EPA-60Q/4-76-043
August 1976                              Environmental Monitoring Series
   PROCEDURES FOR  EVALUATING  OPERATIONS  OF
              AMBIENT AIR MONITORING  NETWORKS
                                               A  Manual


                              Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
                                      Office of Research and Development
                                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                           Las Vegas, Nevada 89114

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency,  have been  grouped into five series.  These five  broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related  fields.
The five series are:

     1.    Environmental Health Effects Research
     2.    Environmental Protection Technology
     3.    Ecological Research
     4.    Environmental Monitoring
     5.    Socioeconomic  Environmental Studies

This  report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING series.
This  series describes research conducted to develop new or improved methods
and  instrumentation  for the identification and quantification of environmental
pollutants at the lowest conceivably significant concentrations. It also includes
studies to determine  the ambient concentrations of pollutants in the environment
and/or the variance of pollutants as a function of time or meteorological factors.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                           EPA-600/4-76-043
                                           August 1976
        PROCEDURES  FOR EVALUATING OPERATIONS
         OF AMBIENT AIR MONITORING NETWORKS
                      A Manual
                         by

        Ruth W.  Shnider and Edwin S.  Shapiro
                URS Research Company
                   155 Bovet Road
             San Mateo, California 94402
               Contract No.  68-03-0473
          Edward A. Schuck, Project Officer

    Monitoring Systems Design and Analysis Staff
Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
   Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
               Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
        U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
   ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
               LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114

-------
                                  DISCLAIMER
     This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory-Las Vegas, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for
publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
                                      11

-------
                                   PREFACE
     The procedures detailed herein are a "first cut" at the development of
a mathematical basis for the evaluation of monitoring network operations.
Since the relative importance of the components of network operations is a
function of monitoring network objectives, no single evaluation technique is
universally applicable.  For this reason and because of the complex nature
of this subject, the evaluation methods developed herein are applicable only
to monitoring networks whose main objective is to document compliance with
or progress toward attainment of promulgated "ambient air quality standards
and/or regulations.

     A necessary restriction placed on development of this evaluation proce-
dure was that it be consistent with existing regulations promulgated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning site selection, net-
work design, sampling methodology and quality assurance procedures.  Substan-
tial changes in these regulations will require modification of the evaluation
procedure.

     Identification of the six major operational components of an air-quality
monitoring network with the stated main objective was accomplished by an on-
site study of five networks judged by the EPA Regional Offices to be among
the best operating networks.  The major characteristics identified are:
1.  Network Design, 2.  Personnel, 3.  Facilities and Equipment, 4.  Sampling,
5.  Quality Assurance, and 6.  Data Distribution and Dissemination.  While
the on-site studies served to identify the operational components, they did
not provide sufficient data for a mathematical assignment of the relative
weights for these components.  To provide the latter the opinions of govern-
mental experts in the monitoring field were solicited and the results statis-
tically analyzed.  Values of the weighting factors so derived have been car-
ried to the third decimal place because these factors are normalized values
of over 55 responses.  It will be noted, therefore, that users of these eval-
uation techniques will be comparing the operational characteristics of their
networks against a mathematically derived function of the opinions of over
55 experts.  While this approach admittedly has drawbacks, it is, as stated,
a "first cut" approach.  A separate document describing the mathematical
treatment of the expert opinion data and derivation of the relative weights
of operational components will be furnished, upon request, by the Project
Officer at the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas
(EMSL-LV).

     Finally, it will be noted that application of this procedure is complex
and can be carried out only by personnel directly involved in operation of
the monitoring network.  Depending on the magnitude of the network it may
indeed require inputs from several individuals with a total manpower invest-
ment of up to 5 man-days.  This latter, however, is a small price if it leads
to a more technically optimum and cost-effective monitoring operation.

                                    iii

-------
     The procedures in this manual have not been field tested; however,
such an evaluation is planned for the immediate future.  In the interim we
encourage users of this manual to submit their observations and suggestions
for improvement.
                                     IV

-------
                                   CONTENTS
                                                                        Page

Disclaimer  ..............................     a
Preface   ...............................    j^i
List of Figures   ...........................    vii
List of Tables ............................   viii
List of Abbreviations and Symbols  ..................     ix
Acknowledgment .............................      x

I    Introduction to the Manual  ...... . .............      1

II   Evaluation of Network Plan and Design . .  .  .  .  .........     11
     1 1. A   Rating for Number of Monitoring Sites  ..........     11
     II. B   Rating of Site Distribution  ...............     26
     II.C   Rating of Site Characteristics and Design  ........     31
     II. D   Evaluation of Network Planning and Design  ........     36

III  Evaluation of Area of Personnel Qualifications  .........     38
     III. A  Education Rating ...  ..................     38
     III.B  Experience Rating  . .. ..................     41
     I II.C  Special On-Job Formal Training Rating  ..........     44
     III.D  Evaluation of Personnel Qualifications  ..........     47

IV   Evaluation of Area of Facilities and Equipment  .  ........     48
     IV. A   Office Facilities and Equipment Rating  ..........     48
     IV. B   Rating of the Wet Laboratory ...............     48
     IV. C   Rating of Calibration/Maintenance Facilities .......     48
     IV. D   Field Facilities Rating  .................     51
     IV. E   Field Instrument Rating  .................     53
     IV. F   Evaluation of Area of Facilities and  Equipment ......     56

V    Evaluation of Area of Sampling and Analysis  ...........     57
     V.A    Rating of Recording Procedures for
            Continuous Sensors ....................     57
     V.B    Rating of Use of Station Operator Time  .......  .  .  .     60
     V.C    Area Evaluation  .....................     63

VI   Evaluation of Area of Quality Assurance .............     64
     VI. A   Ratings for Controls on Field Instruments
            and Measurements .....................     64
     VI. B   Ratings for Controls on Laboratory Instruments
            and Measurements .....................     67
     VI. C   Evaluation of the Area ..................     69

-------
                            CONTENTS (continued)


                                                                        Page

VII  Evaluation of Area of Data Utilization	     70

VIII Overall Area Evaluations	     72

IX   Evaluation of Technical Services Budget Allocation  	     73
     IX.A   Budget Allocation Rating Determination .  .  .	     73

X    References	     77

     Appendix A	     78
                                     VI

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES
Number

  1       Rating curve for the number of sites
          for each pollutant	     23
  2       Case a.  Priority I for TSP and S02	     27
  3       Case b.  Priority I for Oxidants and/or CO	     27
  4       Case c.  Priority I for pollutant mix
          other than case a or case b	     28
  5       Case d.  Priority II and/or III for all
          five major pollutants  	     28
  6       Rating for site distribution in each AQCR	     30
  7       Nomogram for evaluation of network plan
          and design	     37
  8       Experience rating curve  	     42
  9       Rating for on-job training program 	     45
 10       Rating for efficiency of use of station
          operator time	     61
 11       Days between end of period and summary release	     71
 12       Determination of technical services budget
          allocation	     74
 13       Personnel budget allocation rating 	     76

-------
                              LIST OF TABLES
Number

  1       Network basic information 	      3
  2       Technical services personnel information  	     10
  3       Zone areas and pollutant concentrations 	     13
  4       Number of monitoring sites for SO- and TSP	     14
  5       Minimum number of air quality monitoring sites
          as a function of concentration levels and
          population	     16
  6       Required minimum number of monitoring sites
          based on AQCR classification and population	     18
  7       Topography and climatology  	     20
  8       Determination of the number of sites for
          photochemical oxidants and NO.	     21
  9       Actual vs recommended numbers of sites  	     23
 10       Rating of the number of sites per pollutant	     25
 11       Multiplying factors for four cases of air
          pollution	     25
 12       Station distribution work sheet 	     29
 13       Sampling location guidelines for areas of
          estimated maximum pollutant concentration 	     32
 14       Ratings for site characteristics and design	     34
 15       Ratings for office facilities, wet laboratory,
          calibration/maintenance facilities  	     49
 16       Values for field facilities	     52
 17       Rating for field facilities 	     52
 18       Rating for intermittent sensors as applicable  	     53
 19       Rating for continuous instrument performance
          parameters	     55
 20       Evaluation of continuous sensor recording
          procedures	     58
 21       Evaluation of station operator time	     61
 22       Ratings for controls on field instruments
          and measurements  .	     65
 23       Ratings for controls on laboratory instruments
          and measurements	     68
 24       Area of quality assurance evaluation  	     69
 25       Ratings for data utilization	     71
 26       Network evaluation  	     72
                                    Vlll

-------
                       LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS

    AQCR
    avg.
    calib. freq.
    Hi -Vol.
    Hq. digit.
     acquis .
    Mfr.
    mg/m
    yg/m
    ppm
    spec
Air Quality Control Region defined in the Federal
Register, Vol. 40, Part 35,501-4 (1972) as an area
designated or established pursuant to Section 107
of the Clean Air Act (Dec. 1970).  Section 107ff of
the Clean Air Act states that air quality control
regions are geographical regions for which imple-
mentation plans exist specifying the manner in
which national primary and secondary air quality
standards will be achieved and maintained.
average
calibration frequency
high volume air sampler

digital acquisition system at Headquarters
area in square kilometers
manufacturer
milligrams per cubic meter
micrograms per cubic meter
parts per million
specification
SYMBOLS

    CO
    N02
    OX
    S02
    TSP
carbon monoxide
nitrogen dioxide
photochemical oxidants
sulfur dioxide
total suspended particulates
                                     IX

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGMENT


     Many individuals at the five networks visited and the experts who
responded to a Survey Letter have been helpful in developing the material
used in these recommended procedures.  For their contributions, the
project management extends its sincere gratitude.

     Mr. Edward Schuck, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, served as
Project Officer, assisted by Mr. Leslie Dunn and Dr. Joseph Behar.
Mrs. Ruth W. Shnider, URS Research Company, served as Project Manager.
Mr. Jack Jenkins, who visited and compiled information on the operations
of five air monitoring networks, provided valuable input and assistance
on this project, and Mr. Paul Kennedy also aided in the evaluations of
laboratory instruments and facilities.

-------
                                  SECTION I

                          INTRODUCTION TO THE MANUAL
     This manual is designed to evaluate the efficiency of ambient air moni-
toring networks whose primary objective is to document compliance with or
progress toward attaining ambient air quality standards.  This definition
includes the ambient air monitoring operations of networks that include Engi-
neering and Enforcement, although the latter two functions are not examined
except in consideration of overall budgetary allocations.  The evaluation is
designed to be carried out for a network consisting of one Air Quality Control
Region (AQCR), or for a network consisting of a number of AQCRs, since the
basic methodology evaluates each AQCR individually.  For networks composed of
more than one AQCR, methods are given to integrate the results for all AQCRs
into one evaluation.

     Two basic concepts are used in the evaluational methodology.:  (1) air
monitoring operations depend mainly on the population density, industrial
and commercial distribution, and the meteorological and topographical con-
straints; (2) the overall efficiency of a network is the integrated result
of the evaluated efficiency of each area of operation within the network.
Six Operational Areas have been designated:  Network Plan and Design, Person-
nel Qualifications, Facilities and Equipment, Sampling and Analysis, Quality
Assurance, and Data Utilization.  The first six sections of the manual pro-
vide methods to evaluate the efficiency of each of these areas, and the
seventh section presents the technique for the overall integrated evaluation
of Operational Areas.  The last section provides a method to evaluate the ef-
ficiency of budgetary allocations.  Most of the areas are composed of many
elements.  The efficiency of all elements must be integrated to evaluate each
area efficiency, and the efficiency of all the areas must then be integrated
to evaluate the network efficiency.  The manual presents techniques for each
of these integrations.

     The sections of the manual are numbered in Roman numerals.  Evaluations
of elements comprising each area are identified by the sectional Roman numer-
al and a capital letter.  For example, Section II provides a method to evalu-
ate the area of Network Plan and Design.  The number of sites in a network
is one element of this area.  Thus, Rating for Number of Monitoring Sites is
identified as a subsection II.A.  Subsection II.A. is then subdivided into
four parts.  II.A.I, II.A.2, and II.A.3 contain instructions (taken from
U.S. EPA, 1974) to calculate, by three different methods, the number of sites
needed to monitor the five major pollutants.  II.A.4 presents a technique
that combines the previous three methods and provides a rating of the existing
number of sites per pollutant with respect to both EPA recommendations and
the pollutant priority classifications for each AQCR.  Only the five major
pollutants for which Federal Regulations have been promulgated are considered.
These are:  total suspended particulates (TSP); sulfur dioxide (S02); carbon

-------
monoxide  (CO); nitrogen dioxide  (N02); and photochemical oxidants  (OX).  The
Rating of Site Distribution is a  second element of this area, and  the method
for rating this element is labeled II.E.  A technique for rating the element
of Site Characteristics is identified as II.C.  The  last subsection, II.D.,
provides a method that combines the ratings of the three elements  in II.A.,
II.E., and II.C., into one overall evaluation for the area of Network Plan
and Design.  Each succeeding section is similarly subdivided.

     Weighting factors are used in achieving each evaluation.  These factors
are normalized mean values derived from analyses of  responses to a Survey
Letter that requested experts in  the field of air monitoring to designate the
weighted relative importance of most of the items considered.  All weighting
factors are decimal fractions (less than 1.0, since  they are normalized
values); however, they represent  very real differences in the opinions of
over 55 experts in the field of air monitoring.  Specific regional require-
ments were accounted for by special utilization of the responses,  which were
obtained from all over the United States.

     Calculations required to derive the ratings are presented in  "Steps"
to clarify the processes and aid  the evaluator, and  tables are provided for
recording the rating calculations.  Each of these tables contains  space
for six AQCRs, to be used as needed for the network  considered.

     This manual is the first of  its type to provide a method for  evaluating
ambient air monitoring networks in this fashion and  is designed to allow com-
pletion within a week.  There are, naturally, limitations to the manual.  For
example, the only bases for comparison and evaluation in many cases are cur-
rent EPA-recommended procedures and approved instrumentation.  Consequently,
the manual will require updating  as changes are published in the Federal
Register.  Furthermore, only general site distribution rather than precise
location is considered in the area of Network Plan and Design, since analyses
of meteorology and emissions distribution are beyond the scope of  this
manual.

     Tables 1 and 2 of Section I, when completed, will contain information
needed in the Evaluational Sections that follow.  Most of the information
for completing the tables should  be available in the files of the head-
quarters office of the network under study.  Some inspection will be neces-
sary to complete the information  on Facilities and Equipment in Table 1.
U.S. EPA Guidelines APTD-1347, 1972, and the maps noted in Section D of
Table 1 will also be needed along with knowledge of  the Federal Register,
40 CFR, Sections 50 (1971, amended 1975b) and 53 (1975).  After obtaining
the necessary maps and completing Tables 1 and 2, the evaluational procedures
described in the manual can be carried out readily.  It is anticipated that
completion of the information tables will require about 3 man-days and the
evaluations can be completed in 2 man-days.

     In many cases non-metric units are employed because data, such as area
on a map, or recommended values in referenced EPA documents (hereinafter re-
ferred to as Guidelines),  occur in those units.  Conversions to Internation-
al System of Units (SI) are provided in Appendix A.

-------
                                    TABLE 1.   NETWORK BASIC INFORMATION
Air Monitoring Agency 	
Indicate whether major network emphasis is:
A.   BUDGET INFORMATION
     Total Budget $	
Area of Network 	
Ambient Air Monitoring
Enforcement
sq. mi.    No. AQCR'.s in Network
1.   Budget for Activity
2.   % of Total
     Personnel
3.   Salaries and Benefits
4.   % of Activity Budget (1)
5.   % of Total Budget
     Equipment
6.   Capital Expenditure
7.   % of Activity Budget (1)
8.   % of Total Budget
                                       Administration
                                            and
                                      Public Information
             Technical Services
               Air Mon.,  Lab,
                 Data Anal.
             I	
       Engineers/Enforce.      Total  Itemized
       $	     $	(Total Budget)
 B.   PERSONNEL INFORMATION
 1.   List Total number of personnel in Technical Services  (Air Monitoring, Laboratory, and Data Analysis)
 2.   Obtain copies of the network Position Descriptions for each Technical Services position.
     For each filled position, complete columns 1 through  8 of Table 2.
 3.   Does the network provide special On-Job Formal Training Programs?	.

-------
                                              TABLE 1.    (continued)
C.  AIR MONITORING SITE INFOKHVnON



1.  Fill in the information for each AQCR in the network.




Area (sq.Bi.)
Mo °f SitBS
No- w/tnvir.ControT
Number of sites
with
continuous sensors
Frequency of cont.
Sensor visits
Servicing
No. sites with both
intermittent and
continuous sensors
No. continuous
sensors
No. of sites TCP
nonitoring SO-;
each CO
""""'""Sxidan^
No. manual sensors
Frequency of manual
Sensor visits
Servicing
No. station
operators
Avg. mi /day travclcc
by operators visit-
ing stations

1. Priority
Classification
II. Ill
Pop.



-Jli"1 1&T
at each
station "q <er week





per week




6. Priority
Classification
I
II. Ill
Pop.



disit<,l;Tele»e-
acquis. c
at each ^ di u
station acquis.
per week





per week




-------
                                                    TABLE  1.    (continued)
2.    Obtain station information:   (a)  avg.  sq.  ft. per station	; (b) maintenance of log book at 	% of stations.
3.    Obtain the network's descriptive  sheet for each site, or obtain information giving:  (a) height of probes or intakes and biasing sources,
     (b) % of time access to instruments is physically unavailable	.
4.    Determine whether there were any  acts  of thefts or vandalism at sites.  If so, list the amount of loss in the past year;
     per AQCR:  (1) «	, (2) $ 	.  (3) | 	, (4) $	, (5) *	, (6) $	.
5.    List the percentage of data lost  per AQCR in the past year, due to station inaccessibility (weather, traffic, etc.):
                (1) 	, (2) 	,  (3) 	. (4) 	, (S) 	, (63 	.
6.    List the down times per AQCR in the past year of all sensors:
                (1) 	, (2) 	,  (3) 	, (4) 	. (5) 	, (6) 	.
D.   NETWORK INFORMATION
1.   Obtain a nap of the area (from Local or Regional Planning Agency).
2.   Locate Air Monitoring Sites on the map and indicate the number of sensors and pollutants monitored at each.
3.   Does the network utliic data in developing an  air model 	, in trend prediction 	, in air quality evaluation 	
4.   Is an air quality report published for public  release annually	?  Is air quality information released daily to news media
5.   Are data summaries prepared monthly	, quarterly 	?  How soon after the period ends are they released	T
6.   Obtain pollutant isoplcth maps of the network  area, if available.

-------
                                     TABLE 1.    (continued)
E.   FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT INFORMATION.   (Fill in all  blanks)

     1.   Are library facilities available? 	.
     2.   What is the percentage of office  personnel with at  least  50 sq.  ft.  per person? 	%
     3.   What percentage of office utilities are available when  needed?      %
     4.   What percentage of office supplies are available when needed?      *
     5.   What percentage of transportation is available  when needed?      *
     6.   The following information is needed on the wet  (sample  analysis) laboratory,  whether maintained
          by the network, or whether an outside facility:
          a.  What is the percentage of laboratory personnel  with at least 100 sq.  ft./analyst?       %
          b.  Are there check list controls on cleanliness? 	  On ambient  conditions? 	  On
              electrical service? 	.
          c.  What percentage of the tine are standard procedures followed in  labeling and storing
              chemicals and reagents? 	%
          d.  What percentage of the time are standard procedures followed in  labeling and storing
              standard solution bottles?       %
          e.  What percentage of chemical and gas standards are validated and  documented? 	%
          f.  Is associated equipment (cuvettes,  volumetric ware, dilutors, consumables, refrigeration,
              etc.) sufficient? 	
          g.  What percentage of the time is standard cleaning of associated equipment used?      \
          h.  Is supply inventory maintained? 	
          i.  Is quality of purchases checked?
          j.  List specifications as indicated for the following laboratory instruments used for analysis,
              the calibration frequency of the instruments, manufacturers (mfr.)  recommendations,  and
              documentation of calibration:
       Instrument
Sensitivity/Precision
  Calib. Freq.
Mfr. Recom./ActuaT
                                                                                  %  of
                                                                              Documentation
      Analytical Balance
                               Weighing chamber
                                     x       in.
      Spectrophotometer
Eff.band width
      Conductivity meter
      pH meter
      Atomic absorption
       Spectrophotometer
           k.  Are  documented results used to modify calibration frequency?
           1.  	\ of calibration techniques are approved methods, i.e., those listed in the Federal
              Register  (FR, 40 CFR S3, 1975).

-------
                                TABLE 1.    (continued)
7.   The following information is needed on  laboratory measurements:

     a.    _ % of the analyses use approved techniques  (listed  in the Federal Register, Sections
          50 and 55).
     b.         % of the time statistical control  chart techniques are used.
     c.    Is there scheduled participation in interlaboratory testing _ 1
     d.    Are spiked samples _ or standard reference  materials _ used to validate data?
     e.    _ % of samples undergo replicate analysis?

8.   The following information is needed on  sensor calibration/maintenance  equipment  and procedures:

     a.   List equipment used to calibrate sensors for each pollutant, specs  (as in 6.j. above)
          source of calibration methods used, Mfr. recommendations on calibration  frequency, actual
          frequency of sensor calibration, whether calibration is documented, and  whether documenta-
          tion is used to modify the schedule:

                               Equip .   Method                      !
Sensor  for    Callb. Equip.    Specs.   Source    Mfr. Freq.   Actual Freq.  Documentation    Use

TSP

S02
 CO

 Photo-
  chemical
  oxidants


     b.   Check on availability of associated equipment:  volumetric ware _ ,  still  _ ,  ther-
          mometer _ , barometer _ , manometer _ , other.
     c.   Are  secondary standards documented and validated on a schedule? _
     d.   The  following information is needed on sensor maintenance:  Maintenance of each sensor  is
          on a schedule and documented _ _% of the time; compared with Mfr.  recommendations
          _ % of the time; documentation is used to modify schedules _ %  of the time;
               % of maintenance techniques are approved; preventative maintenance is also documented


 9.   Statistical control chart techniques are used in analysis of field data _ % of  the time.

-------
TABLE 1.  (continued)

To.
•) Check if mbile
unit 1« wallabl*
b) List the performance
specs, Mfr. and Model
of each automatic
sensor, as available
Parameter t'nits
(1) Ranee ppn
(2) .Voise ppn
(3} lover Detectable
Lir.it ppn
a. Each Interferes
Eouivuler.t DM
b. Total Interferent
KOI
(5) Zero drift. 12
and 24 hours
PW
2M of upper
ran.-e linit \
rar.je limit \
(7) Lai Tioe »in
(8) Rise Tine Bin
(9) Fall Tiae Bin
201 of upper
range lir.it *
range Unit t
AQCR 1

SO. Oxidantf CO
<:ir >!od Mfr Hod Kfr Mod














AQCR 2

SO. Oxidants CO
Mfr Modi Mfr Hod Mfr Mod














AQCR '3

SO. Oxidants CO
fr Mod Hfr Mod Mfr Mod














AQCR 4

SO. Oxidants CO
Mfr Itod Mfr Mod Mfr Kod














AQCR S

SO, Oxidants CO
!M Mfr Mod Mfr Hod














AQCR 6

SOj Oxida.itj CO
•:fr Mod Kfr Mad Mfr V«l















-------
TABLE 1.  (continued)

e) Ust tlM follooU( for

Chaneteriitic Units
(1) Pur.? rain-.iir.s air
pressure differential
at desired flow rite
of atnospherti
(2) 24-hour flow rite
	 liters/BiB
(J) Air flow rea»u«d by
calibrated rotaceter
3r«i«ior: - *
(4) Flow T»t« of «ir
through 8 by 10 in.
filter 	 ft*/MB
AQCR 1
SO KO TSP
2 2
If r hod Kir Hod lltr Mod

X
X
X
X X
AQCR 2
S3 KO TSP
2 2
Mir Wod Mfr ItoJ Mfr Mod

X
X
X
X X
AQCR I
ro >» TSP
2 2
Mfr Hod Hfr Mod Mfr Mod

X
X
X
X X
AQCR 4
SO KO TSP
2 2 ' "
Mir Mod" HCr Hod Kfr Mod

X
x
X
X X
AQCR S
SO KO TSP
2 2
:fr Mod Mfr Cod Mfr McJ

X
X
X
X X
AQCR 6
SO XC TSP
? 2
Mfr Mod Mfr Mo'i Kfr Vod

X
X
X
X X

-------
                               TABLE 2.   TECHNICAL SERVICES PERSONNEL INFORMATION*
        I.                2.                   3.               4.             5.            6.            7.            8.             9.
     Positions       Qualifications          Incumbents'       Years in    Starting post-   Salary of      Salary        Years          On-job
       and            required*          qualifications      present     tion (if other starting posi-    today         with          training
     section*        (degree/exp.)         (degree/exp.)       position    than present)     tion today                  network      availability
Administration
Air Monitoring
Lab 6 Data Anal.
 *  Use additional pages,  as necessary.
 t  Section - Administrative, Air Monitoring  (Station operators, engineers, technicians).
             Lab and Data Analysis.
 *  Stated in U.S. EPA, 1972.

-------
                                  SECTION II

                     EVALUATION OF NETWORK PLAN AND DESIGN
 II.A  RATING FOR NUMBER OF MONITORING SITES
EPA Guidelines provide several possible methods for determining the number
of monitoring sites needed for an AQCR.  The basic method  (F.R., 40 CFR
51.17, 1971, amended 1975a) determines the minimum required number of sites
by AQCR classification and population class.  Additional "possible methods
for determining a more adequate number of stations for an AQCR. . .based
on varying levels of information" are given in an Appendix to U.S. EPA,
1974.  Part A of this Section provides three of these methods, based on
varying levels of information, and incorporates the concept of air quality
indicators for determining the number of sites needed.  The first method
deals with the number of sites for TSP and S02-  The second method deals
with the number of sites for CO, photochemical oxidants and N02; and the
last method concerns the number of sites for all five pollutants.  If suf-
ficient information is available, use all three methodologies that are
presented in II.A.I, II.A.2, and II.A.3, and calculate or determine a value
for N  (number recommended) by each method.
II.A.I A Method to Determine the Number of S02 and TSP Sites, Using
       Pollutant Isopleth Maps (in terms of annual averages).  (If such
       maps are not available, go to Section II.A.2.)
This guideline method (U.S. EPA, 1974; U.S. EPA, 1972) estimates the number
of stations needed as a function of both the land area of the region and the
pollutant concentrations.  Each AQCR is divided into three distinct zones,
on the basis of annual average iso-concentration lines representing the
ambient air quality standard and the background values appropriate for the
region.  The three zones, for which the land areas are determined from the
isopleth map, are:
                                            2
          X =  area in square kilometers (km ) where concentrations are
               higher than ambient air quality standard.
                       2
          Y =  area (km ) where concentrations are above background,
               but less than ambient standards.
                       2
          Z =  area (km ) where existing concentrations are at back-
               ground levels.

     The number of samplers for each zone,  Nx, Ny, N2, of each AQCR in the
network is calculated separately for S02 and TSP, using the following equa-
tions from EPA guidelines (U.S. EPA, 1974;  U.S. EPA, 1972):

                                     11

-------
                         Nx = 0.0965  "' c  s   X                            (1)


                                     C  - C
                         N  = 0.0096 -~—-  Y                            (2)
                         N  = 0.0004 Z                                      (3)
                          Z


   where   C  = value of maximum pollutant  isopleth, with a contour  interval
            m   of 10 micrograms per cubic  meter  (yg/m3) as indicated on
                isopleth map.

           C  = ambient air quality standard in yg/m  annual average.
            S                                   '      M^BI^B—^^W"^—

           C,  = value of minimum pollutant  isopleth, with a contour  interval
                of 10 vg/m3 annual average  as indicated on isopleth  map.

Then Nr, the total number of samplers in each AQCR for each of the two pollu-
tants, is obtained by summing the estimated numbers in each zone:

                    Nr(S02) * (Nx + Ny + Nz) for  S02                        (4)

                    Nr(TSP) = (Nx + Ny + Nz) for  TSP                        (5)


     The calculations are accomplished by carrying out the following two
steps.
                                      12

-------
Step 1

     From the isopleth map of the network, determine  for  each  AQCR in the
network the basic values of X, Y, Z, Cm> GS, and  Cb for S02  and TSP and place
these values in Table 3.
               TABLE 5.  ZONE AREAS AND POLLUTANT  CONCENTRATIONS	

                                         	AQCR	

                            (1)      (2)       C3)        (4)       (5)      (6)
S02 Data
   Cs
   Cb
TSP Data
   Cm
   Cs
   Cb
                                     13

-------
Step 2

     Calculate Nx, Ny, and Nz, the number  of  sites  needed in each zone of
each AQCR, to monitor S02 and TSP.  Substitute values  from Table 3 (p. 13)
into Eqs. (1), (2), and  (3) on page 12.  Record  these  values in Table 4.
Then calculate the values of Nr for S(>2 and TSP  in  each AQCR by substituting
the Nx, Ny, and N2 values into Eqs. (4) and  (5)  on  p.  12.   Record the values
of N  in Table 4.
For S02
   Nx
   Ny
   Nz
   Nr
For TSP
   Nx
   Ny
   Nz
   Nr
             TABLE 4.  NUMBER OF MONITORING SITES  FOR  S02  AND TSP


                      	AQCR	

                          CD        (2)      (3)       (4)       (5)       (6)
                                     14

-------
II.A.2  A Method To Determine the Minimum Required Number of Sites*
This method, given in both U.S. EPA 1974 and 1972, determines the minimum
number of sites for all five major pollutants, based on concentration levels
and population size.  If you completed Section II.A.I, follow the procedures
of this section only for CO, photochemical oxidants, and N02-  Table 5, on
pp. 16 and 17, combines and reproduces material contained in both the EPA
Guidelines noted.  This material includes the Criterial Concentrations of
each of the five pollutants, the Minimum Number of Monitoring Sites, as a
function of regional classification and population, and the Minimum Fre-
quency of Monitoring.
Step 1

     In Table 6 (p. 18), record the population of each AQCR and the Priority
Classification for each of the pollutants in each AQCR of the network (from
information in part C of Table 1).

Step 2

     Fill in the value of N  in Table 6 for each of the five pollutants in
each AQCR, where

                    N  = Minimum number of air monitoring
                     r   sites, according to Table 5.
*Source:  CFR Title 40, Part 51, 1971, amended 1975a.

                                     15

-------
TABLE 5.  MINIMUM NUMBER OF AIR QUALITY MONITORING SITES AS A
          FUNCTION OF CONCENTRATION LEVELS AND POPULATION
Regional
Criteriml* classifi-
concentrations cation Pollutant
24-hr Max? >323 wg/a3 I
Annual Ceoa. Mean:
>100 i.g/1113
24-hr Max: >4S5 vg/ttz (.17)
Annual Arith. Mean:
>100 ug/m3 (.04)
8-hr Max: >14
1-hr Max: >5S
1-hr Max: >19

mg/a3 (12)
mg/n3 (48)
S wg/m3 (.10)
Annual Arith. Mean:
>110 yg/E3 (3.6)
Suspended
particu-
lates
Sulfur
dioxide
Carbon
monoxide
Photo-
chemical
oxidants
Nitrogen
dioxide
Measurement
•ethod
High-volume
sacpler
Tape sanpler
Pararosan-
iline or
equivalent"1
Xondispersi\e
infrared or
equivalent6
Gas phase
cheoiluair.-
escer.ce or
equivalent £
24-hour sam-
pling method
( Jacobs -Hoch- .
heiser method)
Region
population
Less than 100,000
100,000-1,000.000
1^000,000-5,000,000
Above S, 000,000
Minimum number of air
quality monitoring
sites*

4
4
* 0.6 per 100,000"
7.S + 0.25 per 100,000=
12
* 0.16 per 100,000
One per 250,000° up to
S sites
Less than 100,000
100,000-1,000,000
1,000,000-5,000,000
Above S, 000,C03
Less than IOC, 000
100,000-5,000,000
Above 5.000,000
Less than 100,000
lOOjOOO-SjOOO.OOO
Above 5,000,000
Less than 100,000
100,000-5,000,000
Above 5,000,000
Less than 100_,000
100_,000-5, 000,000
Above 10,000,000

2.
6
11

1
6

1
6

1
6

4

2
S + 0.5 per 100,000b
* 0.15 per 100,000b
+ 0.03 ser 100, OOC"
i
* 0.15 oer 100,000°
+0.03 per 100,000b
1
+ 0.1S per 100,000°
+ 0.05 per 100,000b
1
+ 0.15 per 100,000b
+ O.OS per 100,000"
5
+ 0.6 per 100,000"
10
Nini«i»
frequency
of sampling
One 24-hour
sample every
6 daysC
One sample
every 2 hours
One 24 -hour
sasple every
6 days (gas
bubbler) c
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
One 24-hour
sample every
14 days (gas
bubbler) S

-------
                                                    TABLE 5.    (continued)
Criterial*
concentrations
24-hr Max: 150-325 ug/n3
Annual Geoa. Mean:
60-95 bg/n3
24-hr Max: 250-455 ug/n3
(.10-. 17)
Annual Aritii. Mean:
60-iCO wg/n3 (.02-. 04)
24-hr Max: >150 wg/m3
Annual Geom. Mean:
>60 yg.'a3
24 -hr Max: >260 iig/m3 (.10)
Annual Arith. Mean:
>6C yg/o3 (.02)
Regional
classifi-
cation Pollutant
II Total
suspended
particu-
lates
Sulfur
dioxide
IIIh Total
suspended
particu-
lates
Sulfur
dioxide
Measurement
cethod
High-volu:ne
sampler
Tape sampler
Pararosaniline
High-volu:ne
sampler
Pararosanll:ine
Hinioum number of air Minimum
Region quality monitoring frequency
population sites8 of sampling
3 One 24 -hour
sample every
6 daysc
1 One sample
every 1 hours
3 One 24-hour
sanplj every
• 6 (Jays (gas
bubbler jc
1 Continuous
1 One 24 -hour
sample every
6 daysc
1 One 24-hour
sasple every
6 days (gas
bubbler) c
*  ( ) - ppa (parts per million)
a  In interstate regions, the r.utbsr of sites required should be prorate"  to  each state on a population basis.
0  Total population of a region.  When, required number of samplers  includes a fraction, round off to nearest whole number.
c  Equivalent to 61 random samples per year.
   Equivalent cethods are:  (1) Gas Chrosatographic Separation-Plane  Photometric Detection (provided Teflon is used throughout the instnment system
   in parts exposed to the air streaa); (2) Flame Photometric Detection  (provided interfering sulfur compounds present in significant quantities
   are removed); (3) Coulonetric Detection (provided oxidizing and  reduc-ng interferences such as Oj, NOj, and H2S are renoved); and (4) the auto-
   mated Pirarosanilir.e Procedure.
e  Equivalent r.sthod is Gas Chro-arographic Separation -  Catalytic  Conversion - Flajr.e lonization Detection.
   Equivalent nethods are:  (1) Fotassiun Iodide Colorioetric Detection  'provided a correction is made for S02 and SOz); (2) UV Photometric Detec-
   tion of Ozone (provided compensation is made for interfering substances);  and (3) Chemilioinescence Methods differing froa that of the reference
  method.
£ Equivalent to 26 randora sar.ples per year.
h  It is assumed that Federal Motor Vehicle emission standards will achieve and maintain the national standards for CO, NOj, and photochemical
  oxidar.ts; therefore no monitoring sites are required for these pollutants.
4 The Jacobs-Hochheiser nethod is no longer  the EPA-approved technique, even though it is listed in the table.  EPA is currently evaluating three
  zeasurenents and will publish a r.ev reference aethad for NOj.
  NOTE:  Cricerial Concentrations are reproduced froa U.S. EPA. 1972.  '.he rest of Table 5 is reproduced from F.R., 40 CFR 51, 1971, Amended 1975a.

-------
                 TABLE 6.   REQUIRED MINIMUM NUMBER OF MONITORING  SITES BASED ON
                             AQCR CLASSIFICATION AND POPULATION
                      CD
                   Population
                   Priority
                    class.
N
        (2)
     Population
Priority
 class.
                                                             AQCR
                  (3)
               Population
Priority
 class.
N
                   C4)
               Population
Priority
 class.
                       (5)
                    Population
Priority
 class.
N
                                  (6)
                              Population
Priority
 class.
N
TSP
         Hi-Vol

          Tape
SO,
   Intermittent

     Continuous
CO
OX
NO,

-------
II.A.3  A Method to Determine an "Adequate" Number of Sites for
        Photochemical Oxidants and NCL
This method, from U.S. EPA 1974, determines the number of sites as a function
of topography and climatology.  Table 7 (p. 20) reproduces the descriptions
of four Topography regimes and the factor, Tp, associated with each; and
the eleven Climatology regimes and the associated short-term and long-term
factors, Cp, for photochemical oxidants and N02.
Step 1

     From Table 7, determine the Topography regime and associated factor, Tp,
and the Climatology regime and associated factor, Cp, for photochemical oxi-
dants and NOo for each AQCR in the network.  List the values in the first two
lines of Table 8.

Step 2

     Calculate the value of Nr, the "adequate" number of monitoring sites for
photochemical oxidant,s and N02 as a function of topography and climatology in
each AQCR, and list the values in the bottom line of Table 8. Calculate the
values by using Eq. (6), provided in U.S. EPA, 1974.


                          Nr = TF x CF x MP

   where values of Tp and Cp are those recorded in Table 8, and

                   = "minimum" number of sites for photochemical
                     oxidants and N02 recorded in Table 6  (p. 18).
                                      19

-------
                                           TABLE 7.  TOPOGRAPHY AND CLIMATOLOGY
K)
O
Topography*
regime
Valley-ridge




Hilly-
mountainous



Shoreline

Level or
gently rolling
Factor
CTF)
Continuous contours 1.8
of greater than 300
feet between a valley
and a ridge within a
mile of the horizontal
distance

Terrain elevations 1.5
greater than 800-1,000
feet between hills or
mountains and valley
floor

Bodies of water of a 1.2
size at least equal to
the Great Salt Lake
No marked contours 1.0
or shorelines
Short-term factor Long-term factor
Climatology oxidants N02
regime (Cp) (CF)
California-Oregon Coastal
Washington Coastal
Rocky Mountain
Great Plains
Great Lakes -Northeast
Appalachian
Mid-Atlantic Coastal
South Florida
Tropical
South Coastal Alaska
North and Central Alaska


2.0
1.4
2.0
1.0
1.1
1.6
1.4
1.0
1.0
1.5
2.0


1.6
1.4
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.4
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.8


        * It may be necessary to subdivide the AQCR if the topographic features are
          significantly variable, and'to calculate each area separately.

        Source:  U.S. EPA. 1974.

-------
                TABLE 8.  DETERMINATION OF  THE NUMBER OF SITES
                          FOR  PHOTOCHEMICAL OXIDANTS AND NO,,
                                           AQCR
Factors        (1)          (2)          (3)         (4)        (5)        (6)
            OX   N02    OX   N02     OX   N02    OX  N02    OX  N02   OX
CF
N
                                      21

-------
 II.A.4  Method  for  Rating  the  Number of Sites  per  Pollutant  in  the  Network
The results  calculated  in  the  previous  three EPA Guidelines  methods  for
determining  the number  of  sites  per  pollutant are compared with  the  actual
number of  sites, and  a  rating  is derived  for each.   These ratings  are  then
weighted with respect to each  pollutant Priority Classification, to  provide
a rating of  the number  of  sites  per  pollutant,  for  each  AQCR.  Whether any
particular pollutant  requires  additional  sites  is indicated,  if  the  rating
is significantly less than 1.  The network  rating is also determined.
Step 1

     In Table 9  (p.  23), fill  in  the value of Na,  the actual number of
existing monitoring  sites  (from Table  1) for each  pollutant monitored in
each AQCR.  Then, from Tables  3  (p. 13), 6 (p.  18), and  8  (p. 21), fill in
the largest value of N  calculated  for each pollutant monitored in each
AQCR.  Use the sums  of the  intermittent and continuous stations for TSP and
S02 in Table 6 for the values  for Nr for TSP and SCL.

Step 2

     Fill in the columns labeled  %  in  Table 9,  where % = N /N  x 100.
                                                          3-  r
Step 5

     Use Figure 1 (p. 23) to determine the R value for each pollutant of
each AQCR, and list  these values  in Table 10 (p. 25) under the values of
R! for AQCR number 1, R2 for AQCR number 2, etc.  Determine each R by
locating on the horizontal axis of Figure 1 each percent value for each
pollutant (from Table 9).  Then locate the percent value on the curve and
read the corresponding value of R on the vertical axis.

Step 4

     Use the Priority Classifications  listed in Table 6  (p. 18) for each pol-
lutant in each AQCR  to determine  whether case a, b, c, or d (defined below)
most closely matches conditions in each AQCR, thus defining the air quality
indicators (Priority I pollutants) where:

          Case a:    Priority I for TSP and S02; Priority II
                    and/or III for the other major pollutants.

          Case b:   Priority I for photochemical oxidants and/or
                    CO;  Priority  II and/or III for the other
                    major pollutants.

          Case c:   Priority I for any pollutant mix other than
                    case a or case b.

          Case d:   Priority II and/or III for all major pollutants.
                                      22

-------
        TABLE 9.   ACTUAL VS RECOMMENDED NUMBERS OF SITES


AQCR
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
N N%NN%NN%NN%NNtNN%
ar ar ar ar ar ar
TSP
so2
CO
ox
N02














-















!















































































c
• -





































^













































































































































































































































































3


























&













•



























































































































































'

























•






































~

L,
r
I
























•
•t







































































































































i




































































































--
r

























i
>L

















































































































































































































































,








































































































































































































































































•;:

























DC-
»d
ro

Figure 1.   Rating curve for the number of sites  for each  pollutant

-------
List the case alongside each AQCR number in Table 10.  Then list for each
AQCR the M values given in Table 11 corresponding to each case of pollutant
mix.

Step 5

     Multiply each R^ value by its M value and put the product in the column
labeled E for each AQCR.

Step 6

     On the bottom line of Table 10, labeled AQCR R, record the sums of the
E's for each AQCR.  The maximum possible value for each AQCR R is 1, which
corresponds to a perfect rating for total number of sites.

Step 7

     At the right on the same bottom line, in the column labeled "Sum R,"
place the sum of the AQCR R's.  Then divide by the number of AQCRs in the
network, and place that answer on the bottom line of the column labeled
"Avg. R."  This final value represents the overall network Rating on total
number of fixed monitoring sites.  A value of 1 would represent a perfect
score.
                                     24

-------
   TABLE 10.  RATING OF THE NUMBER OF SITES PER POLLUTANT

TSP
so2
CO
ox
N02
AQCR R

(1) Case -
R. x M.






= bl






AQCR
(2) Case -
R2 x M, = E_












(3) Case -
R3 x M3 = E3












(4J Case -
R, x M . =
4 4






K4






(5) Case -
R5 X M5 = E5












(6) Case -
R, x M , = E,
ODD












SUM R


AVG. R


TABLE 11.  MULTIPLYING FACTORS FOR FOUR CASES OF AIR POLLUTION

TSP
so2
CO
ox
NO,,
Case a
M
0.227
0.216
0.193
0.182
0.182
Case b
M
0.180
0.180
0.201
0.252
0.187
Case c
M
0.223
0.214
0.199
0.196
0.168
Case d
M
0.210
0.208
0.203
0.208
0.171
Case a:
Case b:
Case c:
Case d:
Priority I for TSP, S0_
Priority I for Oxidants and/or CO
Priority I for any Pollutant
Mix other than Case a or Case b
Only Priority II or III for
all five major pollutants

-------
 II.B.   RATING OF SITE DISTRIBUTION
 Site distribution will be evaluated with respect to two major factors:
 site descriptions and air quality indicators.   The site descriptors are:

 Source-Oriented Sites, which encompass central city urban industrial
                        locations, and other major pollutant sources,

 Population-Oriented Sites,  which encompass residential and suburban
                            locations, including shopping areas,

 Rural Sites,  which provide background data.
 Pollutant conditions are defined by cases  a,  b,  c,  and d,  described in
 Section II.A.4.   In this evaluation,  the numbers of intermittent  and
 continuous sensors are not specified.   The requisite number and distri-
 bution of sites  as functions of pollutants monitored are considered more
 important.  Only general areas for sites are  indicated.  Precise  loca-
 tions are not identifiable for many reasons,  such as availability and
 budgetary constraints, as well as involving analysis of micro-meteorology
 and emissions distribution,  which are  not  within the scope of  this manual,
 II.B.I   Method of Rating

      The evaluational  technique  is  presented  in  the  following  steps.  Use
 Table 12 for  a work  sheet.

 Step  1

      Fill  in  the  heading of Table 12  (p.  29), as you did for Table 10 (p. 25),
 with  the case (a,  b, c, or  d)  that  most nearly matches conditions in each
 AQCR.

 Step  2

      Mark  the major areas of industrial source emissions for each AQCR on the
 network  area  map  on which the  sites are located.  List the total number of
 sites in each AQCR in Table 12 in the space labeled  "No. sites" under each
 AQCR  number.   In  the rows labeled Na for  each AQCR,  list the number of
 existing sites that are source-oriented,  the number  that are population-
 oriented,  and the  number that  are rural,  corresponding to the  definitions
 in Section II.A.4.

 Step  3

      Use Figures 2, 3, 4, and  5  (pp. 27,  28), which  provide recommended sta-
 tion  distributions for pollution cases a, b, c, and  d, respectively, to deter-
mine  the recommended number of sites of each type for each AQCR.  List the
recommended values from these  figures in  the N  rows of Table  12.
                                     26

-------
;- !
i- '
, (
 '.

[i,
 I
EQ
Q

|
ui
U)
in
BO
Q
UU
U
tu
2









>0








10







u<




























)






















































































\




























>.-
V






















































































H




























:





























:'


1























-f

y


J























t-f
1



























^





























• '



























H

• •



























M




























r
,.




























If T




























































,






2
.




































tJ









0











|


























































'
















I







/•











































































































































I










!












|















5











i




i























V •




























1




























4
»





1






















•>





























-
























































<



























1





)(













-'i





1



















1


























\


                    TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES

        Figure 2.  Case a.  Priority  I  for  TSP and S02








T>









i n







































































''•






























f




























,
N





























.,'
f^






























' \






























9



























•

f\



























































•






























•
v






























i



























•



























































•


X






























!

























:



























































































'





























,



^






























,



























































•






























*





























i









.

















-


:









.-






























—



















'










.



















l|


























i






























1





























'




























































'





























!

























































































































1





















. ,
H






1






















I
3 j
 KEY

    • Source
     Oriented
     Sites

 O = Population
     Oriented
     Sites

    = Rural
      (Background)
 KEY

 v = Source
     Oriented
     Sites

 O = Population
     Oriented
     Sites

-—= Rural
     (Background)
                    TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES
   Figure  3.   Case  b.   Priority I for Oxidants and/or CO

                                    27

-------






WJ
LU
r"


0 2
lu ~
a
fa -
<5
,— ~
U)
I
2 ~
jj
V
u) -
o; -















!0






10







































0





























































































4































^






























































































































(

































1




























.H

0




























1




























































































1































j






























1
'






























































.




























11







2
2



















i


H






D



















M






























i
7-

,




























7






























Tr



.


























I
I


-.-


























>






























-



;
-

























1






























1




.,









3















n




1









0














i




i

























V



,
.

























*




• t


























r ^



.
•


























t



„































,






























I
.
























^




i,'






























M













4
Key:


v = Source

Oriented

oites


O = Population
Oriented
Sites


-~ — '= Rural Sites













0
                       TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES
 Figure 4.   Case c.   Priority I for pollutant mix other than case a or case b.
               20
           Q
           U-l
           UJ
                                       120
Approximately same
distribution for both
source- and population-
oriented sites.
                    TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES
Figure 5.  Case d.  Priority II and/or III for all five major pollutants.
                                        28

-------
                                  TABLE 12.   STATION DISTRIBUTION WORK SHEET
Site
description
Source-
oriented
Population-
oriented
Rural

Na
N
r
%
AQCR
(ID
Case
No.
sites




N
a
N
%


r»




N
a
Nr
%


r«





SIM
Avg.


-
r
r

i
1
(2D
Case
No.
sites






r»






r«






-
SUB i
Avg. i
•

2.
C3)
Case
No
. sites






r*






r*







»
Sum r
*rj
3
»
3
(4)
Case
No
. sites






r»







r*






•»
SUB i
j
Avg. r

4
4
(5)
Case
No. sites







-





^




Su
Av«


r«
* T.
. r



(6)
Case
No. sites





r«





i-




Si


-
a
Avg.
r
b

Sura
Avf?
to
                                                                                             Avg.  R

-------
 Step 4
      Calculate and  list  each  percent  value  in  Table  12  (p.  29), where
                               %  =  N  /N   x  100
                                   a r
 Step  5
     Fill  in  values  for  r  for  each AQCR.   Values  for  r are determined by  lo-
 cating,  on the  horizontal  axis  of Figure  6 the percent values  from Table  12
 (p.  29)  for each  site  orientation.   After locating  each percent value on  the
 curve, the corresponding value  of r  is read on the  vertical axis.
— i — r























-1— U

















































1

1
i





















!











[












!
























1





















••


:
i



















-



1
!


















.




!


















-





i
























!
















.







'
























•














/









>













.










:












,











,



























































•














Hi








.-•























-•























,















































.



































































.
























.


























.





































































































































































































1
-























1

































































































































































































































(























/
t.
































































































































































































































J -*























t
'






















30


	
                Figure  6.   Rating  for  site  distribution  in each AOCR
Step 6

     Sum the r values for each AQCR and record the sum for each in Table 12.

Step 7

     Divide each Sum r by 3 and record each result in the corresponding space
for Avg. r.  This decimal value, when expressed as a percent, represents the
rating of each AQCR for site distribution.  The value of 1 represents a per-
fect rating.

Step 8

     Sum the values of all Avg. r's and place that value in the space labeled
"Sum Avg. r.."  Then divide the sum by the number of AQCRs and put that result
in the space labeled "Avg. R."  This decimal value, when expressed as percent,
provides the network Rating for site distribution.  Comments of Step 7 apply
here.

                                      30

-------
II.C. RATING OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND DESIGN
Five site characteristics that affect monitoring efficiency are rated
in this subsection.  The ratings are then combined to Rate the element.
The following paragraph and Table 13 (p. 32) present information for
site and intake locations reprinted from U.S. EPA, 1972.

"Avoid sampling locations that are unduly influenced by downwash or by
ground dust, such as roof-top air inlet in proximity to a stack, or a
ground-level inlet near an unpaved road.  In the latter case, either
elevate the sampler intake above the level of maximum ground turbulence,
or place the sampler intake away from the source of ground dust.  Except
for stations that sample 1-hour CO concentrations, avoid locations where
there are flow restrictions such as buildings, parapets, or trees in
the vicinity of the air inlet."

The paragraph above and Table 13 are provided to aid in answering the
questions listed under "Procedure Steps," by comparing the Guidelines
information with the network site data listed in part C of Table 1.
The decimal value used to rate each characteristic was derived from
analysis of the Survey Letter responses.
II.C.I  Procedure Steps

     Record on the line of the same number in Table 14 (p. 34),, the answers
to each of the following numbered questions and instructions, for each AQCR
in the network.

Step 1

     List the percentage, as a decimal fraction, of all intakes free of
biasing sources.

Step 2

     List the percentage, as a decimal fraction, of all intakes for which
air flow is unobstructed.

Step 3

     Sum the values for each AQCR.

Step 4

     List the average of the sum of the two values.

Step 5

     List the product of 0.261 times the average above.
                                      31

-------
        TABLE 15.   SAMPLING  LOCATION  GUIDELINES  FOR AREAS  OF ESTIMATED MAXIMUM POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION
o*
Is)
                                                                                          Position of air inlet
Pollutant
category
Primary
stationary
source
pollutant


Primary
•obile
source
pollutant





Secondary
pollutant
Pollutant
*i


"°2
Particulates
CO
(1-hour
averaging
time)

CO
(8-hour
averaging
time)
OX

Height from
ground
Station location (ft)
Determined from atmospheric diffusion 3


>3
>3
>3




>3



>3

Horizontal
clearance
beyond
supporting
structure
(ft)*
>5


>S
>3
>3




>3



>s

                      NO,
and >300 ft  from major traffic arteries or
parking areas).'*' •

Representing residential area downwind of
•downtown area (3
>5
          Not applicable where air inlet is located above supporting structure.
          Downwind of prevailing daytime wind direction during the oxidant season.
          Source:   U.S. EPA. 1972.

-------
 Step  6
 at  a

 Step  7
List the percentage, as a decimal fraction, of all continuous sensors
uniform height (reported within + 3 ft).
      List  the percentage,  as a decimal  fraction of all intermittent sensors
 at  a  uniform height  (reported within +_  3 ft).

 Step  8

      Sum the values  of  lines 7 and 8 for each AQCR.

 Step  9

      List  the average of the sum of line 8.

 Step  10

      List  the product of 0.225 times the average of line 9.

 Step  11

      List  the percentage, as a decimal fraction, of all site facilities
 physically available to network personnel at all times that access is desired.

 Step  12

      List  the product of 0.186 and the value of line 11.

 Step  13

      List, as a decimal fraction, the dollar amount lost due to damage, theft,
 or vandalism (from part C of Table 1), as a percentage of the Technical Serv-
 ices budget (from part A of Table 1).

 Step  14

      List  the value of  (1 minus the value of line 13).

Step  15

      List  the product of 0.178 and the value of line 14.

Step  16

     List the percentage of data lost/year because of inaccessibility of
the site.  (Inaccessibility may be due to weather conditions, traffic condi-
tions, excessive distance of the site from a station operator,  etc.,  part C,
Table 1.)
                                      33

-------
 TABLE 14.   RATINGS FOR SITE  CHARACTERISTICS AND DESIGN

                 	AQCR	
                    (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Intakes

  1.  Bias
  2.  Air Flow
  3.  Sum (1+2)
  4.  Line 3*2
  5.  Line 4
        x 0.261
Sensor Height

  6.  Continuous
  7.  Intermittent
  8.  Sum
  9.  Line 8+2
 10.  Line 9
        x 0.225
Availability

 11.  Facilities
 12.  Line 11
        x 0.186
Security

 13.  Loss
 14.  (1 - line 13)
 15.  Line 14
        x 0.178
Accessibility

 16.  Data Loss
 17.  (1 - line 16)
 18.  Line 17
        x 0.150
 19.  AQCR
       rating
                                         Sum r
                                                                      Avg, R
                                   34

-------
Step 17

     List the value of (1 minus the value of line 16).

Step 18

     List the product of line 17 and 0.15.

Step 19

     List the decimal fraction that is the sum of lines 5, 10,  12,  15,  and 18
for each AQCR in the network.  This decimal fraction, when expressed as a
percent, is the rating of each AQCR for the five site characteristics con-
sidered.  The value of 1 indicates a perfect rating.  Then sum the  ratings for
each AQCR and place the value in the box labeled "Sum r," and divide by the
number of AQCRs to obtain the Avg. R.  This Avg. R,  when expressed  as percent,
is the network Rating for this element.   The value of 1 is a perfect Rating.
If the Rating is 0.75 or less, it is recommended that Site Characteristics be
improved.
                                      35

-------
II.D.  EVALUATION OF NETWORK PLANNING AND DESIGN
rhe separate ratings of each of the three elements that comprise the
Area of Plan and Design for the network are now combined to provide
an overall evaluation of this area, by means of the following Steps
and use of Figure 7.  The weightings incorporated into Figure 7 re-
flect the results of analysis of the Survey Letters.	
II.D.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     Express Avg. R of Table 10 as a percent
network Rating on Number of Sites;
                                                   _%.   This value is R,  the
                                                             %.  This value
                                                             %.  This value
     Express the Avg. R value of Table 12 as a percent _
is RD, the network Rating on Site Distribution.

Step 3

     Express the Avg. R value of Table 14 as a percent _
is RC, the network Rating on Site Characteristics.

Step 4

     In the Nomogram of Figure 7 (p. 37), circle the value  of RN on the bar
labeled R...  The value of Rn on the bar labeled R_., and the value of R,, on
the bar labeled RC.
     Draw a straight line crossing bar Q connecting the circled values of

   and V
Step 6

     Draw a second straight line between the circled value of RC and the
point on bar Q where the line of Step 5 crosses it.

Step 7

     The line of Step 6 crosses bar Ep.  The value at that point provides the
evaluation of the network for the Area of Plan and Design.
                                      36

-------
KEY:
01
-v]
      R  =
                     = Bar for Rating Number of Sites

                     » Reference Bar

                     = Bar for Rating Site Distribution

                       Bar for Rating Site Characteristics

                     = Bar for Evaluation of Area of Plan and Design
                            Figure  7.   Nomogram for evaluation of network plan and design

-------
                                 SECTION III

                EVALUATION OF AREA OF PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
In this Section, the Area of Technical Services Personnel Qualifications
is evaluated by rating the Education and Experience of the personnel, and
Training opportunities available.  The interpretation of training as given
in Section III.C includes motivation, to an extent.  Table 2 contains the
information needed concerning the network personnel and Appendix B of U.S.
EPA APTD-1347 (1972) specifies the requirements for each position.  Factors
used in the ratings and evaluation are derived from the Survey Letter.
III.A  EDUCATION RATING
A method follows that rates separately the educational background of per-
sonnel in Administration, in Air Monitoring, and in Lab and Data Analysis,
and then combines the ratings into one Rating for Technical Services Per-
sonnel .
The column numbers reference the numbered columns of Table 2.


III.A.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     From columns 1 and 2, list the total number of filled Administrative
positions requiring a diploma/degree or equivalent experience 	.

Step 2

     From column 3, list the number of Administrative personnel meeting only
minimum requirements 	.

Step 3

     From column 3, determine the number of Administrative personnel with
degrees or equivalent experience greater than minimum requirements, and list
the result 	.

Step 4

     Education Rating for Administrative Personnel;

          (Result for Step 2) + (Result for Step 3) _
                      (Result for Step 1)             	'
                                      38

-------
Step 5

     From columns 1 and 2, list the total number of filled Air Monitoring
(station operators, engineers, and technicians) positions requiring a diploma/
degree or equivalent experience	.

Step 6

     From column 3, list the number of Air Monitoring personnel meeting only
minimum requirements	.

Step 7

     From column 3, determine the number of Air Monitoring personnel with
degrees or equivalent experience greater than minimum requirements, and list
the result	    .

Step 8

     Education Rating for Air Monitoring Personnel:
          (Result for Step 6) + Result for Step 7) _
                        (Result for Step 5)
Step 9
     From columns 1 and 2, list the total number of filled Lab and Data Analy-
sis positions requiring a diploma/degree or equivalent experience 	.

Step 10

     From column 3, list the number of Lab and Data Analysis personnel meeting
only minimum requirements 	.

Step 11

     From column 3, list the number of Lab and Data Analysis personnel with
degrees or equivalent experience greater than minimum requirements and list
the result	•

Step 12

     Education Rating for Lab and Data Analysis Personnel:

          ("Result for Step 10) + (Result for Step 11 x Step 6) _
                          (Result for Step 9)                  = —	*
                                      39

-------
Step 15

     Education Rating for Technical Services Personnel:  The result of the
following calculations provides the Education Rating:

          (0.238 x Rating of Step 4) + (0.389 x Rating of Step 8)
          + (0.373 x Rating of Step 12) = R = 	     .

If the education of Technical Services Personnel matches the Guidelines
requirements,  the Rating will be 1.
                                     40

-------
III.B  EXPERIENCE RATING
The following method for Rating the experience of Technical Services Per-
sonnel also examines the three groups separately and then combines results
in an overall Rating.
The column numbers reference the numbered columns of Table 2.


III.B.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     Sum the years (in column 4) that all Administrative personnel have been
in their present positions, divide by the number of such personnel, and list
the result 	.

Step 2

     Experience Rating for Administrative Personnel:  Use the result of Step 1
and Figure 8 (p. 42), to determine the experience rating for Administrative
personnel.  Locate the average years in positions on the horizontal axis; then
determine and list the rating     .	.

Step 3

     For Air Monitoring personnel, sum the years (in column 4) that personnel
have been in their present positions, divide by the number of such personnel,
and list the result	.

Step 4

     Experience Rating for Air Monitoring Personnel:  Use the result of
Step 3 to determine the experience rating for Air Monitoring personnel from
Figure 8 (p. 42).  Locate the average years in position on the horizontal
axis, determine, and list the rating	.

Step 5

     For Lab and Data Analysis personnel, sum the years (in column 4) that
personnel have been in their present positions, divide by the number of such
personnel, and list the result	.

Step 6

     Experience Rating for Lab and Data Analysis Personnel;  Use the result
of Step 5 to determine the experience rating for Lab and Data Analysis person-
nel from Figure 8 (p. 42).  Locate the average years in position and list
the rating	•
                                     41

-------
Ni
        —
        X
        T3
        Ct
       m
       m

                                     AVERAGE  YEARS  IN PRESENT POSITION
                                      Figure  8.   Experience rating curve

-------
Step 7

     Experience Rating for Technical Services Personnel:

          CO.142 x Rating of Step 2) +  (0.232 x Rating of Step 4) +
          (0.222 x Rating of Step 6) = R =	.

A perfect Rating would be a value of 1.
                                      43

-------
III.C  SPECIAL ON-JOB FORMAL TRAINING RATING
"Special On-Job Formal Training" consists of training courses, available
to personnel who have been employed by the network for a minimum of one
year.  Successful completion of a course provides an opportunity for pro-
fessional development.  If the network does not offer such training or
make it available to personnel, skip the calculations of this Section, and
fill in 0 for the Rating in Step 13.  If such training is available, pro-
ceed with the following Steps to determine the Rating for training.
     This method again examines each group in Technical Services separately,
and combines results for an overall Rating.

     The column numbers reference the numbered columns of Table 2.
III.C.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     List the number of Administrative personnel for whom training programs
are available (col. 9) 	.

Step 2

     List the total number of Administrative personnel  (col. 1) 	.

Step 3
     Divide the number listed in Step 1 by the number listed in Step 2 and
record the value of f, the fraction of Administrative personnel for whom
training is available; f = 	.

Step 4

     Rating for Training Available to Administrative Personnel;  Use Figure 9
to determine the rating value for training.The result of Section III.B,
Step 1 lists the average years of experience in position for Administrative
personnel, and four curves are shown in Figure 9 for average years of experi-
ence.  Select the curve that most closely matches the result of Section III.B,
Step 1.  Locate on the selected curve the intersection of the value of f (re-
corded in Step 3, above) that is plotted on the horizontal axis of Figure 9.
Determine the value of r on the vertical axis corresponding to the intersec-
tion point; r = 	.

Step 5

     List the number of Air Monitoring personnel for whom training programs
are available (col. 9) 	.

Step 6

     List the total number of Air Monitoring personnel (col. 1) 	

                                     44

-------

                     IRK
                     ce oMLy
Figure 9.  Rating for on-job training program

-------
Step 7

     Divide the result of Step 5 by the result of Step 6, and record the value
of f, the fraction of Air Monitoring personnel for whom training is available;
f = 	.

Step 8

     Rating for Training Available to Air Monitoring Personnel:  Use the result
of Section III.B, Step 3, to determine the appropriate average years experience
curve in Figure 9, and use the value of f from Step 7, above, to determine the
value of r, as in Step 4, above;  r » 	.

Step 9

     List the number of Lab and Data Analysis personnel for whom training is
available (col. 9) 	.

Step 10

     List the total number of Lab and Data Analysis personnel
(col. 1) 	.

Step 11

     Divide the result of Step 9 by the result of Step 10 and record the value
of f, the fraction of Lab and Data Analysis personnel for whom training is
available; f = 	.

Step 12

     Rating for Training Available to Lab and Data Analysis Personnel:  Use
the result of Section III.B, Step 5,  to determine the appropriate average years
experience curve in Figure 9, and the value of f, from Step 11, above, to
determine the value of r from Figure 8; r = 	•

Step 13

     Training Rating for Technical Services Personnel:  The result of the
following calculations provides the training Rating:

     (0.238 x Result of Step 4) + (0.389 x Result of Step 8) +
     (0.373 x Result of Step 12) = R =	.
                                      46

-------
III.D  EVALUATION OF PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
An evaluation of Personnel Qualifications is provided by the sum of the
three products defined below.
     Calculate each product as indicated, and sum the results to derive the
Area Evaluation.

     0.301 x Education Rating of Section III.A, Step 13 = 	.

     0.385 x Experience Rating of Section III.B, Step 7 = 	.

     0.314 x Training Rating of Section III.C, Step 13  = 	.

                                  Area Evaluation = Sum =
     The perfect evaluation would be 1.  Values less than 1 suggest need for
improvement.
                                     47

-------
                                  SECTION IV

                EVALUATION OF AREA OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
In this Section, availability and adequacy of the office, laboratory, and
field facilities and equipment of an ambient air monitoring network are
examined.  The overall evaluation is performed only for the equipment and
facilities required to monitor the five major pollutants for which speci-
fications are currently available in the Code of Federal Regulations.  As
specifications are added for other pollutants, additional ratings will be
required.  The elements of this Section rate separately the equipment
needed for wet (sample analysis) laboratories and calibration/maintenance
laboratories because some networks do not perform analyses.  The weightings
used are based on opinions of experts who replied to the Survey Letter.
Table 15 is provided to facilitate rating the elements of Office, Wet Lab,
and Calibration/Maintenance facilities.  Tables 16 and 17 are for rating
Field facilities, and Tables 18 and 19 are to aid in the rating of Sensors
used in the network.  The perfect Rating for any element is a value of 1.

IV.A  OFFICE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT RATING

The four items rated in this element are listed in Table 15, along with
the sections of Table 1 in which the information on them is recorded.
Necessary calculations are indicated in the Table, i.e., value x weight =
score for each item, and the sum of the scores = R for the element.  Con-
vert Table 1 percentage answers to decimal numbers for use as "value."

IV.B  RATING OF THE WET LABORATORY

If the network operates a wet laboratory, derive the scores and the Rating
indicated in part B of Table 15, where instrument quality is as specified
in CFR Title 40, Part 50, 1975b.  Calculations are the same as for element
A.  If analyses are performed on contract, skip part B, and proceed to
part C of the Table.

IV.C  RATING OF CALIBRATION/MAINTENANCE FACILITIES

Part C of Table 15 provides a Rating of facilities and equipment in the
Calibration/Maintenance laboratory.  Calculations are again the same as
for the preceding two Elements.  Calibration equipment available is listed
in Table 1, parts 8.a and 8.b.  If each instrument or equipment listed in
Table 15 is available, the value is 1; if it is not, the value is 0.
                                     48

-------
       TABLE 15.   RATINGS FOR OFFICE  FACILITIES,  WET  LABORATORY,
                     CALIBRATION/MAINTENANCE FACILITIES
     Each element Rating is the sum of the scores of the items  within the element.
Each score is  the value for the item multiplied by the indicated weight.  The column
labeled "source" references the section of Table 1 providing information on the item
value.  When facilities are available,  the value is 1; when not available, the value
is 0.  Convert all percentages to decimal fractions before entering  in the value column.
   Table 1
   source
Item
Value
Weight
Score
Element
rating
             Office  Facilities g Equipment
   E.I           Library facilities
   E.2           Personnel space
   E.3           Office utilities
   E.4           Office supplies
             1L
             Wet  Laboratory Evaluation
             1.   Facilities
   E.6.a.        Laboratory space
   E.6.b.        Laboratory cleanliness
   E.6.b.        Environmental control
   E.6.f.        Associated equipment
             2.   Availability of Laboratory
                 Instruments
   E.6.J.        spectrophotometer
                 Analytical balance
                 Conductivity meter
                 pH meter
                 Atomic absorption
                  spectrophotometer
                                   0.312
                                   0.204
                                   0.238
                                   0.246
                                      Sum of scores
                                   0.224
                                   0.227
                                   0.248
                                   0.301
                                      Sum  of scores = R
                                   0.240
                                   0.240
                                   0.190
                                   0.190

                                   0.140
                                      Sum  of scores » R
                                         49

-------
                               TABLE  15.    (continued)
Table 1
source
Item
Value    X   Weight
                                                                    Score
Element
rating
          3.  Wet Lab Instrument
              Quality
E.6.J.        Spectrophotometer value
               for effective band width:
                 1 if less than 15 nm
                 0 if greater than IS run
              Analytical balance value
               for sensitivity:
                 1 if equal to 0.1 mg
                 0 if greater than 0.1 mg
              Value for weighing chamber
                 1 if sensitivity = 1
                   and if specific for
                   8 by 10 in.  filter
                 0 if not
          £1.
          Calibration/Maintenance
          Facilities
E.7,a.        Spectrophotometer
               (Specs as in B.3)
              Analytical balance
               (Specs as in B.3)
              Permeation tubes
              Temperature control
               equipment
              Wet test meter/flow
               meter
              Multimeter or
               equivalent
E.7.b.        Associated equipment
               (volumetric ware,  still,
               thermometer, barometer,
               manometer,  etc.)
                                    1.000
                                    0.500
                                   0.500
                                                           Sum of scores  « R <*
                                   0.100

                                   0.150
                                   0.100

                                   O.OSO

                                   0.150

                                   0.050


                                   0.300
                                      Sum of scores  •  R
                                          50

-------
IV.D  FIELD FACILITIES RATING
In this element, each AQCR of the network is rated separately, since field
facilities may vary.  Table 16 lists the source section of Table 1 that
will provide the information to determine the value for each item, each of
the field facilities to be rated, with its symbol, and a space for each
AQCR.  As in Table 15, convert percentages to decimal fractions before
entering them as values.  When facilities are available, the value is 1;
when they are unavailable, the value is 0, with special instructions for
mobile units.
     Calculation of the value is straightforward for E, the fraction of
stations with environmental control.  For S/260, the average station area is
compared to 260 sq.ft. (station area specified in U.S. EPA, 1972).  T is the
fraction of transportation available.  The value M  is determined to be 1 or
0 as follows:
             = 1 when  (1) M  (availability of mobile units) is avail-
                          able and two or me
                          sified Priority I
v              able and two or more pollutants are clas-
                       (2) Less than two pollutants are classified
                          Priority I

          M  = 0 when two or more pollutants are classified Priority I
           v   and M is unavailable.

          M  = availability of mobile units.

     Table 17 again lists each item to be rated, and the weight for each
item that is to be multiplied times the value in Table 16, to derive the
score for each item in each AQCR,  Note that by summing each row, a network
Rating for each item is obtained; summing each column provides a rating for
field facilities for each AQCR, and finally, the network Rating for Field
Facilities is obtained by summing the Rs for each AQCR and dividing by the
number of AQCRs.
                                     51

-------
                     TABLE  16.   VALUES  FOR FIELD FACILITIES
                                                          AQCR
       Table 1       Item                  123456
       source                           Value   Value   Value   Value   Value  Value
        C.I    E-Fraction of sites with
                 environmental control	

        C.3     S-Avg. Station Size (ft  )

               S/260

       E.lO.a. M-Mobile Units
        C.I    C-Pollutants classified
                 Priority I	
               M -Value assigned for
                  availability of mobile
                  units
        E.5    T-Fraction of transporta-
                 tion available
Multiply the  value of  each item  (from Table 16) by  the weight  for that  item
in Table 17 and record the score for each item in each AQCR  in Table  17.


       	TABLE 17.   RATING FOR FIELD FACILITIES	
                            	AQCR	
                              12345       6      Network
        Item	Weight    Score   Score   Score   Score  Score    Score   sum/item
         E         (0.28)


         S/260     (0.25)

         M         (0.19)


         T         (0.28)

        AQCR rating * Sum of
                     Scores ——_________________—_______________
                                                           Element R*
        *  Sum the AQCR ratings, and divide by  the number of AQCRs to  derive
          the Rating of this element for the network.
                                          52

-------
IV.E  FIELD INSTRUMENT RATING
The determination of Ratings for field instruments used to monitor the five
major pollutants depends simply on whether the performance parameters of
the network sensors (recorded in part E.9 of Table 1) are at least equal to
those specified in CFR Part 40, Title 50, 1975b, and on the weight assigned
to each parameter.  This element is divided into two sub-elements, treated
separately.
IV.E.I   Rating for Intermittent Sensors

     Table 18 lists the performance specifications for intermittent sensors
for three pollutants, as published in CFR Title 40, Part 50, 1975b.  If the
network sensor specification recorded in part 10.c of Table 1 is at least
equal to that tabulated, the score is the indicated weight; if it does not
meet the tabulated specifications, the score is 0.  Sum the score for the sen-
sor for each pollutant to derive the rating for each sensor.  The sub-element
rating for intermittent sensors is the sum of the total scores divided by the
number of total scores.
          TABLE 18.  RATING FOR INTERMITTENT SENSORS AS APPLICABLE
Table 1
source:  Part E.lO.c. 	
                                                              Sensor for
               Performance specifications
                                                           SO*
NO*
TSP
                                                  Weight  Score  Score  Score
                                                  0.5
                                                  0.5
                                                  1.0
1.   Pump must maintain air pressure differ-
     ential greater than 0.7 atmospheres at
     desired flow rate.

2.   A calibrated rotameter or critical
     orifice must measure air flow of 0.2
     liters/min. within +. 2%

3.   Pump must draw air through an
     8-x 10-inch filter at a rate between
     40-60 cu.ft./min.
*    Score  if used by network.
                                        Total Score =
     Sub-element-rating    „   _  Sum of Total Scores  =
     	     1  ~  No. of Total Scores
                                      53

-------
IV.E.2  Rating for Continuous Sensors

     Use Table 19 (which lists the performance parameters for continuous sen-
sors from CFR Title 40, Part 50, 1975b, and the weight assigned to each param-
eter) to derive the Ratings for continuous sensors for three pollutants.  If
the network sensor specifications listed in part E.lO.b of Table 1 meet
those tabulated, the value is 1; if not, the value is 0.  The product of the
weight times the value for each parameter is the score.  Find the total score
for each sensor, and the network score for continuous sensors, as indicated.

IV.E.3  Element Rating

     The element Rating is the average of the two sub-element ratings:

                                       Rj(Table 18) + R2(Table 19)
Element Rating for Field Instruments = 	*	

                                   R =
A Rating of 1 indicates that all field instruments meet Federal Register
Specifications.
                                      54

-------
                       TABLE 19.  RATING FOR CONTINUOUS INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS*
in
     Table 1
     source:  Part E.lO.b
Parameter
1 . Range
2. Noise
3. Lower detectable limit
4. Interference Equivalent
Each interferent
Total interferent
5. Zero drift, 12- § 24-hour
6. Span drift, 24 hours
20% of upper range limit
80% of upper range limit
7. Lag time
8. Rise time
9. Fall time
10. Precision
20% of upper range limit
80% of upper range limit
* Specifications for each sensor
CFR, Title 40, part S3. 1975.
"*" Score if used by network
Units
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
J
min
min
min

ppm
ppm
taken
Weight
'0.094
0.086
0.094
0.05
0.05
0.096
0.047
0.047
0.068
0.068
0.068

0.116
0.116
so|
Specs Value
0-0.5
0.005
0.01
-0.02
0.06
-0.02
-5.0
20
15
15

0.01
0.015
from
Total
Score
Sub-Element Rating
fevr f!rvnt"imirni«; S*»n«r>TC
Oxidants
Score Specs Value Score
0-0.5
0.005
0.01
-0.020
0.060
-0.020
J20.0
-5.0
20
15
15

0.01
0.01
Total
	 Score 	
Sum of Total Scores

CO
Specs Value Score
0-50
0.50
1.00
-1.00
1.50
-1.00
-10.00
-2.5
10
5
5

0.5
0.5
Total
Score 	

-------
IV.F  EVALUATION OF AREA OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
If the network operates a wet laboratory, follow Procedure 1 to evaluate
the area of Facilities and Equipment.  If sample analyses are performed on
a contractual basis, follow Procedure 2.  Both Procedures use the Ratings
calculated in the Tables of this Section as values, which are then multi-
plied by assigned weights to provide Relative Ratings.  The Relative
Ratings are then summed to derive the area evaluation.  Each Procedure
tabulates the Source Table or Section listing the Rating, or value, for
each element, along with the assigned weight for each element.

If the Rating of each element in the area is perfect  (i.e., 1), the area
evaluation will be 1, and each Relative Rating will equal the weight as-
signed to the element.
                        Procedure 1 for Area Evaluation
Source
Table 15, A
Table 15, B
Table 15, B
Table 15, B
Table 15, C
Table 17
IV. E. 3
ssr *
Office Facilities x
Wet Lab. Facilities
Wet Lab. Instruments
Wet Lab. Instrument Quality
Calib./Maint. Facilities
Field Facilities
Field Instruments
Weight
0.082
0.149
0.145
0.169
0.169
0.132
0.154
Relative
rating
=






                      Area Evaluation = Sum Relative Ratings =
                        Procedure 2 for Area Evaluation
Source
Table 15, A
Table 15, C
Table 17
IV.E.3
Element
Office Facilities
Calib./Maint. Facilities
Field Facilities
Field Instruments
Element
rating
X
Weight
0.153
0.315
0.246
0.286
Relative
rating
=
                      Area Evaluation = Sum Relative Ratings
                                     56

-------
                                  SECTION V

                 EVALUATION OF AREA OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
 Only two elements will be examined in this area, Recording Procedures for
 Continuous Sensors and Efficiency of Use of Station Operator Time.  Meth-
 ods and procedures involved in Sampling Analysis will be considered in the
 area of Quality Assurance.
 V.A  RATING OF RECORDING PROCEDURES FOR CONTINUOUS SENSORS
 The number of Priority I pollutants (the air quality indicators) in an
 AQCR is a factor that affects the importance of recording procedures used.

 The "value" for each recording procedure is the percentage (expressed as a
 decimal fraction) of the continuous stations employing each procedure with
 two exceptions:  (1) the value for strip charts is 1, since each continuous
 sensor must have strip chart recording; (2) if there is a digital acquisi-
 tion system or a data processing system at Headquarters, the value is 1 (if
 not, 0) for each AQCR.

 The weights for each procedure are listed in the left column of Table 20.
 Two weights are shown for strip-chart  recording.  If the AQCR is small,
 has less than two Priority I pollutants,  and has only strip-chart record-
 ing, the weight is 1.   If there are two or more Priority I pollutants,
 the weight is 0.410, since additional  procedures are necessary.
      The steps in the evaluational procedure  follow.   Use information  from
part  C  of Table 1 and record in Table 20.

V.A.I  Procedure Steps

Step  1

      Record the number of Priority I  pollutants in each AQCR in the space  for
each  AQCR in Table 20.

Step  2

      Multiply  the  values for  strip  charts by  the appropriate weight, and
record  the results  in  the spaces on the line  for r.

Step  3

      Record the values for digital acquisition system at each station.   Multi-
ply the values times the weight in the left column, and record those results
in the spaces on the line for r.

                                      57

-------
                         TABLE  20.  EVALUATION OF CONTINUOUS SENSOR RECORDING PROCEDURES
in
oo
                                                                         AQCR
                                          12           3            4           5            6
                                       No.Prior.I   No.Prior.I   No.Prior.I  No.Prior.I  No.Prior.I   No.Prior.I
                                       pollutant	 pollutant	  pollutant	pollutant	pollutant	 pollutant.
wt.
1 or
0.410
0.327
0.263
Procedure Value Value Value Value Value Value
Strip Charts 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.
r
Digital Acquis.
at Each Station
r
Telemetry
r
         0.327   Digital Acquis. and
                 Data Processing at
                 Headquarters	
         0.263   Only Data Processing
                 at Headquarters
                 R =

-------
Step 4

     Record the values for telemetry.  Multiply those by the weight and record
the results in the spaces on the line for r.

Step 5

     Record the value for digital acquisition system at Headquarters.  Multiply
that value by the weight and record the result in the spaces for r.

Step 6

     Sum the values for r in each AQCR, and record those values in the spaces
for RJL.  The value of R^ is the rating for each AQCR, for recording procedures
used.  The perfect value for each R. is 1.
     Sum the values of Ri and divide by the number of AQCRs evaluated, to
obtain the value of R, and record the result, the network Rating for the ele-
ment Continuous Sensor Recording Procedures.  The perfect Rating is 1.
                                      59

-------
V.B  RATING OF USE OF STATION OPERATOR TIME
In this element, an estimate is made of the use of station operator time
based on the assumption that operators are not responsible for major main-
tenance and major calibration of sensors.  The procedures of this evalua-
tion follow as Steps, in which data from part C of Table 1 are recorded
in Table 21, and calculations are made.
V.B.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     On the first line of Table 21, record the number of continuous sensors
in each AQCR.

Step 2

     On the second line, record the number of station operators if continuous
sensors are visited daily; record the number of operators multiplied by 2 if
the sensors are visited every other day.

Step 3

     Record the values of Step 1 divided by Step 2.  In the spaces for rj,
record the product of value for each AQCR times the weight listed in the
first column of the Table.

Step 4

     Record the number of manual sensors in each AQCR.

Step 5

     Record the number of station operators multiplied by 5 if manual sensors
are checked once a week; record the number of operators multiplied by 2.5 if
manual sensors are checked twice a week.

Step 6

     Record the values of Step 4 divided by Step 5.  In the spaces for r2>
record the product of value for each AQCR times the weight listed in the first
column.

Step 7

     Record the average miles/day traveled by operators visiting stations in
each AQCR.  In the spaces for rj record the product of Step 7 and the weight
in the first column of the Table.

Step 8

     Sum the values of r and record the sum for each AQCR in the space in-
dicated.
                                      60

-------
       TABLE 21.  EVALUATION OF STATION OPERATOR TIME

Weight Factor
1. No. Continuous Sensors
2. No. Station Operators
0.38 3. Value
rl
4. No. Manual Sensors
5. No. Station Operators
0.16 6. Value
r2
0.03 7. Average Miles/Day
r3
rl + r2 + r3

Rj

R =

1
















2















AQCR
3
















4
















5
















6















  ac .5
Figure 10.  Rating for efficiency of use of station operator time
                               6]

-------
Step 9

     On Figure 10, find the value of sum r on the horizontal axis and determine
the value of R on the vertical axis.  Record that value in Table 21 in the
space for R^ for each AQCR.  If each value of each R. is 1, the station opera-
tion time is being used very efficiently.

Step 10

     Sum the values of R^, divide by the number of AQCRs, and record that value
as R, the Rating for the element.
                                      62

-------
V.C  AREA EVALUATION
     Multiply the value of R in Table 20 by 0.50 =
     Multiply the value of R in Table 21 by 0.50 =

                           Area Evaluation = Sum -
     The perfect area evaluation is 1.  If the value is less than 1,  the
values, expressed as a percent, define how close the two elements are
to perfect effectiveness.
                                     63

-------
                                  SECTION VI

                   EVALUATION OF AREA OF QUALITY ASSURANCE
In this area, many aspects of quality control that affect quality assur-
ance are evaluated.  The area is divided into two major parts composed of
several elements each.  The first part considers controls on field instru-
ments and measurements, the second part controls on laboratory instruments
and measurements.  The information needed should all be in the sections
of Table 1, as referenced, and the Ratings and the area evaluation can be
completed rapidly.  General procedures rather than the specific details
are considered to avoid an extremely lengthy period of information-
gathering for Table 1.  The perfect Rating for any element is 1, and the
perfect area evaluation is also 1.
VI.A  RATINGS FOR CONTROLS ON FIELD INSTRUMENTS AND MEASUREMENTS
Information to rate the elements of Field Instrument Calibration and Field
Instrument Maintenance (on only four requirements each) is contained in the
sections of Table 1 and is referenced in the first column of Table 22, for
each item considered.  The response in Table 1  (expressed as a decimal frac-
tion) that indicates the percent conformance with requirements is the value
of each item.  The value of each item multiplied by the listed weight pro-
vides the score for that item.  The sum of the  scores within an element is
the Rating for the element.
VI.A.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     In Table 22, determine the value of the first item in the first element,
Field Instrument Calibration, by reference to Section E.S.a of Table 1.  In
that tabulation, if the manufacturer's recommendations were used for frequen-
cy of instrument calibration of all instruments, the value of the item is 1.
If they were used for only a fraction of the instruments, the value of the
item is that fraction, expressed as a decimal.  The value of the item, Docu-
mentation of Calibration Results, is determined in the same way, as is the
value for Use of Documentation to Modify the Schedule.  The value for Use of
Approved Techniques will be 1 if all the procedures are those specified in
CFR Title 40, Part 50, 1971, amended 1975b, and CFR Title 40, Part 53, 1975,
or in U.S. EPA, 1971, or in Jutze, 1973, and if the equipment used is approved.
If only a portion of the methods is as specified, the value of the item is
that portion expressed as a decimal.
                                     64

-------
     TABLE 22.  RATINGS FOR CONTROLS ON FIELD INSTRUMENTS AND MEASUREMENTS

Each element Rating is the sum of the scores of the items within the element.
Each score is the value of the item, multiplied by the indicated weight.   The
column labeled "Table 1 source" references the section of Table 1 providing
information on the item value.  Convert all percentages to decimal fractions
before entering in the value column.
Table 1
source
                      Item
Value x Weight = Score
Element
rating
         1.  Field Instrument Calibration

E.S.a.       Use of Mfr. Frequency
              Recommendation
E.S.a.       Documentation of Calibration
              Results
E.S.a.       Use of Documentation to
              Modify Schedule
E.S.a.       Use of Approved Techniques
         2.  Field Instrument Maintenance

E.S.d.       Use of Mfr. Recommendations
E.S.d.       Documentation of Maintenance
E.S.d.       Use of Documentation to
              Modify Schedule
E.S.d.       Use of Approved Techniques
         3.  Controls of Field Measurements

E.S.c.       Validation and Documentation
              of Secondary Standards
E.9.         Use of Statistical Control
              Charts
C.2.         Maintenance of Log Books
C.6.         Documentation of Down Times
              (sum for all AQCRs)
E.S.d.       Preventative Maintenance
      x 0.188  --

        0.287

        0.237
        0.288

  Sum of Scores
        0.204
        0.277

        0.242
        0.277

  Sum of Scores
        0.193

        0.172
        0.239

        0.168
        0.228

  Sum of Scores
                                                                  = R =
                                                                  = R =
                                                                  = R =
                                      65

-------
Step 2

     Rating of the element of Field Instrument Maintenance is performed in the
same way, using the referenced sections of Table 1.

Step 3

     Rating of the third element, Controls on Field Measurement System, is
performed similarly.  If items are not documented, the value is 0.
                                      66

-------
VLB  RATINGS FOR CONTROLS ON LABORATORY INSTRUMENTS AND MEASUREMENTS
Information to Rate the three elements considered in Controls on Laboratory
Instruments and Measurements is in Table 1.  Table 23 is provided for the
calculations, which are similar to those in Table 22, and the first column
references the location of the information in Table 1.
VI.B.I  Procedure Steps

Step 1

     The Rating of Laboratory Instrument Calibration in Table 23 is based
on the sum of the group of four items, information for which is all in
part E.6 of Table 1.  As in the previous evaluations, the value of each item
is 1 if the requirement is met for every instrument, or the decimal fraction
of l equal to the portion of instruments for which the item is used.
     Values of items in the next element, Factors Affecting Laboratory Sup-
plies, depend on the following:  the percent of the time that standard
procedures are used in the handling and storage of chemicals, reagents, and
gases; the percent of standard chemicals and gases for which values are
validated; the maintenance of an inventory of supplies (value is 1 if yes,
0 if no); and whether the quality of purchased supplies is checked (value
is 1 if yes, 0 if no).  All the needed information should be in the refer-
enced sections of Table 1.
     Values of items in the element, Controls on Laboratory Measurements,
depend on answers in the referenced sections of Table 1.  The value of the
first item depends on whether the analytical methods used are referenced in
CFR Title 40, Part 50, 1971, amended 1975b, and CFR Title 40, Part 53, 1975.
If all methods are referenced, the value is 1; otherwise, the value is the
decimal fraction representing the portions of the methods that are referenced.
If there is scheduled participation in interlaboratory testing, the value of
the item is 1, if not, the value is 0.  If there are check list controls on
the electrical service, the value is 1, if not the value is 0.  If 10 percent
or more of all samples undergo replicate analysis, the value is 1.  If the
percentage is less, the value is the decimal fraction equal to the actual
percentage divided by 10 percent.
                                       67

-------
                 TABLE 23.  RATINGS FOR CONTROLS ON LABORATORY
                            INSTRUMENTS AND MEASUREMENTS

Each element rating is the sum of the scores of the items within the element.
Each score is the value of the item multiplied by the indicated weight.  The
column  labeled "Table 1 source" references the section of Table 1 providing
information on the item value.  Convert all percentages to decimal fractions
before  entering in the Value column.
Table 1
source
Item
Value x Weight = Score
Element
rating
          1.  Laboratory Instrument
              Calibrations

E.6.J.        Frequency as Mfr. Recommends
E.6.J.        Documentation of Calibration
               Results
E.6.k.        Use of Documentation to
               Modify Schedule
E.6.1.        Use of Approved Techniques
          2.  Factors Affecting Laboratory
              Supplies

E.6.c.§ d.    Handling Procedures
E.6.c.§ d.    Storage Procedures
E.6.e.        Validation of Chemical and
               Gas Standards
E.6.h.        Maintenance of Inventory
E.6.i.        Check Quality of Purchased
               Supplies
          3.  Controls on Laboratory
              Measurement

E.7.a.        Use of Approved Techniques
E.7.b.        Use of Statistical Control
              Chart Techniques
E.7.c.        Interlaboratory Testing
E.7.d.        Validation of Data
E.6.b.        Controls on Electrical Service
E.7.e.        Replication
                              x 0.200   =

                                0.281

                                0.237
                                0.282
                                                Sum of Scores = R =
                                0.188
                                0.186

                                0.241
                                0.161

                                0.224
                                                Sum of Scores = R =
                               0.193

                               0.115
                               0.192
                               0.192
                               0.154
                               0.154
                                                Sum of Scores =  R =
                                     68

-------
VI.C.  EVALUATION OF THE AREA
In Table 24, record the values of the products of the Rating for each ele-
ment of this area and the weight listed for that element.  The sun of the
products determines the area evaluation.
                TABLE 24.  AREA OF QUALITY ASSURANCE EVALUATION
Source
table
22
22
22
23
23
23
Element
Field Instrument Calibration
Field Instrument Maintenance
Controls on Field Measurement
Laboratory Instrument
Calibration
Factors Affecting Lab Supplies
Controls on Lab Measurements
Rating x Weight = Rel. E.
x 0.212 =
0.152
0.172
0.186
0.116
0.162
                                    E « Area Evaluation « Sum «
                                    69

-------
                                  SECTION VII

                    EVALUATION OF AREA OF DATA UTILIZATION
In this area, the utilization and distribution of monitored data are exam-
ined.  Information to allow evaluation of the four elements of the area
should be found in parts C and D of Table 1, and Table 25 is provided for
the evaluation of each item and element.
1.   The score for each item in each of elements A, B, C, and D of this area
     is the value of the item multiplied by its weight.  The value of each
     item depends on the responses to the questions in part D, Table 1. If
     the response is yes, the value is 1; if the response is no, the value is
     zero.  Weights for the items of elements A, B, and C are given in Table
     25.  Weights for the items of element D, Timely Preparation of Data
     Summaries, are determined from Fig. 11, which contains two figures, one
     for monthly summaries and one for quarterly summaries.  Note that the
     time of summary release should be earlier if computerized analysis is
     available.  The availability of computerized analysis is indicated in
     part C, of Table 1.  If Headquarters digital acquisition has been
     checked in part C of Table 1, then use the computer analysis "curves"
     to determine the weights.  If not, use the manual data reduction "curves"
     to determine the weights.

2.   The Rating for each element is the sum of the scores, as indicated in
     Table 25, and the area evaluation is the sum of the Ratings for each
     element, divided by 4.

                                _ Sum of R's _
                              C ™ «^^^^—»^™^*«»^^ _          t
                                      70

-------
                    TABLE 25.  RATINGS FOR DATA UTILIZATION
Table 1
source
             Item
Value x Weight = Score
Element
rating
l.D.

l.D.
l.D,

l.D,
l.D.
l.D.
and
I.C.I.
A.  Public Information

    Daily release of air quality
     information to public media
    Publication of air quality
     reports for release to public
     x  0.5

        0.5

 Sum of Scores
                                                         = R
B.  Forecasting and Modeling

    Use of data to validate or
     calibrate an air model
    Use of data to predict trends
C.  Maintenance of Air Quality

    Use of data to evaluate air
     quality and detect changes
D.  Timely Publication of Data
     Summaries

    Preparation of quarterly
     data summaries and
     monthly data summaries
        0.625
        0.375    _

 Sum of Scores = R
                                                  1.

                                           Sum of Scores
                                                = R
                                           Sum of Scores
                                                         = R =
            NO. OF DAYS                             "". ur

               Figure 11.   Days between end of period and  summary release
                                      71

-------
                                 SECTION VIII

                           OVERALL AREA EVALUATIONS
To determine an evaluation for the network for all the areas examined,
multiply the area evaluation determined at the end of each Section by the
weight listed in Table 26.  The sum of these products is the overall Net-
work Evaluation.  Each product represents a Relative Evaluation.  The
closer each Relative Evaluation is to the listed weight, the closer the
area effectiveness, with respect to overall operations, is to optimum, in
the opinion of the Survey Letter responses.
                         TABLE 26.  NETWORK EVALUATION
AREA                            Area Evaluation x Weight = Relative Evaluation
I.   Plan and Design                            x  0.182

II.  Personnel                                     0.165

III. Facilities and Equipment                      0.167

IV.  Sampling and Analysis                         0.173

V.   Quality Assurance                             0.182

VI.  Data Utilization                              0.131
                      Network Evaluation = Sum of Scores =
     The value of 1 represents a perfect score, for each area and for the
network; i.e., the network is operating at 100 percent effectiveness.  Where
a value is less than 1, the cause of lack of effectiveness should be examined
for improvement.
                                     72

-------
                                  SECTION IX

              EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL SERVICES BUDGET ALLOCATION


 IX.A   BUDGET ALLOCATION RATING DETERMINATION

 IX.A.I  Procedure Steps

 Step  1

      Record the budget allocation to Engineering-
 Enforcement listed in part A of Table 1.              	
Step 2

     Record the budget allocation to Technical
Services, listed in part A of Table 1.	

Step 5

     Divide Step 2 by Step 1.                         	

Step 4

     Record the budget allocation to Technical
Services Personnel, listed in part A of Table 1.      	      ^

Step 5

     Divide Step 4 by Step 2.                         	

Step 6

     Locate in Figure 12 the value of the intersection of Step 3 along the
horizontal axis and the value of Step 5 along the vertical axis.  If the  point
lies in the shaded region,  follow the procedures of Step 6.a;  if the point
lies below the shaded region, follow the procedure of Step 6.b.; if the point
lies above the shaded region, follow the procedures of Step 6.c.

     a.   If the point lies in the shaded region, enter the value 1.0 in
          Step 7.

     b.   Determine the vertical axis value of a point on curve A immediately
          above the calculated point.   In the lower half of Figure 13 find the
          r* curve closest  to this vertical axis value.   On this r* curve,
          locate the value  determined in Step 5 along the horizontal axis.


                                     73

-------
1UU
m
pj
m. -

Ss,
H
tn iSi

*T" " ^ ^



fj 80 "«';' *
2

o
tN
SERVICES Bl
0
C1
m
-3 60 -
r-
O
n

m so
o
H
o



cn 40 -


-«^
m
r-
3oLLL
0
•





;' !? ;»
• cj £ j

U i i *. •'•" ^
'' £• ''• ' ""• ;i
* '-•-' •"-•-' •.'-"• '•-•• '•
V ^ .-• •'•:• '•'.' :•
A ^ i i*: 2 ;


-i*iba:
	









.-




-







' ii "^ >.

• -".
•;' • _»
' .'•;. '•:• '•.•"•
• t ^^


|| ||
	























1 -w
-
•
' .'-.



•^-_
















-


; :





'





1 	 -=-

























j





1
-^^


























--


•-

































,














1.












' >


















s













































-^


-^































-





























































'•-

'< ^



















•









5

•.








-




















^_




•




























--_


-



























; i
•^-i.


i













-












•


















.

















8



















"





























•













































-


_

























-














'































i

















-


























.



-
-
-































|


-






















'

'



|l
"** i















_




— — —
- - H


~





V??
*
*i •.'-;:
, _
. , ,

_

-
!
_ _ —



-


-_.._._ I
. —


	 -
- —
• -~ ~ • • • - • ~ •
----------


. . ..

-



iPiiiiiM^;?L ^::-
^•'^t^^^^^^^^^-^^^r ^-^^rt^^^.^^,
5 ••'


_
- - - - . .
- ---.-..--.
.
- - _ .
	


- -
. ~ x : J_
5
TMHIM T1
I





- -





C JCCJL!

I
... / 	 j .;.. .
"^TTT^T^r"^""^ |k^r4~~ ™™w«™-,, 'x ~ *
.'•: ..; •-- ,-•' •; ; -:- ••/ 'T ? -.'• - ^T ••• ? -: -• . - ; . ,
~ ** ^ - ^ ^ ^ "^ TI '•' ^ "'' ~~ "*" * " ^" "^ "^ "" '" ""' """ "^
?§^|^|^||i^iHi . . „
"• ^ :.' :: ': ' ' •> T y: '"•" T7 ,' "^

K s ^ ^. ^^"^^j":;
*s *Tir-7^t
^! •
"^ s
.._„..

,

2.0 9
 TECHNICAL SERVICES BUDGET ENFORCEMENT AND ENGINEERING (STEP 6)




Figure 12.  Determination of technical services budget allocation

-------
          Then read the Budget Allocation Rating for this point on the vertical
          axis.  Record this Budget Allocation Rating in Step 7.

     c.   Determine the vertical axis value of a point on curve B immediately
          below the calculated point.  In the upper half of Figure 13 find
          the r* curve closest to this vertical axis value.  On this r* curve,
          locate the value determined in Step 5 along the horizontal axis.
          Then read the Budget Allocation Rating for this point on the vertical
          axis.  Record the Budget Allocation Rating in Step 7.

Step 7

     The value determined in Step 6 is the evaluation
of the Technical Services Budget Allocation.	
                                     75

-------
:. ,
,-,
O
y
5
, i
i •
u
     l.Or
                               45.
     .80
    .60
                                 \   i\   \   V
                              .\    \.
\   \   X
                  v,   \ '  , \  ±tl
                  V   V    \.   \
                                           \   r\
     \  i\
     .40
    .20
     .80
     .60
     .40
    .20
              S
                    \   \
                     \, , \
                  y '/ i ' \A \f
                               i\.-i i At
                               :V : :\
                           M  '\,
                                      \   \l
           •V--V
                                             _u L i  L        ---
                                         , : ,N i \   \   \   \i   \j ;  \

                                        \!J\i'i\   V  \;  i.  \i
                                                            i   -
                                               -X	AT
                            -rr
                                 /Ml/
                                             \1—,\
                                       ' V '\ '
                                     H' '\ .  \
                                                             '
                                                        h  \  \
                                       \'\. :\
                                    '/r/>rx:  I
                                         '  7=2
           ^  ,  ,
           \ i \i
                                                 ' /',
                                                    '
         fflra
                                     IX;
                  rzn
                l!)
                          20
                                                        iO
                                     '0
    PERCENT ALLOCATION  OF TECHNICAL SERVICES BUDGET TO PERSONNEL CSTEP  6)


                Figure 13.  Personnel budget  allocation rating
                                     76

-------
                                 SECTION X

                                REFERENCES
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

     Title 40, Part 51.17, "Air Quality Surveillance," November 25, 1971,
     including amendments through February 18, 1975a.

     Title 40, Part 53, "Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent
     Methods," February 18, 1975, with changes of April 25, 1975.

     Title 40, Part 50, "National Primary and Secondary Air Quality
     Standards," November 25,  1971, including amendments through
     February 18, 1975b.

Jutze, George A., et al., Quality Control Practices in Processing Air
     Pollution Samples, Office of Air Programs Publication No. APTD-1132,
     EPA, Research Triangle Park, N.C., March 1973.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
     Field Operations Guide for Automatic Air Monitoring Equipment, Office
     of Air Programs Publication No. APTD-0736, EPA, Research Triangle
     Park, N.C., November 1971.

     Guidance for Air Quality Monitoring Network Design and Instrument
     Siting, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and the
     Quality Assurance and Environmental Monitoring Laboratory Publica-
     tion OAQPS No. 1.2-012, Research Triangle Park, N.C., January 1974.

     Guidelines for Technical  Services of a State Air Pollution Control
     Agency, Office of Air Programs Publication No. APTD-1347, Research
     Triangle Park, N.C., November 1972.
                                     77

-------
                                   APPENDIX  A


                  CONVERSION FROM NON-METRIC UNITS  TO  SI*  UNITS
Non-Si unit
length
ft.
in.
mi.
x Conversion factor

0.3048
2.54 x 10"2
1.609 x 103
SI

m
m
m
unit




          area
sq. ft.

sq. mi.
velocity
•z
ft. /min.
mi . /day
0.09290
6
2.590 x 10


0.02832
1.609 x 103
m
2
m

•z
m°/60 s
m/24 h
          international System of Units



According to the Metric Practice Guide and Style Manual, published in 1975
by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, the use of standard
atmosphere has been authorized, for a limited time.  The SI definition is:

                                                                   2
     1 standard atmosphere = 101,325 newtons per square metre, (N/m ).
                                     78

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                             (Please read Iiim-ucrioiis on the reverse before completing!
 1. REPORT NO.

   EPA-600/4-76-043
                              2.
             3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
 4. TITLE ANDSUBTITLE

   PROCEDURES FOR  EVALUATING OPERATIONS OF  AMBIENT
   AIR MONITORING  NETWORKS - A Manual
             5. REPORT DATE

               August  1976
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 7. AUTHOR(S)

  R.  W.  Shnider and  E.  S.  Shapiro
             8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  URS Research Company
  155 Bovet Road
  San Mateo, California  94402
              10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                 IHD 620
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                 68-03-0473
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
   Environmental Monitoring  and Support Laboratory
   Office of Research and  Development
   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
   Las Vegas, Nevada 89114	
              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                 Procedures manual
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                 EPA-ORD
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 16. ABSTRACT
   This manual  is  designed to evaluate  the efficiency of ambient  air monitoring
   networks whose  primary objective  is  to document compliance with or progress
   toward attaining ambient air quality standards.  The manual provides methods
   to evaluate  the efficiency of each of six operational areas:   Network Plan and
   Design, Personnel Qualifications, Facilities and Equipment, Sampling and Analysis,
   Quality Assurance,  and Data Utilization.  A technique is presented for the overall
   integrated evaluation of the operational areas.  A final section provides methods
   to evaluate  the efficiency of budgetary allocations.
 7.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.  COSATI Field/Group
  Air Pollution
  Pollution Site Surveys
  Systems Evaluation
  Mathematical Models
  Systems Analysis
 Air Monitoring Networks
 Air Quality Monitoring
 Monitoring Sites
  05H
  13B
  14A
 8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

  RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)

 UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES

     90
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)

                                               UNCLASSIFIED
                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                 O 692-224-1BI0

-------