Graphics Planning
          Task Order No. 13 - Computer Graphics Interface
          Task Order No. 22 - Computer Graphics Development

     With the massive quantities of data collected during RAPS, EPA and
Rockwell  cooperated to formulate a comprehensive data management effort.
Linking the model development and field measurement program to insure the
interaction between field oriented activities and data utilization, the
objectives of data management were to develop and maintain a data bank
responsive to user requirements.  These requirements led to the development
of efficient storage and retrieval software, simple on-line display and
analysis capabilities, timely distribution of data in user specified formats,
periodic data base summary reports and adaptability to changing needs and
schedules.
     Computer graphics appeared to be the natural display media for the
large amount of data collected by RAPS.  Graphics provided quick and under-
standable visualization of the data, models, and results.  To develop a com-
prehensive graphics capability for application to the RAPS data base a
computer graphics plan was initiated, examining RAPS data base objectives
for interactive and interpretive display requirements.  Existing EPA and
Rockwell  computer graphics facilities were evaluated and a basic graphics
hardware plan was recommended.  A sequel task order was the RAPS Data Base
and Graphics Interface Plan.  Its objectives were to evaluate the impact of
the graphics package on the RAPS data base, define the data base attributes
and develop a plan for an interface capability between the graphics system
and the data base.  Consequently, the study identified and discussed key
functions of the RAPS data base and graphics system and the interface between

                                     254

-------
the functions.  Another supplemental  task order developed a comprehensive
computer graphics capability for application to the RAPS data base.   Working
from plans previously devised, its objectives were to prepare and submit a
detailed design and implementation plan for the RAPS graphics system, develop
the graphics software, and implement the graphics system on the Univac 1110
at Research Triangle Park.  Although the detailed design and implementation
plan was never submitted, a basic graphics software package was developed
and partially implemented at Research Triangle Park.
     Documentation of the computer graphics studies can be found in  the
Task Order Nos. 10, 13, 22 Final Reports.

12.2  RAPS CENTRAL COMPUTER FACILITY
          Task Order No. 40  - Computer Support for RAPS Field Activities
          Task Order No. 45  - RAPS Helicopter Data Translation and  Verifi-
                               cation
          Task Order No. 107 - RAMS/RAPS Field Data Processing

     Field data processing at the RAPS Central Computer Facility included
both RAMS data processing and computer support for several other RAPS
studies.  Software developed by Rockwell for these studies included  data
validation, analysis and display routines.
     The RAMS data processing included the reprocessing of data collected
prior to January 1, 1976.  Monthly and quarterly summaries of RAMS data were
also generated in support of other studies.
     The software packages developed under previous task orders were imple-
mented to process helicopter data and gas chromatography laboratory  data.
An additional software package was developed and implemented to process the
subsurface heat flux data.  A modified version of the RAMS remote data
acquisition software was developed for continued operation of several sites
in a non-network environment.
     The program listings and processed data were submitted to the EPA Task
Coordinator.  Documentation of the aforementioned procedures can be  found in
the Task Order Nos. 40, 45, 107 Final Reports.
                                    255

-------
         APPENDIX A



LISTING OF RAPS TASK ORDERS
             256

-------
TASK ORDER
TITLE
Number 1        RAPS Program Planning
Number 2        Summer 1973 Boundary Layer  Study Helicopter Support
Number 3        Gas Chromatography Laboratory Operation
Number 4        Summer 1973 Boundary Layer  Study Pibal Support
Number 5        RAPS Office Relocation
Number 6        Summer 1973 Aerosol Characterization Study Aircraft Support
Number 7        Summer 1973 Aerosol Characterization Study Meteorological
                Support
Number 8        Cancelled
Number 9        RAPS Program Objectives  and Plans
Number 10       Computer Graphics  Planning  and  Support
Number 11       Investigation of the Significance of Aircraft Emissions on
                Stratospheric Aerosols
Number 12       Cancelled
Number 13       Computer Graphics  Interface with RAPS Data Base
Number 14       St. Louis CAMP Station Operation
Number 15       Winter 1974 Boundary Layer  Study Helicopter Support
Number 16       Point Source Criteria Pollutant Emission Methodology and
                Inventory
Number 17       Field Experiment Emission  Inventory Methodology
Number 18       Winter 1974 Boundary Layer  Study Pibal and Radiosonde
                Support
Number 19       Winter 1974 EPA Aerosol  Lab Trailer Support
Number 20       RAPS Emission Inventory  Data Handling System
Number 21       Gas Chromatography Laboratory Operation
Number 22       Computer Graphics  Development for the RAPS Data Base
Number 23       Catalyst Sulfate Study Design and Installation
Number 24       Cancelled
Number 25       RAPS Helicopter Aerial Monitoring System Installation
Number 26       Effects of Airborne Sulfur  Pollutants on Materials
                                                              (continued)
                                   257

-------
TASK ORDER
TITLE
Number 27       LBL Dichotomous Aerosol  Sampling  Network
Number 28       Visibility Model  - Correlation  of Light Scattering with
                Other Atmospheric Parameters
Number 29       RAMS Aerosol  Inlet Modification for LBL Automatic
                Dichotomous Aerosol Samplers
Number 30       Cancelled
Number 31       RAPS Upper Air Sounding  Network
Number 32       Winnebago Laboratory Van Instrumentation
Number 33       Summer 1974 Brookhaven Plume  Study Pibal  Support
Number 34       Cancelled
Number 35       Summer 1974 Nelson Streaker Study
Number 36       Catalyst Sulfate Study Sample Analyses
Number 37       Update of RAPS Emission  Inventory Handbook
Number 38       Point and Area Source Heat Emission Inventory
Number 39       Emission Inventory Precision  Analysis
Number 40       Computer Support for RAPS Field Activities
Number 41       Summer 1974 Aerosol Characterization Study  Aircraft  and
                Pibal Support
Number 42       Cancelled
Number 43       Summer 1974 Long Path-Pollutant Variability Study
Number 44       Winnebago Laboratory Van Operation
Number 45       RAPS Helicopter Data Translation and Verification
Number 46       Summer 1974 Meteorological Upper Air Support
Number 47       Summer 1974 Boundary Layer Study Pibal Support
Number 48       Summer 1974 Boundary Layer Study Helicopter Support
Number 49       Summer 1974 High Volume  Filter  Measurements
Number 50       RAPS Expedition Research Program
Number 51       High Volume Filter Measurements of Suspended Particulate
                Matter
Number 52       Investigation of the Significance of Aircraft  Emissions on
                Stratospheric Aerosols
Number 53       Gas Chromatography Laboratory Operation
Number 54       Point Source Non-Criteria Pollutant Emission Inventory

                                                                 (continued)
                                    258

-------
TASK ORDER
TITLE
Number 55
Number 56
Number 57
Number 58
Number 59
Number 60
Number 61
Number 62
Number 63
Number 101

Number 102
Number 103
Number 104
Number 105
Number 106
Number 107
Number 108
  Task 108A
  Task 108B
  Task 108C
  Task 108D
  Task 108E
  Task 108F
  Task 108G
  Task 108H
  Task 1081
  Task 108J
Number 109
Number 110
Number 111
Number 112
Number 113
Point Source Criteria Pollutant Emission  Inventory
Sulfur Compounds and Particulate Size  Distribution  Inventory
Modification of RAMS Dew Point Sensors
RAPS Quality Assurance Audits
Summer 1975 Brookhaven Plume Study Pibal  Support
Summer 1975 Boundary Layer Study
Summer 1975 MISTT Plume Study  Pibal  Support
Summer 1975 Nelson Streaker Study
Summer 1975 SFg Plume Tracer Study
High Volume Filter Measurements of Suspended  Particulate
Matter
LBL Dichotomous Aerosol Sampling Network
Gas Chromatography Laboratory  Operation
Subsurface Heat Flux Study
Fall 1975 Brookhaven Plume Study Pibal Support
RAPS Quality Assurance Audits
RAMS/RAPS Field Data Processing
RAPS Emission Inventories
Point Source Criteria Pollutant Emission  Inventory
Criteria and Non-Criteria Pollutant Source Testing  Program
RAPS Data Handling System Enhancement
Stationary Industrial Area Source Emission Inventory
Off-Highway Mobile Source Emission Inventory
Hydrocarbon Emission Inventory
Point and Area Source Heat Emission Inventory
Emission Inventory Handbook Update and Review
Point and Area Source Organic  Emission Inventory
Emission Inventory Summary
Winter 1976 Boundary Layer Study
Acoustic Echo Sounder Operation
EMI Plume Study Pibal Support
Effects of Airborne Sulfur Pollutants  on  Materials
Gas Chromatography Laboratory  Operation
                                                 (continued)
                                    259

-------
TASK ORDER
TITLE
Number 114      DA VINCI II and III  Pibal  Support
Number 115      Summer 1976 MISTT Plume Study  Pibal Support
Number 116      Summer 1976 Boundary Layer Study
Number 117      Streaker and Radiometer Operation
Number 118      Fall 1976 Boundary Layer Study
Number 119      Fall 1976 SFg Plume  Tracer Study
Number 120      RAMS Transition Support
Number 121      C02 Effect on RAMS Sulfur Monitors
Number 122      RAPS Data Base Augmentation
Number 123      RAMS Station Relocation
Number 124      Fugitive Dust Survey and Inventory
Number 125      Evaluation of RAMS CO Data
Number 126      Cobb/Andrus Plume Study Pibal  Support
Number 127      Aerosol  Effects on Visual  Range
Number 128      UASN Mixing Depth Determination
Number 129      RAPS Emissions Inventory Quality Assurance Program
Number 130      Cobb/Andrus/Breed Plume Study  Pibal Support
Number 131      Documentation of Sources and Land Use Around  RAPS Sites
                                    260

-------