-------
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
-------