United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EPA-450/4-80-03?
December 1980
Air
-------
NAMS NETWORK
PROCEDURAL MANUAL
by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
Contract No. 68-02-3013
Task No. 6
PN 3366-F
Project Officer
Thomas J. Sharpe
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
Monitoring and Reports Branch
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
MONITORING AND DATA ANALYSIS DIVISION
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711
December 1980
-------
This report hsis been reviewed by the Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
Of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products is not intended to constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use. Copies of this report are available through
the Library Services Office (MD-35), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, or from National Technical Information
Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA, 22161.
Publication No. EPA-450/4-80-037
ii
-------
CONTENTS
Figures 1V
Tables Y
Abbreviations yi
Acknowledgment vii
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Objectives of the National Air Monitoring
Stations 1
1.2 Summary 2
2. Air Monitoring Regulations and Guidelines 4
2.1 Network establishment 5
2.2 Network design 6
2.3 Monitoring instruments 11
2.4 Probe siting 14
2.5 Reporting requirements 18
2.6 Quality assurance 21
3. NAMS Data and Information Flow and Uses 26
3.1 Data and information flow 26
3.1.1 Air quality data 28
3.1.2 Monitoring site information 32
3.1.3 Quality assurance data 35
3.2 Data uses 37
4. Step-by-Step Procedures 39
4.1 Regional offices 39
4.1.1 Active responsibilities 39
4.1.2 Passive responsibilities 73
4.2 Headquarters 74
4.2.1 Active responsibilities 75
4.2.2 Passive responsibilities 86
4.3 National Air Data Branch 87
4.3.1 Active responsibilities 87
4.3.2 Passive responsibilities 94
References 95
111
-------
FIGURES
Number
3-1 Overall Flow of NAMS Data 27
3-2 Air Quality Data Flow 29
3-3 Site Information Flow 33
3-4 Quality Assurance Data Flow 36
4-1 Data Flow in State and Local Agencies Before
Regional Office Entry 42
4-2 Specific Tasks of EPA Regional Office 43
4-3 Sample of SAROAD Control Log Form 44
4-4 Sample of SAROAD Site Identification Form 51
4-5 Sample of Precision and Accuracy Data Form 66
4-6 Tasks Performed by MRB/MDAD 78
4-7 Tasks Performed by NADB 89
IV
-------
TABLES
Number Page
2-1 Guidelines for TSP and S02 NAMS Network Size 7
2-2 Minimum Distance Required Between a Neighborhood
Scale CO Station and the Edge of the Nearest
Traffic Lane 16
2-3 Minimum Distance Required Between a Neighborhood
or Urban Scale 03 or N02 Station and the Edge
of the Nearest Traffic Lane 18
4-1 Active Responsibilities of the Regional Office
NAMS Coordinator 40
4-2 Active Responsibilities of the Headquarters
NAMS Coordinator 76
4-3 Active Responsibilities of the Chief, Monitoring
Section 77
4-4 Active Responsibilities of the National Air
Data Branch NAMS Coordinator 88
-------
ABBREVIATIONS
AQ Air quality
CMS Chief, Monitoring Section
EMSL Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
HQNC Headquarters NAMS Coordinator
MDAD Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
MIS Management Information System
MRB Monitoring and Reports Branch
NADB National Air Data Branch
NADBNC National Air Data Branch NAMS Coordinator
NAMS National Air Monitoring Stations
NHCI NAMS Hard Copy Information
P&A Precision and accuracy
QA Quality assurance
RONC Regional Office NAMS Coordinator
ROQAC Regional Office Quality Assurance Coordinator
SAROAD Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data
SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring Stations
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This report was prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Monitoring and Data Analysis Division,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, by PEDCo Environmental,
Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio.
The project was directed by Mr. Charles Zimmer and managed
by Mr. Edwin Pfetzing. Ms. Catherine Jarvis and Mr. Douglas Orf
also worked on the project. Principal authors were Ms. Jarvis
and Mr. Pfetzing.
Mr. Thomas J. Sharpe was the Project Officer for the U.S.
EPA, and the authors appreciate his cooperation.
VI1
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
With the promulgation of new monitoring regulations in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Part 58, X the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established a plan for
obtaining reliable ambient air quality data on a timely basis
throughout the Nation. This plan requires a network of National
Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS). These regulations cover the
components of data collection and reporting for State and local
air pollution control agencies and are external to EPA. The
purpose of this report is to provide procedures for NAMS work
that is internal to EPA.
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE NATIONAL AIR MONITORING STATIONS
The primary objective of NAMS is to monitor areas where pol-
lutant concentration and population exposure are expected to be
highest. Thus, NAMS will be located in areas of expected maximum
concentration and in areas that combine high population density
with poor air quality (although they are not necessarily areas of
expected maximum concentration).
The aim of NAMS is not to monitor every area where National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are violated, but rather to
-------
provide a representative sample of the worst conditions and ex-
posures. This sample can be used to assess trends and form
national policy decisions.
Estimates indicate that the United States will need 600 to
700 NAMS for total suspended particulates (TSP), 200 to 300 NAMS
for sulfur dioxide (SO ), and fewer than 200 NAMS each for carbon
monoxide (CO), ozone (O ), and nitrogen dioxide (N02). Because
they will be a subset of the State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations (SLAMS), the NAMS must meet all the requirements for
SLAMS contained in 40 CFR 58. Also, NAMS are subject to the
additional data reporting and monitoring methodology requirements
contained in Subpart D of 40 CFR 58.
1.2 SUMMARY
This manual presents procedures that are to be followed in
the handling of NAMS data by EPA personnel. Section 2 summarizes
the regulations and guidelines for the collection and transmittal
of NAMS data. Primary references for the information are given
so that the user can find more complete explanations, if neces-
sary.
Section 3 describes the flow of data from collection through
entry into the data bank of the National Air Data Branch (NADB).
Three types of data are discussed: air quality data, quality
assurance data, and site information. The flow of air quality
data includes normal checks required for Storage and Retrieval of
Aerometric Data (SAROAD) and additional checks required by 40 CFR
58. Air quality data go from state and local agencies through
2
-------
the SAROAD contact to the NADB; the Regional Office NAMS
Coordinator (RONC) and Headquarters NAMS Coordinator (HQNC) have
access to, but do not directly handle, the data.
Quality assurance data go from state and local agencies to
the Regional Office Quality Assurance Coordinator (ROQAC) with
a copy to the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
(EMSL) at Research Triangle Park (RTF), North Carolina. The NADB,
RONC, and HQNC have access to, but do not directly handle, the
data. Quality assurance data are checked for completeness,
representativeness, precision, accuracy, comparability, and
traceability by the ROQAC.
Site information goes from state and local agencies and the
Regional Office through the RONC and Regional Office SAROAD
contact to the NADB and HCNC. Site information is separately
handled by SAROAD site identification, the Management Information
System (MIS), and NAMS Hard Copy Information (NHCI).
Section 3 also details the uses of NAMS air quality data.
These uses require that the data be complete and timely.
Section 4 presents step-by-step procedures for NAMS data
handling in the Regional Office and at the NADB and at Head-
quarters. The section describes active responsibilities (i.e.,
actions that must be performed) and passive responsibility in-
formation (i.e., background knowledge required for proper per-
formance of duties).
-------
SECTION 2
AIR MONITORING REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES
The authority to establish National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for various pollutants was contained in the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970. Responsibility for controlling
and preventing air pollution was delegated to state and local
governments. Furthermore, the Clean Air Act required that the
states adopt State Implementation Plans to facilitate attainment
and maintenance of NAAQS. The establishment of an extensive
network for monitoring air quality was necessary to determine
whether the NAAQS were being attained and maintained.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 required that the EPA
establish monitoring criteria to be followed uniformly on a
nationwide basis. Complying with the 1977 Amendments and follow-
ing the recommendations of the Standing Air Monitoring Work
Group, the EPA promulgated ambient air monitoring regulations
under 40 CFR 58.1
As defined in 40 CFR 58, all National Air Monitoring Sta-
tions (NAMS) are also State and Local Air Monitor-ing Stations
(SLAMS); thus, all SLAMS criteria apply to NAMS. The NAMS, how-
ever, are subject to additional requirements. This section dis-
cusses monitoring criteria for all criteria pollutants, including
-------
lead, as they pertain to network establishment, network design,
monitoring instruments, probe siting, reporting requirements, and
quality assurance.
2.1 NETWORK ESTABLISHMENT
Section 58.20 of 40 CFR 58 required each state to submit a
revised implementation plan to the Regional Administrator by
January 1, 1980. Each plan was to provide for (1) the measure-
ment of ambient concentrations of TSP, S02, CO, 03, NO2, and lead
by establishment and operation of a sampling network; (2) meeting
the Part 58 requirements pertaining to quality assurance, network
design, monitoring methodology, and probe siting criteria; (3)
the operation of at least one monitor per pollutant during any
stage of an air pollution episode; (4) an annual review of the
monitoring system; and (5) a sampling network description that is
available for public inspection and has been submitted to the
Regional Administrator for his approval.
The network description must include the SAROAD site identi-
fication form for existing stations, proposed location of sched-
uled stations, identity of urban areas represented, sampling and
analysis methods, operating schedule, monitoring objectives, and
spatial scale. Also included should be a schedule for submitting
a SAROAD site identification form and implementing quality assur-
ance procedures for sites not in operation at the time of sub-
mi ttal.
The EPA has set a deadline of January 1, 1981, for the
operation of all NAMS in appropriate locations per SAROAD site
-------
identification forms and the implementation of quality assurance
requirements.
2.2 NETWORK DESIGN
Specific monitoring objectives and physical dimensions of
air parcels to be monitored are defined for NAMS. The SLAMS are
designed to determine the highest concentrations in the network,
representative concentrations in areas of highest population
density, impact of significant sources on air quality, and general
background levels of pollution. The primary objective of NAMS is
to monitor areas of maximum pollutant concentration and maximum
population density, especially urban and multisource areas.
Thus, two categories of NAMS are needed: those where pollutant
concentration is worst (without being unduly influenced by a
single source) and those where both poor air quality and high
population density are found. In urban areas requiring NAMS, the
two categories must be incorporated. If only one monitoring
station is needed for TSP and SO-, the maximum pollutant concen-
tration area must be monitored.
The NAMS have been designed to provide data for national
policy analyses and trends. The aim is not to monitor every area
where NAAQS have been violated. Site selection requires back-
ground information, which must be obtained primarily from emis-
sion inventories and past dispersion modeling.
Table 2-1 indicates the number of permanent TSP and SO2
stations necessary for areas with different populations. As
-------
TABLE 2-1. GUIDELINES FOR TSP AND SOz NAMS NETWORK SIZE
(approximate number of stations per area)a
Population of area
High (>500,000 persons)
Medium (100,000-500,000 persons)
Low (50,000-100,000 persons)
Pollutant concentration
Highb
6-8
4-6
2-4
Medium0
4-6
2-4
1-2
Lowd
0-2
0-2
0
a Actual number and location of stations are determined by EPA and state
agency.
b TSP: 20 percent or more >primary NAAQS.
SQ2- >primary NAAQS.
c TSP: secondary NAAQS.
S02: ^.secondary NAAQS or >60 percent of primary NAAQS.
d TSP:
-------
evidenced by the ranges in the number of stations, some flexi-
bility is necessary because specific sources of emissions and
local control efforts can vary across the country. Where more
than one station is required, both categories of NAMS should be
used. The specific number and location of NAMS are determined by
EPA Regional Offices and state agencies and approved by EPA
Headquarters.
Local factors affecting the actual number of monitors needed
in a specific area are meteorology, topography, urban and re-
gional air quality gradients, and the potential for air quality
improvement or degradation. Normally, greatest monitor density
would be in the northeastern portion of the United States because
of high population density and pollutant concentrations. The
worst air quality in an area should be used to determine the
number of NAMS for TSP and SO2. Nationally, there should be more
than twice as many TSP stations as S02 stations because urban
areas with high TSP levels outnumber those with high S02 levels;
whereas S02 is primarily emitted from a few point sources, TSP is
generated from a large number of point and area sources, many
fugitive in nature.
The neighborhood spatial scale is required for TSP and S02
NAMS monitoring. This scale represents a reasonably homogeneous
urban subregion of fairly uniform shape with dimensions of a few
kilometers. Homogeneity refers to the pollutant concentration as
well as the land use and surface characteristics.
-------
Nationally, fewer NAMS are required for CO than for TSP and
SO-. The CO monitors are principally needed to assess the over-
all air quality progress resulting from the Federal Motor Vehicle
Control Program. Sometimes as few as two monitors are needed for
a major urban area (generally an area with more than 500,000
persons).
The areas requiring CO NAMS are those with peak concentra-
tion such as heavily travelled downtown streets (microscale) and
those with significant population exposure (neighborhood scale).
A peak concentration monitor (microscale) should represent
several similar source configurations in an urban area to which
the general population has access. A neighborhood scale station
should be located in an area with a stable, high population
density and high traffic density.
Plans for future growth should be investigated so that
zoning changes and new highways or shopping centers do not inter-
fere with monitoring selection criteria. The NAMS should indi-
cate the overall effect of CO emissions from significant sources,
but should not be unduly influenced by a particular line source.
Lead monitoring requires a minimum of two urban stations to
obtain data once every six days, so that data are gathered for
each day of the week twice in each quarter. The Regional Admini-
strator may require the use of additional monitors to determine
whether ambient air quality standards are being attained and
maintained. The purpose of these NAMS is to measure pollutant
-------
concentrations in areas where persons, especially children, are
exposed to maximum lead concentration from automobiles and to
determine the effect on air quality of the Federal program for
reducing lead in gasoline.
Roadway (microscale) and neighborhood stations are required
for NAMS monitoring of lead. A roadway station must be adjacent
to a major roadway with an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of
at least 30,000 vehicles; in areas where there are no roadways
exceeding 30,000 ADT, the station should be located near the
roadway with the largest traffic volume. The neighborhood sta-
tion must be in an area of high traffic density and high popula-
tion density.
Ozone NAMS are required in urban areas with populations
greater than 200,000. Ozone is not directly emitted, but results
from complex photochemical reactions of organic compounds and ni-
trogen oxides in the presence of solar radiation. Major sources
of hydrocarbons tend to be far from areas of high 03 concentration.
Because hydrocarbon emissions come from very diverse mobile and
stationary sources, both local and national control strategies
are used. Thus, more sampling stations are needed for O^ than
for CO.
Each urban area will generally require two 03 NAMS: one in
the urban scale, the other in the neighborhood scale. The urban
station should monitor maximum concentrations downwind from the
highest purcursor concentration and provide information concerning
trends in the overall area. The neighborhood station should
10
-------
indicate O3 levels in an area of high population density on the
fringes of the downtown along the predominant summer/fall daytime
wind direction.
Because NO2 is primarily formed in the atmosphere from the
oxidation of nitrous oxide (NO), large volumes of air and long
mixing times usually reduce the importance of monitoring on a
small spatial scale. The N02 NAMS are required in urban areas
whose populations are greater than 1,000,000. Each such area
should contain a station in the neighborhood scale and one in the
urban scale. The neighborhood station should measure photo-
chemical production of NO- and be in the area where NO2 emission
density is highest. The urban station should measure NO2
produced from the reaction of NO with O, and be downwind of peak
NO- emission areas.
2.3 MONITORING INSTRUMENTS
Appendix C specifies the monitoring methods which must be
used in NAMS/SLAMS. Reference or equivalent methods are required
for monitoring at all NAMS/SLAMS. Analyzers whose cancellation
dates have been exceeded may be used for a reasonable period of
time to be determined by the Administrator.
Provisions have been made for use of nonconforming analyzers
purchased before February 18, 1976 in certain geographical areas.
These analyzers must meet all other requirements for a reference
method, and the concentration of substances that could cause the
analyzer to fail should be insignificant in the geographical area
where the analyzer is to be used. Requests for approval under
11
-------
these conditions must provide data about the analyzer and the
area to be sampled, especially past monitoring data from the
area. Once approval has been granted, assurance must be provided
that the instrument will be used only in the specified area. As
noted in Section 2.4, Appendix C, a report must be submitted to
the Administrator within 60 days of any significant increase in
the concentration of an interfering substance or within 60 days
of the discovery of pertinent new information. Further, a semi-
annual report must be submitted about interfering substances that
occur in insignificant concentrations.
Additionally, provisions have been made for analyzers with
nonconforming ranges if they were purchased before February 18,
1975. These analyzers must meet all other requirements, and
their ranges should not extend more than two times the upper
approved range limits. Requests for approval under these con-
ditions must include information about the analyzer and repre-
sentativeness of the data. Also, if the analyzer has more than
one scale, the request must specify that the scale with the range
not extending more than two times the upper approved range limit
will be used.
Analyzers with unapproved ranges may be used without special
approval until January 1, 1983, if the following three conditions
are met: the upper range must be not more than two times the
approved upper limit, the analyzer must be located in an area
where pollutant levels are expected to be higher than the approved
ranges, and the unapproved ranges are used only when these higher
concentrations are expected.
12
-------
An analyzer with a nonconforming range greater than twice
the upper limit may be used if it has more than one range and has
been designated a reference or equivalent method on at least one
of the ranges when the pollutant to be measured is likely to
occur in the range with greater than twice the approved upper
limit. Further, the Administrator must determine that the reso-
lution of the range is adequate. See Section 2.6.2, Appendix C,
for further detail.
Requests for approval under Section 2.4, 2.5, or 2.6.2,
Appendix C, must be made to the Director of the Environmental
Monitoring and Systems Laboratory (EMSL), Department E (MD 75),
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. A request should
contain information concerning the analyzer, testing information,
and identification of geography. The Administrator may withdraw
an approval if any of the information provided is found to be
invalid or no longer valid.
Finally, approval may be requested for a modification that
may alter the performance characteristics of a reference or
equivalent method. The request must describe the nature and
purpose of the modification, discuss the effect on performance
characteristics, and include any additional relevant information.
The Administrator has 75 days to act on the matter. Temporary
modifications may be made without approval if the approved method
is malfunctioning and parts are not available for at least 45
days. The repairs must be made as soon as practicable, but no
longer than 4 months after the temporary modification unless the
Administrator has granted an extension. Unless and until the
13
-------
temporary modification is approved, air quality data obtained
with the method as temporarily modified must be clearly identi-
fied as such, and must be accompanied by a report containing the
information specified in Subsection 2.8.3, Appendix C.
2.4 PROBE SITING
When the number of monitors, spatial scale of representa-
tiveness, and objectives have been determined, siting criteria
for the probe must be specified.
The TSP monitor probe must be 2 to 15 meters above ground
level. Ideally it should be at breathing level, but security
problems sometimes preclude this. If located on a roof or other
structure, the monitor must be at least 2 meters from the walls,
parapets, and other obstacles. No furnace or incinerator stack
should be nearby. The sampler should be at least 20 meters from
trees. The distance between any other obstacle and the sampler
must be at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes
above the sampler. Airflow must be unrestricted in an arc of at
least 270 degrees around the sampler with the predominant wind
direction for the greatest pollutant concentration in the 270
degree arc. Monitors that measure the plume of a single source
cannot be considered representative. Therefore, when monitors
are placed along roadways, the traffic volume must be less than
3000 vehicles per day, and the monitor must be placed more than 5
meters from the edge of the nearest traffic lane. If the roadway
is elevated and the monitor is below the roadway level, the dis-
tance from the nearest lane to the monitor may be no less than 25
14
-------
meters. Sampling sites should not be located in unpaved areas
unless the areas are covered throughout the year by vegetation.
The sulfur dioxide monitor probe inlet should preferably be
located at breathing height, although they may be situated any-
where in the range from 3 to 15 meters above ground. If the
equipment is located on a building, then it should be on the
windward side of the building relative to the prevailing winter
wind direction. The probe must be more than 1 meter away from
supporting structures and located away from dusty areas. As with
TSP, no furnace or incincerator should be nearby. If located on
a roof, the monitor must be at least 1 meter from walls, parapets,
and other obstacles. The distance from trees should be at least
20 meters. Further, the distance between obstacles and the inlet
probe must be at least twice the height that the obstacle pro-
trudes above the monitor. Airflow must be unrestricted in an arc
of at least 270 degrees around the inlet, and the predominant
wind direction during the season of maximum concentration must be
in the 270 degree arc. Clearance of 180 degrees is necessary if
the probe is located on the side of a building.
Breathing height is the preferred distance above ground for
the CO monitor probe inlet. The required distance is 2.5 to 3.5
meters for microscale sampling and 3 to 15 meters for neighbor-
hood scale sampling. The probe must be 1 meter away from any
supporting structure. Airflow must be unrestricted in an arc of
at least 270 degrees around the probe, and the predominant wind
direction for the season of greatest pollutant concentration must
be in the 270 degree arc. If located on the side of a building,
15
-------
clearance of 180 degrees is necessary. The purpose of microscale
measurements in street canyons and traffic corridors is to
indicate the effect of the immediate source on the population.
Therefore, the probe must be 2 to 10 meters from the nearest edge
of the traffic lane and at least 10 meters from an intersection
(preferably in the middle of a block). Table 2-2 shows the
minimum distance that neighborhood scale stations must be from
the edge of the nearest traffic lane.
TABLE 2-2. MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN A
NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE CO STATION AND THE EDGE OF THE NEAREST TRAFFIC LANE
Roadway average daily
traffic, vehicles
£10,000
15,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
>60,000
Minimum distance,
meters
I10
25
45
80
115
135
>150
Lead monitors must be placed 2 to 7 meters above ground at
roadway stations (microscale or middle scale). A lead roadway
monitor must be 5 to 15 meters away from the nearest traffic
lane, and the probe must be kept away from tollgate and metered
ramps because higher lead concentrations are known to occur at
higher constant speeds. A lead neighborhood scale monitor must
be at least 15 meters from roadways traveled by more than 10,000
vehicles per day. Roadways with larger traffic volumes require
16
-------
greater separation distances. The probe should be placed as
close to ground level as possible, but not more than 7 meters
above ground level. If located on a roof, a roadway or neighbor-
hood scale monitor must be at least 2 meters from walls, parapets,
and other obstacles and should be at least 20 meters from trees.
A monitor must be so located that the distance from an obstacle
is at least twice the height of the obstacle above the sampler.
Airflow must be unrestricted in an arc of at least 270 degrees
around the monitor with the predominant wind direction in the 270
degree arc.
Ozone and N02 monitor probe inlet should preferably be as
close as possible to breathing height; they must be 3 to 15
meters above ground level and at least 1 meter away from sup-
porting structures. Obstacles should disrupt sampling. There-
fore, the distance between any obstacle and the probe must be at
least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the
sampler. Trees should be at least 20 meters away. Airflow must
be unrestricted in an arc of at least 270 degrees around the
inlet with the predominant wind direction for the season of
greatest pollutant concentration included in the arc. If the
probe is on the side of a building, a clearance of 180 degrees is
necessary. Table 2-3 provides information concerning the re-
quired distance that 03 and NO2 monitors must be from roadways.
17
-------
TABLE 2-3. MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN A NEIGHBORHOOD OR URBAN
SCALE 03 OR N02 STATION AND THE EDGE OF THE NEAREST TRAFFIC LANE
Roadway average daily
traffic, vehicles
£10,000
15,000
20,000
40,000
70,000
>n 0,000
Minimum distance,
meters
I10
20
30
50
100
>250
Because S02r NO-, and 0., are reactive gases, only borosili-
cate glass and FEP Teflon or their equivalent are acceptable
materials for intake sampling lines. Residence time is also
critical, particularly for 03 and NO; therefore, the residence
time in sampling probes for reactive gases must be less than 20
seconds.
Waivers may be granted for one or more probe siting criteria
if the appropriate state agency writes to the Regional Adminis-
trator about the purpose of establishing a monitor at a particu-
lar location. Issuance of a waiver to a new station requires
that the station be as representative with the waiver as it would
be if all criteria were met and that physically the criteria
cannot be met. For issuance of a waiver to an existing station,
only one of these two requirements need be met.
2.5 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The NAMS network must be reviewed each year, and all inade-
quacies determined by the annual review must be corrected per a
18
-------
schedule. The final schedule for modification of the network
will be made through consultation with the Regional Adminis-
trator .
As noted in Section 58.35 of the regulations, each state
must report quarterly to the Regional Office all ambient air
quality data and information specified by the "AEROS User
A
Manual." Data must be submitted in SAROAD Air Quality Data
format. The quarterly periods are: January 1 to March 31, April
1 to June 30, July 1 to September 30, and October 1 to December
31. Each report must be submitted to NADB within 90 days of the
end of the quarter that it covers and must contain all air quality
data collected during the quarter. Thus, data obtained from the
first quarter of 1981 will be due at NADB before June 30, 1981.
Data contained in the quarterly report must be edited and vali-
dated by the state and checked by the Region so that such data
are ready to be entered into the SAROAD data files.
Because all NAMS are also SLAMS, an annual report is due by
July 1 of each year on data collected from January 1 to December
31 of the previous year. The annual summary report must include
a computation of the simple unweighted arithmetic average of the
probability limits for precision and accuracy for the four
quarterly periods. The report should include a listing by pol-
lutant of the city name, county name, address of the site, SAROAD
site code, and SAROAD monitoring method code. Further, the
report must show the number of daily observations for TSP and
lead, hourly observations for CO and O,, and daily and hourly
19
-------
observations for SOj and N02- The location, date, pollution
source, and duration of each incident of air pollution during
which ambient levels reached or exceeded the standard must also
be included.
The annual report must be certified by the senior air pollu-
tion control official in the state to assure that the data is
accurate. The manner in which the data were obtained must be
certified to conform to all monitoring criteria. These certifi-
cations must be included in the annual report package.
The annual report must present annual summary statistics for
each pollutant. The TSP data must include the annual geometric
mean, highest and second highest daily values with dates of
occurrence, number of times that the 24-hour primary and secondary
standards were exceeded, and number of 24-hour average concentra-
tions in the eight ranges, beginning with the range from 0 to 65
yg/m and ending with the range greater than 445 yg/m .
The SO2 annual summary statistics must show the annual
arithmetic mean, the highest and second highest 24-hour averages
with dates of occurrence, highest and second highest 3-hour
averages with dates of occurrence, number of times that the 3-
hour secondary standard was exceeded, and number of 24-hour
concentrations in eight ranges beginning with the range from 0.00
to 0.04 ppm and ending with the range greater than 0.28 ppm.
The CO data must include the highest and second highest 1-
hour values with dates and times of occurrence, highest and
20
-------
second highest 8-hour averages with dates and times of occur-
rence, number of times that the 1-hour primary and 8-hour average
primary standards were exceeded, and number of 8-hour concentra-
tions in the eight ranges beginning with the range from 0 to 4
ppm and ending with the range greater than 28 ppm.
Statistics required for NO2 include the annual arithmetic
mean, highest and second highest hourly averages with dates and
times of occurrence, highest and second highest 24-hour averages
with dates of occurrence, and number of hourly concentrations in
the eight ranges beginning with the range from 0.00 to 0.04 ppm
and ending with the range greater than 0.28 ppm.
The required 03 data are the four highest daily maximum 1-
hour values with dates and times of occurrence, number of times
that the daily maximum 1-hour standard was exceeded, and number
of observations in the eight ranges beginning with the range from
0.00 to 0.04 ppm and ending with the range greater than 0.28 ppm.
The required lead data include annual submittal of the four
quarterly arithmetic averages in yg/m given to two decimal
places and the number of 24-hour samples included in the quar-
terly averages.
2.6 QUALITY ASSURANCE
Appendix A of 40 CFR 58 specifies minimum requirements to
provide quality assurance in the data submitted by the states.
These requirements must be fully implemented by January 1981.
Quality Assurance consists of two distinct and equally im-
portant functions. One function is the assessment of the quality
21
-------
of the monitoring data by estimating their precision and accuracy.
The other function is the control, and improvement of the quality
of the monitoring data by implementation of quality control
policies, procedures, and corrective actions. The quality con-
trol requirements are included in Section 2, and the assessment
procedures are specified explicitly in Sections 3, 4, and 5 of
Appendix A.
A quality control program to cover the control and improve-
ment functions is necessary to provide data capable of meeting
monitoring objectives and minimize loss of air quality data
caused by malfunctions. Such a program as noted earlier is
required by Section 2 of Appendix A and must be described in
detail and documented by the agency operating the monitor and
approved by the Regional Administrator. Guidance for setting up
a program can be found in Volumes I and II of the EPA document
"Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Sys-
tems."5'6
General activities that require set procedures are: (1)
selection of methods, analyzers and samplers, (2) equipment
installation, (3) calibration, (4) zero/span checks and adjust-
ments of automated analyzers, (5) control checks, (6) correction
of unacceptable zero/span limits and other problems indicated by
control checks, (7) calibration and zero/span checks of multiple-
range analyzers, (8) preventive and remedial maintenance, (9)
quality control procedures for air pollution episode monitoring,
(10) recording and validation of data, and (11) documentation of
22
-------
quality control information. Also, gaseous standards for S02/
CO, and NO, must be working standards certified by comparison
with a gaseous Standard Reference Material (SRM) from the Na-
tional Bureau of Standards (NBS). Ozone tests must be made in
accordance with ultraviolet photometric calibration procedures,
and flow measurements must be traceable to an authoritative
volume or other standard. The National Performance and Systems
Audit program will audit quality assurance and monitoring pro-
grams of NAMS.
With regard to reporting the assessment of the quality of
the data in terms of precision and accuracy the state must pre-
pare for each pollutant, a list of all monitoring sites and their
SAROAD site identification co'des in each reporting organization.
This list must be submitted to the ROQAC who reviews and approves
the list before submitting a copy to EMSL. Each reporting organi-
zation is defined such that precision and accuracy among all
stations in the organization can be expected to be reasonably
homogeneous, as a result of common factors. Common factors
which should be considered by States in defining reporting
organizations include: (1) operation by a common team of field
operators, (2) common calibration facilities, and (3) support by
a common laboratory or headquarters. Where there is uncertainty
in defining the reporting organizations or in assigning specific
sites to reporting organizations, States must consult with the
appropriate EPA Regional Office for guidance.
23
-------
The requirements for data quality precision include a one-
point precision check against a gas of known concentration at
least once every 2 weeks for each automated analyzer used to
measure SO-/ NO-, O.,, and CO. The analyzers must be operated in
normal sampling mode during the precision check.
The accuracy requirements include a quarterly audit of at
least 25 percent of the SO-/ NO , 0 , or CO analyzers, so that
each analyzer is audited at least once a year. The audit is
accomplished by challenging the analyzer with a gas of known
concentration within four specific concentration ranges.
For precision determination of TSP, two sites with the
expected highest geometric mean concentration must be selected by
the States for side-by-side sampling (at least 2 meters apart).
If such sites are impractical, alternate sites approved by the
Regional Administrator or his designee may be selected. Criteria
for the samplers such as calibration, sampling, and analysis must
be identical. Only one site is necessary for lead.
The accuracy requirements for TSP (and lead) include a
quarterly audit of the flow rate of 25 percent of the high-volume
samplers against a device with a known flow rate so that each
sampler is audited at least once per year. For lead, an audit of
the analysis using glass fiber filter strips must also be per-
formed .
A series of calculations must be included for determining
the precision and accuracy of each analyzer and of the reporting
organization. Estimates of precision are determined from results
24
-------
of individual precision checks and results are reported at the
end of each calendar quarter. Accuracy estimates are also calcu-
lated from results of the individual audits and results are
reported at the end of each calendar quarter. The precision of
the reporting organization is determined from the average of the
percentage difference between monitors, the pooled standard
deviation, and the 95 percent probability limits. The accuracy
of the reporting organization is also determined from the average
of percentage differences, the standard deviation, and the 95
percent probability limits.
For each pollutant, a list of all monitoring sites and
SAROAD site identification codes must be prepared and sent to the
Quality Assurance Coordinator at the Regional Office; a copy must
be sent to EMSL. Whenever the assignment of a monitoring site
changes, the change must be approved by the Regional Office, and
EMSL/RTP must be informed of the change.
25
-------
SECTION 3
NAMS DATA AND INFORMATION FLOW AND USES
Effective management of the National Air Monitoring Stations
(NAMS) network must consider all systems associated with the
collection of NAMS air quality data. They provide three main
types of data: air quality data, monitoring site information,
and quality assurance data.
3.1 DATA AND INFORMATION FLOW
Figure 3-1 shows the overall flow of NAMS data. Air quality
data generally go from state or local agencies to the Regional
Office (RO) SAROAD contact and then to the data processing sec-
tion of NADB. Information about SAROAD site identification (ID)
is handled in essentially the same way as air quality data.
Site information included in the NAMS Hard Copy Information
(NHCI) and Management Information System (MIS) goes from state
and local agencies to the Regional Office NAMS Coordinator (RONC)
to Headquarters NAMS Coordinator (HQNC). In most Regions the
RONC also enters the MIS information into the S2K system through
a computer terminal located at the Regional Office.
Quality Assurance (QA) data go from state and local agencies
to the Regional Office Quality Assurance Coordinator (ROQAC). The
quality assurance data is reported on data assessment report
26
-------
10
vj
All POUUTION AGENO
RESPONSIBLE FOR INIIAl
SITING OF KMIIOIS. —
COtlECIION ANO
CODING or *g o«i*
common AM
COOING Or SAROAO
SUE ID INFORMATION
CAICUAIION OF
PIA OAIA, AND
DEVELOPMENT OF DA
PIOGRAM *NO PROJECT —
PI MS
J *ll QUAlllI MIA J
1 1
J VUtOM MIA, !„
I Hit CMUKS. *
1 COMECTIONS |
i J
1 SI If INFMMIT IONI
1 SAIMO SIU 10 1
l"i"o""iiis 1
HiNFMNLiiM.
NAMS HMO
CON INFORMATION
I" COHMENIS
I
-j jjint"0"
i
fouAlin ASSURANcTI
•4 PIA MIA
! OA PROJECT
l~\ AND PROGRAM
J~
I—
_
o
r-
CPA oitiioMi orrtrc
«••
SAROAD CONTACT
RESPONSIBLE FOR RUNNING EDIT
CHECKS ANO CORRECTING *0 MIA.
HANDLING SAROAD SHE 10
INFORMATION
1
»
M
«
NAHS roORDINAIM IRONC)
RISPONSIUIE FOR COMPLEIENESS
ANO ACCURAO OF NHCI MO
MIS WOmirilW. DtvllOPMtllT
Or HO NAMS DAIA HANOI ING
PlM, TIHILINLSS OF AQ MIA.
SCREENING COMMENTS, AND
IDENTIFICATION 01 PROBLEMS
I
RISPONSIBIE FOR CONDUCTING
PERFORMANCE AND S«SIEN AUDITS.
EVALUATING AO. DATA FOR
COMPLEIfNESS, REPRESENTATIVENESS,
PRECISION, ACCUR*C«, COMPARABILIK
AND IRACABUIK. ANO DEVELOPMENT
OF RO 0* PLANS
•^
AIR HUAlll* DATA 1
' SAROAD MIA. 1
EDII CHECKS, L«-
mj IISIINGS J
1 SHE INFORMATION 1
«J SAROAD SITE ID |
' MIS INFORMATION. |
P^ NAMS HARD COP* j \_
\ IWIIIENOR {
1 VEIML |
— * n
i i — _ j
[ QUALI" ASSURANCE |
1 RO MIA i
—/ 1.
-?H 1
1 REQUESTS FOR |
i ASSISIANCC j
^"1 Ml HEN OR 1
j VERBAL j-«
L J
If* NAM
M>
OAIA PROtlSSING SECTION
RESPONSIBLE FUR RUNNING EDIT
CHtUS, ENURING OAIA INIO
MIA MM, MAINTAINING SAROAO
SfSUN. ADO PRODUCING
RCPORIS ANO SUMMARIES OF MIA
1
^
MOB NANS COORDINATOR (NAOBNC)
RESPONSIBII FOR INTEGRATION
OF PI* MIA INTO SAROAO. UPDATING
OF fOMMNIS. FILE. REMOVING
LOCKOUT WE* AUIHROI/ED. ANO
RCSOLVING OAIA PROCESSING
PROBUNS
EPA MM/NOAO
»
HQ NANS COORDINATOR (HqNC)
RESPONSIBLE FOR TRACKING »l)
INSURING CONFORMIII 10 NEIMMt
ANO SHE DESIGN CRITIRIA «ND
MONITORING RIGUUUONS. AUIHOR-
IIING CHANGIS 10 AQ MIA,
ISSUING MANAGEMENT LEVEL REPORTS
MD MAINTAINING MIS
I
CHIlf. NONITORING SECTION
RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING CQM-
SISTENCI III HAMS, ADDRESSING
MIIONAL ISSUES, NAINIAINIM
LIASON UITH EMSl. MO ISSUING
QUAR1ERI* RCPORTS ON NAMS
EPA [MSI
RESPONSIBLE fOR
HMOLING PW
MIA MO ISSUING
QA SUWARKS
d)
MOPS Dl« DIRECTORS
R1SPONSIBLE FOR
ASSESSING MOM
OAT* *FFECT
ONGOING OR P«ST
SIVDIES
Figure 3-1. Overall flow of NAMS data.
-------
forms referred to in Appendix A. State and local agencies also
send copies of the quality assurance data to EMSL.
3.1.1 Air Quality Data
Air quality data flow from the local or state agency to the
SAROAD Contact at the EPA Regional Office and then to the Data
Processing Section at NADB. Figure 3-2 shows this data flow.
The state or local agency collects the air quality data.
Although the local agency may by agreement submit reduced air
quality data directly to the EPA Regional Office, such data are
generally submitted through the state agency. The submitting
agency reduces the data, codes them into SAROAD format, runs data
checks specified in the agency quality control program plans,
and makes necessary corrections. The state then submits the data
in the form of punched cards, air quality data forms, or a mag-
netic tape to the SAROAD Contact at the EPA Regional Office.
The SAROAD Contact at the EPA Regional Office is the person
responsible for handling and running standard checks on air
quality data after the state or local agency. Upon receipt of
the data, the SAROAD Contact enters the date and description of
the submittal into the SAROAD Control Log, which is used to track
data through the Regional Office. If submitted on air quality
data forms, data must be keypunched so that a magnetic tape can
be created. A computerized pre-edit program (NA026) is used by
the SAROAD Contact to check data for completeness and obvious
errors or omissions. A data summary produced by the edit check
is sent to the submitting agency, which is responsible for veri-
fying the summary and correcting questioned data.
28
-------
-
-
mil IUHCI
inuci
All OUAUII
MM
t ....
MBII M)
MIA; HUT
1*1(1 UKW
1
IM MIA OUCH
smiFiiu iii
1 r-
CttlUll Ml
j
limn on
conuci
OAK
1
lit 11*11 I*IA
10 HO
SANOAII (UM1M1
IPA «IGIOIIAI ofriii
IllUR (UCtlH
ll> ?,AKtlMl
CONIflOl
Klf,
SUMMARY Of
OAU RIKIVtb.
COH SI All
-
-
IF NIUSSMV,
Kl mjW H,
ttlMI l«l'l
i
AUH yuioAi>
ni-IDIl
fHOOUH
UNKt
^X'''
Figure 3-2. Air quality data flow.
HH Hiurt ninontwinfl rimci I ._ .
RIVIfU AQ
liAlA SUUHlTltL
AlftK 90 {MI'S
. 1
£
»oi in NAiiew:
OF DAIA
AUIIKWIJII1
TO III MX>[[>
r
VFRIFl MIA IN
10 Wn. UlKk
ilfillft Df DATA
NOT StMIRMIlfJ
1 1.
F— — HI
(SlfHATl
IW'lKMIUH
Of CHIHOti
IU MIA CSIKS
,. ^-~.W
[VA1UAII
OUAIKI Dl
OAIA ANIl fRdrjtlSS
i
fHMWtl (IIAI
HIGII1A1IONS AKi
B( (AT, IWffHfNTtf'
I1VU KlPOfllS ON
f/WC«(iS TO
t
HtlAlK ID
1 II
1
»- ..: i
t . ,
O^RURll 1
fttW OH 1
(HAMl.tS IN 1
— 1 —
WW, OH W»«
CHAftUS AND
IHClltAIIONS 01
-— — — """H
HIHCl UN
PBOBIIH^
^^^
El' A (lAQPS
DlVliJOW MSUUWS
—
ASSESS
fffttl 0»
UMAttH. OK
IT.. '" : ,-.
ISSUC UUAKUkl V
«HW] O/ Alt HA
JOH LHANUS; COCI
ro oAofs ntv. .
KAU6, HO, H(jHC
"
CDIIf. KOIImiWi
si ;i ion
•tin* 111 uii*
Of HlfUllATIIIhS
HIV It*
CHAHCCS
29
-------
The computer analysis run by the SAROAD Contact can also
separate the air quality data into NAMS and SLAMS data. Although
optional, this separation is highly recommended. The following
description of air quality data flow applies only to NAMS data.
A second computer check, SAROAD Edit Program NA067, is run
on the NAMS air quality data. Data rejected by the edit check
are corrected by the SAROAD Contact, often with the help of the
state or local agency.
Air quality data not rejected by the edit check and cor-
rected data are then merged into one file. The SAROAD Contact
submits them to the data processing section at EPA NADB. At this
point the SAROAD contact notifies the RONC of all data not
submitted within the 90-day deadline. Copies of the submitted
data are given to the RONC and sent to the state. This trans-
action is entered into the SAROAD Control Log.
The functions of the RONC with respect to the air quality
data flow are to oversee the progress of the data flow through
the Regional Office and to serve as contact person with the HQNC.
The RONC reviews the raw data listings and edit summaries, re-
turns comments on them, and records the transactions in the
SAROAD Control Log. Changes to the data file resulting from ad-
dition of air quality data not submitted within 90 days are
separated by the RONC into minor and major changes. Major
changes involve addition of previously missing data or large
changes in values of previously submitted data; minor changes
involve correction of less important data, such as dates. The
30
-------
HQNC is notified verbally of minor changes; written explanation
is required for major changes.
Upon receipt of the the submittal, the NADB data processing
sections logs it in and assigns a control ID to the air quality
data. A post-edit inventory (NA049) is run on the data, and a
copy of the post-edit inventory is sent to the HQNC and RO
SAROAD Contact. Data that have been through the post-edit inven-
tory and were either submitted before the 90-day deadline or
authorized by the HQNC to be submitted after the 90-day deadline
are entered into NADB system. Data not submitted within 90 days
are automatically locked out of the system and must be sent by
NADB data processing to the HQNC for review and authorization
before addition to the files.
The NADB NAMS Coordinator (NADBNC) oversees changes to the
files by addition of data after the 90-day deadline only upon
authorization from the HQNC. Upon receiving authorization to add
data to the system, the NADBNC removes the lockout and permits
the additions or changes to be made.
The main responsibilities of the HQNC are to conduct periodic
post-edit reviews of the data, authorize changes to the data
system and issue reports on air quality. Air quality data sub-
mitted after the 90-day deadline are reviewed by the HQNC, who
decides whether or not the data should be added to the system.
Data additions authorized by the HQNC are carried out by the
NADBNC. The HQNC also estimates implications of the changes to
data users and issues a memo on the major changes and their
-31
-------
implications. Further, the HQNC monitors the progress of all air
quality data through EPA and ensures that data are finalized
within 120 days.
The Chief of the Monitoring Section reviews the memo from
the HQNC on major changes to the system and their implications
and issues a quarterly report of all major changes to the system.
Copies of the quarterly report are sent to the Division Directors
of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS),
NADB, EPA Regional Offices and HQNC.
The EPA OAQPS Division Directors assess the effect of
changes to the system on ongoing or past studies.
3.1.2 Monitoring Site Information
The flow of monitoring site information is shown in Fig-
ure 3-3. The major responsibility for collecting and updating
site information lies with the RONC. Two types of site informa-
tion, the MIS and the NHCI report, are completed by the RONC.
The forms for these types of site information are filled out by
the RONC or RONC designee, or by the state or local agency, if
requested by the RONC. The RONC checks the MIS and NHCI report
forms for completeness and accuracy. The NHCI report forms are
also confirmed during site visits by the RONC or RONC designee,
and appropriate blocks of the NHCI are completed during site
visits.
The RONC reviews the site information and decides whether
each site still meets design objectives. If a site does not, the
RONC submits a request to the HQNC to delete the site from the
32
-------
"DATA" FonT"!'
Ul
IOCAI All
can mi
POUUTIOn
A«Nt»
IF AcriKE
01 ItCTH.
rot i on siAtt
STEPS
STATE All POIIUIION
tOKIMX AfitllClr
ASSIST DOW;
III riUIHG
OUT SHE
to rom
NHCI TORN. 1 1
lr Hoi ooni 1 1
«» now 1 1
DAMS NIS
ro««, lr
HOI none
I» DOW
^*4
IFA MSIM
, ,
J
SAIOAO SHE
ID rolM 01
CHAW.IS III
SAMAO CWtACT ]
- " cowimsirc
mroNNATioN
we co
Heowiir!
SITE 10 — .
FOW
(CrPUNCM
SHE — «.
INIORMAIION
OI01IUTM (XMCJ 1
CMC* rat
. -. COMPltlfMISJ
AW
ACCUMO (MIS)
CHfCH
FOD
COWIETEIKSS.
• ACCU*AC«, HSIW
CIITtlllA (MCI)
i
>*ows>v
>^SIH Mfirv „
L_»/ MJIW >Iii_
N)0«JEC1IYESJ/'
f «V
11 Silt VISIT;
lOOt IftfTfAUF.
ISl/rtAR IATEI
SEND CO^V
10 wot.
SIATE
1
corr or
SAAOAO SITE
lnroKHHIION,
NUK SIKS
•
WtC CHAIKtS
TO HIS on
on rom ro HQMC
•EIAIII NHCI -t«-
COP» 10 HONC.
^ufr
MOWS! HQHC 10 _
OEUIf SIU
t L_
^^>^^
COMPAX SIT)
mrORMAIIOD 0*
«HCI, MIS.SAHUO;
HAM CHANCES
t
NOTIf! HQHr
AND SADOAO
CONTACI Of
»
ir AUTHODI/ID.
octrrt SHE
Cr« Kind
nc*
•wcr.uiK
SI (. 1 I'M
EKTIP imn
OAI« MSTfM •
| n»i» iniw 1
H
^CUKCIlEO
CAROS,
con or
cop» nr
NWI rmw
^ —
SHI n«t« in m
Oil 1 HI' _
P.IOIII5I in I
0(t(M M'f
1
»• ^
^—
tPA HB«/«*n*(]
1
ERSUW IHAT MIS
HAS ltd!
UPDATED
»I'«I1 It
'lit
Vtll" l«'0«-
NATION DUDIDt
stir VISIT
l. NEWITOHIIIG SECTION ] 1
Ot'OMIHf
ir strt
SHOUO «E
OEinio
!
ACTION 10 INSU'I
0' Rtr.W«MON5
Figure 3-3. Site Information data flow.
-------
NAMS network. If a site does meet objectives, the RONC sends
copies of the NHCI report (or changes made) to the HQNC and state
agency. The RONC compares the MIS information, NHCI report, and
SAROAD ID information to ensure that they are comparable. If the
three presentations of site information are not consistent, the
RONC determines the correct information and makes the appropriate
changes. The HQNC and the Regional Office SAROAD Contact are
notified by the RONC of changes.
The SAROAD form is completed by the SAROAD contact or the
state or local agency. The information on the form is keypunched
by the SAROAD Contact, and copies of the SAROAD site information
are sent to the NADB, RONC, and state agency. The punched cards
are sent to the NADB Data Processing Section to be entered into
the data system.
The MIS and NHCI report site forms are sent to the HQNC for
review. The HQNC checks the forms to make sure that the informa-
tion is current; the MIS information is verified during site
visits by the HQNC. Changes in MIS information are entered into
the Regional Office terminal by the RONC; the original of the
NHCI report is kept on file by the RONC. If any site information
has changed, the RONC is notified.
The HQNC reviews requests from the RONC for deletion or
addition of a NAMS monitoring site and makes a recommendation to
the Chief of the Monitoring Section. The Chief decides whether a
site should be deleted or added and informs the HQNC of the
decision; the HQNC in turn notifies the RONC, who then implements
34
-------
the decision. Final approval of the NAMS networks and all sub-
sequent additions or deletions are made by the Director, MDAD.
3.1.3 Quality Assurance Data
The QA data are handled by the state agency, Regional
Office QA Coordinator (ROQAC), and Environmental Monitoring «•*
•9opjf*e& Laboratory (EMSL). This data flow is shown in Figure 3-4.
The state or local air pollution control agency runs the data
checks specified in the state QA control plan, which is developed
by the submitting agency and must be approved by the ROQAC.
Also, the state or local agency submits precision and accuracy
(P&A) data on a quarterly basis to the ROQAC and EMSL.
The ROQAC reviews the quarterly P&A data, verifies the use
of QA data checks, and notifies the RONC of all potential prob-
lems. Further, the ROQAC may verify the use of QA data checks if
requested by the HQNC.
The quarterly P&A data are sent to the
-------
Figure 3-4. Quality assurance data flow.
-------
After the RONC develops data handling plans for the Regional
Office, a copy is sent to the HQNC, who verifies the use of
checks in the Regional Office Program and QA Control Plans.
The HQNC reviews the QA summaries issued by EMSL and may
request a verification of data checks by the ROQAC. If problems
are found in either step, the HQNC notifies the Chief of the
Monitoring Section in the form of a memo.
The Chief of the Monitoring Section reviews the information
and takes appropriate action to correct the problem.
3.2 DATA USES
The NAMS concept was developed by the Standing Air Monitor-
ing Work Group (SAMWG). Although monitoring of national air
quality trends was the primary reason for establishment of the
NAMS network, NAMS data have other uses. These include assess-
ment of how well control strategies are working on a national
level and whether NAAQS for a pollutant should be reevaluated.
The NAMS will provide data that are more useful for these pur-
poses than present data because the NAMS will reduce the quantity
of data reported to EPA Headquarters, correct site information
deficiencies, provide for more complete and timely data, and
substantially enhance data quality.
Before the establishment of NAMS, determining air quality
trends and comparing the air quality of major population centers
were difficult. These problems resulted from different monitor
siting procedures, quality assurance procedures, and sampling
37
-------
methods used by various agencies submitting data. Besides incon-
sistencies, the data were not as timely as necessary, and data
were sometimes changed without the knowledge of the data users.
The NAMS network will provide data that will help to answer the
following questions:
Is air quality generally improving throughout the country?
Are these improvements roughly consistent with emission
trends?
Are the improvements different among various sectors of the
country?
What areas of the country are experiencing broad-scale air
qulaity deteriorations? Why?
Are certain seasons more pronounced in terms of air quality
trends or levels? Why?
The NAMS were established to provide consistent and timely air
quality data, and the NAMS data base allows management level
decisions concerning the progress toward attainment of NAAQS.
Related to progress toward NAAQS attainment is the evalua-
tion of how well national strategies are working at the national
level. The NAMS data can be used to assess the effectiveness of
strategies for inspection/maintenance (I/M), new car emission
standards, and fugitive dust control.
Also related to progress toward NAAQS attainment is the
possible reassessment of NAAQS. Ambient standard establishment
was primarily based on health effects associated with a pol-
lutant. For most pollutants the NAMS network was designed so
that population exposure can also be taken into account if a
standard is reevaluated.
38
-------
SECTION 4
STEP-BY-STEP PROCEDURES
This section presents procedures for the flow of NAMS data
from receipt by the Regional Office until entry into the NADB
data bank. Procedures are presented for the Regional Offices,
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division (MDAD), and NADB. Pro-
cedures for each office are divided into active and passive
responsibilities. Active responsibilities are specific actions
to be performed; passive responsibilities include the background
knowledge necessary to perform the duties of a position.
4.1 REGIONAL OFFICES
In general, the Regional Office accepts data from state and
local agencies, reviews data, makes necessary changes in data or
procedures, and transfers data to NADB or MDAD. Four types of
data are handled in the Regional Office: air quality data, site
information, comments, and quality assurance data. These data
are handled by three individuals: the SAROAD Contact, Regional
Office NAMS Coordinator (RONC), and Regional Office Quality
Assurance Coordinator (ROQAC).
4.1.1 Active Responsibilities
The RONC has a number of active responsibilities relating to
the NAMS. Table 4-1 lists each responsibility and the RONC's
corresponding authority and access to information.
39
-------
TABLE 4-1. ACTIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
REGIONAL OFFICE NAMS COORDINATOR
Responsibility
Authority and access to needed information
Ensure that NHCI is accurate
and complete
Keep MIS current
Verify use of QA checks
Inspect, correct, and validate
NAMS air quality data
Develop the Regional Office
data handling plan
Screen comments from state
and local agencies
Ensure submittal of data
within 90 days
The RONC has authority to make any changes
deemed necessary to the NHCI form; the RONC
also has authority to visit NAMS sites to
check information and should visit 10-20%
the sites annually; the original of the
HNCI is maintained by the RONC
The RONC has authority to make changes to
the MIS; ideally, the RONC would be the
only person to make such changes after ini-
tial loading
The RONC or the ROQAC must verify the use of
checks in the QA plans; if checks are not
used, the RONC has authority to enter a com-
ment in the comments file or to withhold the
data from submittal
The RONC has authority to withhold data from
submittal and has access to all NAMS sub-
mi tta Is
The RONC has authority for the content of the
Regional Office data handling plan. Input
should be obtained from the ROQAC and RO
SAROAD contact
The RONC has authority to decide whether a
comment should be passed on to a higher
level
The RONC shares authority with the RO SAROAD
contact to ensure submittal of data within
90 days
40
-------
Figure 4-1 shows the flow of data in the state and local
agencies before entry into the Regional Office. Because this
figure is presented only to show data flow as it relates to the
Regional Office, no explanation of specific state and local
actions is provided in the text.
Figure 4-2 is a flow diagram showing specific tasks per-
formed in the Regional Office. All tasks (rectangular boxes) are
numbered, and explanations of them follow. The headings for
these explanations are the same as the boxes to which they apply
in Figure 4-2.
1. ENTER RECEIPT
IN SAROAD
CONTROL LOG
Upon receipt of air quality data by the Regional Office, the
SAROAD Contact should record receipt of the data identifying
information in the SAROAD Control Log (see Figure 4-3). The
purpose of this log is to allow tracking of the data within the
Regional Office. The items that should be filled out are:
State or local agency that submitted the data
Description that distinguishes the data from other data
Form of data (forms, cards, or tape, indicated as F, C, or
T)
Date received
Regional Office identification in this format:
State Year Quarter Batch
41
-------
«TI: KTIOK Of ST*Tt MB LOCM. MEKItS «H NT EtfUIMO II TIC TtlT.
Figure 4-1. Data flow in state and local
agencies before Regional Office entry.
42
-------
IIUAI 11 T
AiillflAHf f
PROGRAM
PI AN
QUAIIIV ASSURANCE COORDINA
OR|
.*9 RIVHW
— SIAH qA
PMWRAH Ft AN
4(1. fi[»UW
_ sure QA
TON1UH I'lAN
T
J
41. RlUIN
him i» nit ;
COP» AVAIt ABIt
to mM
t
42 MmW
DO 1 ONlBOl ANl>
PHIKJtAN H AKS
1
-^
J6 HtVltU
P1A (1AIA
r"
43. tONffllfl
riRIOWANII
AW1 irSHM
•inns
1
1 —
J7 NO) lit fclrNr
IF POUN1IA1 _,
PWWlfKS AH(
1UNIIFMD
Jii. HMAIN
r- PKA DAI A
IN fill
44 USURf
lOWtlll«55,
Htl'HlSlNIANVINlSS.
ffiKHHW, ACIURACV.
Wt> (DMrAftABH Iff
—1 L
4b. VtH|(T
IBAUAell If* Ul
(fA ItAlA
1 1. __
|
i
1
1
1
1
1
WRI1KN OP VI
KUrif ICA1ION
I'O'INIIAI
vtm\ im
, -— -
x^
4(, If RiQIItSUI),
HHUI tisi or
M) MlK tHU,*-^
..
Figure 4-2. Specific tasks of EPA Regional Office.
-------
STATE
DUCMPTIOS
|
i
§
I
RAROAD CONTROL UK fOR 1»_ _
"5t?
DATE
BBC' p
R.O.
I.D.
stain
LETTER
TO STATE*
TAPE
TO
•CC*/
E-HO.
-ISTIKCi
TO
STATE*
ERROt RESOUmON
MM
R.O.
I.B.
BY
R.O.
RY
STATR
DATE
COMPLETE'
*•»•<
•ADI
OONTROl
I.D.
• •
•ADI
UPDATE
•mSER/
COMPLSV
DATE*
MIA
TO
ITAJt*
TAH
FROM
TAn
TO
STATE*
Figure 4-3. Sample of SAROAD Control Log form.
-------
Date on which letter of receipt was sent to the submitting
state or local agency
The description can be taken from the SAROAD State Trans-
mittal Form, which should accompany the data from the submitting
agency. (A copy of this form should also accompany the data to
NADB.) Instructions on filling out the form are in "AEROS Manual
4
Series Volume II".
2. IF NECESSARY,
KEYPUNCH,
CREATE TAPE
Air quality data can be submitted by state or local agencies
on paper forms, punched cards, or magnetic tape, or by computer
link. All forms of the data must be in SAROAD format. Depending
on the form in which data is submitted from the state or local
agency, the Regional Office may have to keypunch the data and/or
create a tape that can be used on the UNIVAC computer.
3. RUN SAROAD
PRE-EDIT
PROGRAM
NA026
The SAROAD Contact (or staff) runs a SAROAD pre-edit program
that checks the data for obvious and consistent errors in format
and content. The pre-edit program reads records from a standard
labeled magnetic tape file. As the records are read, they
are sorted by site, pollutant, method, interval, year, month, and
units code. Records that cannot be sorted because of invalid
card type, or data type are not included in the report, but
45
-------
will be listed with an error message before any report data. The
SAROAD Contact should resolve all errors found, either by correc-
tion if the error is obvious or by checking with the state or
local submitting agency. Many of the types of checks made in the
pre-edit program should already have been made at the state or
local level. After the pre-edit is complete and errors have been
resolved, a copy of the summary report generated by the program
is sent to the submitting agency. (For further details, see
"AEROS Manual Series, Volume II,"4 page 7.1.2-4.)
4. SEPARATE
NAMS FROM
SLAMS DATA
Separation of NAMS data from SLAMS data is highly desirable
because only NAMS data need be sent to the RONC or HQNC and be-
cause NAMS data must be submitted more quickly than SLAMS data.
Program NA077 is used to separate NAMS from SLAMS data.
5. RUN SAROAD
EDIT PROGRAM
NA067
The SAROAD Contact (or staff) processes air quality data
through a SAROAD edit program (NA067) to edit and update transac-
tions in the data base. The data must meet minimum requirements
before updating of the files. The tape used in the pre-edit
program and program control cards for each of four functions
desired are put into the system. The four functions that can be
46
-------
run are: edit, summarization, raw data listing, and data screen-
ing. An additional function (STAN) lists only violations of the
short-term standards.
The edit subprogram requires a master control card with an
action code to change, add, or delete data. The edit subprogram
checks each data field for content and checks several fields
together for consistency. It produces a transaction tape, an
error tape, and printed output.
The summarization subprogram (TRAN) produces printed sum-
maries of raw data by site, pollutant, or year. These summaries
display information related to the air quality standards.
The raw data listing subprogram (LIST) produces a raw data
listing for all data on the tape.
The data screening subprogram (MRBV) is used to review
automatically raw data for data anomolies and must be executed on
each data set to ensure that data are valid and that suspicious
data are identified. The Gap Test and the Pattern Test are used.
Suspicious data should be verified or removed from the tape
before submission to NADB. (For further details see "AEROS
Manual Series Volume II," Subsection 7.1.2.)
At a minimum the edit, STAN, TRAN, LIST, SHEW, and MRBV
functions should be run. Two copies should be printed. One copy
should be filed and the other sent to the State for problem
resolution. For data flagged by MRBV, the reporting agency
should supply corrections or written verification of data.
47
-------
6. IF NECESSARY,
RETURN FOR
VERIFICATION,
CORRECTION
Errors or suspicious data discovered in the edit check are
verified or corrected by the SAROAD Contact with the submitting
state or local agency. If errors can be easily and quickly
resolved, the SAROAD Contact may do this by phone. If errors are
numerous or complex, the edited print-out should be returned to
the submitting agency for review and correction.
7. CORRECT
DATA, RUN
EDIT CHECK,
COPY RONC
The SAROAD contact should make every effort to add, correct,
or delete data before the 90-day deadline and thus avoid changes
after the lockout applies. All air quality data not received by
NADB within 90 days of the end of the reporting period will
automatically be locked out of the data bank. Submittal on time
necessitates prompt and sometimes frequent interaction with the
submitting state or local agency to correct errors, supply mis-
sing data, or handle other anomalies. Although the SAROAD Con-
tact performs the error resolution with the state or local agency,
the RONC has the responsibility to make sure that the 90-day
deadline is met. A copy of data not corrected and therefore not
submitted is sent to the RONC.
48
-------
8. MERGE
FILES
After the corrections made within the 90 days are completed
and have passed the edit check, the corrected data and the data
that initially passed the edit checks are merged into one data
file. Corrections are merged only with data not yet submitted to
NADB. This file contains all data that have been checked and
approved for submission to NADB within 90 days after the end of
the quarter in which the data was collected.
9. SUBMIT FILES
TO NADB; COPY TO
RONC, STATE
The file containing data approved within the 90 days and the
file containing data corrected but not submitted within the 90
days are sent to NADB. All data submitted are corrected data;
data not corrected are held until corrections are made. The data
are submitted in SAROAD edit format and compatible with the UNIVAC
computer. All data should be accompanied by a copy of the SAROAD
State Transmittal Form. A listing of submitted data is sent to
the RONC and the state.
10. RECHECK
CONTROL LOG
FOR
COMPLETENESS
The SAROAD Control Log is filled out when data are first
received from the submitting agency (see Figure 4-3). As errors
are resolved with the state or local agency, the flow of data
49
-------
should be tracked on the control log. The log is checked before
submittal to ensure that all necessary entries have been made.
The final entries in the log are the date of data transmittal to
NADB and record of any other copies sent.
11. CONFIRM SITE
INFORMATION BY
SITE VISIT
(DESIGNEE)
Site information must be confirmed by a site visit. In some
EPA Regions these site visits will be conducted by the RONC; in
others the site visit is done by designees in the Regional
Office or the state or local agency. The RONC is responsible for
visiting 15 percent of NAMS sites each year.
12. COMPLETE
SITE ID FORM
In many EPA Regions the SAROAD site ID form is completed by
the state or local agency; in some Regions it is filled out in
the Regional Office by the SAROAD Contact on the basis of infor-
mation from the state or local agency. A copy of the SAROAD site
ID form is shown in Figure 4-4. The RONC is responsible for
assuring completion by the SAROAD Contact of SAROAD site ID forms
for all NAMS sites.
13. KEYPUNCH
SITE INFORMATION
The SAROAD Contact (or staff) checks to ensure that site in-
formation is in proper SAROAD format and then has the information
50
-------
I THE KEfOBT IS RE OUIftf O iV LAW |
il 41USC iM7.40CfH«l<
IKED iV LAW i|
'.** J
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
National Auonwlclc Out Sink
flfMUChTfiul|l«Pflli.N.C. 27711
SAflOAD Site (diminution faim
Ol
NO
rp. Sic4«
A
•id
ft S..I.
•
ltd
rp* SI»M
c
•*d
D
«d
yp* Sl.ll
i
>CL
VP* Sl.u
1 2 3j
'
-*di
rrti" i
rl
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
4 6
6 7
-A'i
S>
B'»
»-* L'p,o
U. _
B"
(HI
III*
10
III.
Siu
*J
*l
II
h|
II
UJ
II
13
PlO
2
13
P.O
11
13
PlO
3
13
PlO
12
1}
! i,.. M"»
6 9
I0|ll|l3
II
11
If
"ft*
,11
n
11
12
11
24
IS
26
SMSA J
4
It
II
,71.
1
IB
20
21
11
11
24
39
26
14
It
itlirlii
19
X
21
rfr
1
24
21
26
14
It
•I
17
II
19
10
21
33
2J
24
3JJ
*
"
| City Population
5.
afco
T
M
13
13
14
IS
36
11
IB
19
to
II
4i
13)44
r
IS
16
17
U
ii
SO
>,fc2
a
W
M
M
17
M
W
Supfioitint Agency
17
17
17
2fl
2t
1C
It
11
11
14
IS
36
J,
IB
39
40
41
42
41
44
It
16
47
41
41
SO
SI
62
si
M
M
W
57
M
59
0*9
0
SO
0
)l
CtH
icon*
a
61
H
111
M
M
Mm
M
67
uut
tK
It
69
CwiiitCoontM
1 i]
(4
66
66
i7
>a
BB
LATITUOf
0«f Mm
N
70 71 72 71 74 >
Northing Coot
70 71 7773 74 7
Commtmi
-1
M
30
1113
33
3<
is
16
31
M
W
4C
II
4!
41
44
4SU6
T
47
4t
41
so
SI
K
si
64
SB
se
SI
51
Si
so
»'
iHf
r
n
*f
*'
H
N
ISU U7J7J7J
Commtinu
«
Abbr*«t*l*0 S>lf Aclllim
14
IS
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
21
34
>d,6
27
»
••mplmtSil* Addi*M
14
It
II
17
If
P*fl>CUI*4*»
ul 1 cc
.41616
II
17
I9|l"
1
21
22
21
24
so, 1
Sll 1 CC (SI
I6N9
1
2QJ2I
22
2~3
=
76
26|
tco
1
h
27
1C
M
30
11
29
10
3-
11
33
34
IS
m
36
31
3B
31
•0
II
42
8
]]
19
19
4t
41
«
41
44
33
IS
46
47
41
19
so
SI
S3
SI
64
SS
SS
57
SB
It
cc
BIB
36]
64
iS
66
61
U
s»
70 71 71 73 74 7(
IS
ill
46
47
in
18
M
SI
52
5J
54
!
21
^
29
30
11
12
33
Ox
sn 1 cc
w
}4
IS
36
)]
1C
NO,
sn 1 cc
tt
17
18
It
ST
39
10
40
II
42
41
HC
CC
41
43
41
44
45
46
47
41
45
li*d 1
STJ 1 CC 1
• J46
T
47
,J,9
SO
N
T
SI
U
51
ssk6
Ty't^
S4SS
51
SI
SI
54
SS
56
«
?
S»6C
r
Cc 'If
Cod-
»7
SB
fffl
M
60
SI 5
X3
14
SS
AOCH
Cod* ]
616
261U4
1
66
.»
1
*
59
x>]'i n n 74 7j
1
AOcn ci«v«i>ort E
Populvnon Gr
66J67
68J69
70J7I 71 71 74 7i
j
r)l Hi
• Ion. 5
J78 71 '1 79 M
1 1
u
Aci
76 77 7| 7t BO
An
Zf 12 Zl !SB
Aci
76. 77 71 79 »
Act
76 77 7( 7! M
MSL Aci
TtT?? 7| 79 90
|
[ACI
M1
SO
616
36]
64
65
66
67
6e
«
7071 73 71 74 75
H 77 IB 79)90
1
OW: C*id A TNIM Zon« ••ring • 01, Alufci ft H.WMI • 02. Vufcon • 03. PtKiftc 04. MounUm • M. Cvnir* • 06, Etwivrn -07. Atlantic -Of
C^dA-H Ad>on Add - 1. Chimp • 7. OiUlt • 3
C*wd f SiMion Typi C«ni«i tiiy Imlu.ti.*) * 11. flt»Ml«iin«i - 12. Comm.mi.tl - U, Mobiit * 14
Subuibwi tnrtutiiiAl - 21. R«tid«ni>.>i • 22. Commticiiil * 23. Mobil* - 24
RU.« Nf.,1 uibwi- 31, AdKuliufM - 32. Comm,.c.«l > 33. lndutH<.H - 34. No»t ol th. abov* • 35
Htmoi. - 41
*;*..( M ST (la* Typ«l Not.niitfl Ax MoiiHminvSti* - I. Suit? and Loctt An Man noting Sit* - 2. A« orh». • 3
ti Cod*) St* Cort>/Mi "iMiwcuont
Figure 4-4. Sample of SAROAD site identification form.
-------
keypunched for submittal to NADB. Keypunch instructions are
4
contained in AEROS Volume II.
14. SEND COPY
TO NADB, RONC,
AND STATE
Copies of the completed, keypunched SAROAD site information
are sent to the RONC, the data processing section at NADB, and
state or local agency that submitted the data.
15. SEND COPY
NAMS POST-EDIT
CHECK TO RONC
The data processing section at NADB runs a post-edit check
for all air quality data submitted and sends a copy to the Regional
Office SAROAD contact. The SAROAD contact should copy the post-
edit check of NAMS data and make the check available on request
to the RONC for review and retention.
16. CHECK SITE
INFORMATION
DURING SITE
VISIT
Because the NHCI contains more detailed site information
than the MIS or SAROAD system, the NHCI is used as the basis for
NAMS site visits. Regardless of who conducts the site visit, the
HQNC maintains a copy of the NHCI. The RONC is responsible for
the correctness of information in the NHCI.
The NHCI contains information about the following: site
identification, site classification, topographic characteristics,
52
-------
obstructions that influence the site, meteorology and climatology,
probe siting, monitor, site and data record histories, site
representativeness, and custody and control of data.
Site identification information covers the following:
State
City
Urbani2ed area as designated by the Bureau of Census
Census tract
SAROAD site code number
State agency site number
Local agency site number
Site address
Name of nearest intersecting street
Pollutants monitored at the site (NAMS and SLAMS)
Name of preparer
Telephone number of preparer
Date of report
Description of landmarks
Site sketch
Site photographs
Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (UTM's)
Site classification information covers the following:
Dominant sources by pollutant
Description of land use (within a radius of 1/4 mile)
Description of land use (within a radius of 2 to 3 km)
History of stationary industrial sources influencing
the site
Mobile source information
Information about topographic characteristics includes
general and specific terrain features. A description of obstruc-
tions that influence the site includes buildings, trees, elevated
53
-------
roadways, and other obstacles near the site. The meteorology and
climatology data include the source of meteorological data,
summary of wind speed and direction frequencies, UTM's of the
meteorological data, and location of the meteorological station
in relation to the monitoring site.
Probe siting information shows that the requirements of
Appendix E, 40 CFR 58, are being met. Monitor information in-
cludes:
Monitor manufacturer
Model number
SAROAD method code
Date monitoring began
Frequency of measurement
Probe material
Residence time
Site and data record histories are necessary to identify the
times when air quality data may not be valid for use in deter-
mining air quality trends. Changes that can invalidate data for
such use include:
Changes in the inlet probe
Changes in the manifold
Instrument changes
Breaks in the data record
Information about site representativeness specifies whether
the site is microscale (several meters to 0.1 km), middle scale
(0.1 to 0.5 km), neighborhood scale (0.5 to 4.0 km), or urban
54
-------
scale (4.0 to 50.0 km). Also included are averaging times and
monitoring objectives.
Information about the custody and control of data includes
the current names and telephone numbers of persons in the chain
of custody.
17. REVIEW,
RETURN COMMENTS,
RECORD IN LOG
A copy of data flagged by the edit check of the SAROAD
Contact is sent to the RONC for review. The copy may contain
data summaries, raw data listings, and results of data screening.
The RONC reviews the information, comments on data flagged by the
edit check, returns the data and comments to the SAROAD Contact,
and records the transaction in the SAROAD Control Log. (If the
SAROAD Contact and RONC are not in the same location, the SAROAD
Contact records the transaction in the log.)
18. VERIFY USE
OF CHECKS IN
RO CONTROL PLANS
Action 42 in this subsection describes the performance and
system audits conducted by the ROQAC. The RONC verifies that
these audits are actually used as described in the QA control
plans.
19. CHECK FOR
COMPLETENESS
AND ACCURACY
(MIS)
55
-------
The Management Information System (MIS) describe specific
NAMS in detail and is maintained jointly by MDAD and the Regional
Offices. It is a small computerized tracking system used to
produce management reports that summarize progress in designating
NAMS and achieving conformity with specific instrument and
siting criteria. The MIS form may be filled out by the state or
local agency or by the RONC (or RONC designee), and the RONC
checks the form for completeness and accuracy. The RONC (or RONC
designee) may obtain needed information by visiting a site or
telephoning the state or local agency.
If MIS information is not complete or accurate, the RONC is
responsible for ensuring that the necessary information is ob-
tained. Information in the MIS must agree with that in the NHCI.
If discrepancies are found the RONC must verify questionable in-
formation. After initial loading of the MIS, the RONC should be
the only person to change site information from the Regional
Office terminal.
20. MAKE CHANGES
TO MIS ON RO
TERMINAL OR
FORM TO HQNC
As additional site information is obtained by the RONC, it
is entered into the MIS tracking system (by the RONC) at the
Regional Office computer terminal. The NAMS MIS operates on an
i,
«•
EPA UNIVAC 1110 computer using the Systems 2000 data base manage-
ment system and an English-oriented language. The RONC can
access the system and enter necessary site information according
56
-------
to instructions in the users manual distributed in June 1979.
After approval by the RONC, the MIS information is entered into
the data bank to allow both the RONC and the HQNC to access the
current information. Ideally, only the RONC should change the
MIS.
21. COMPARE SITE
INFORMATION ON
NECI, MIS, SAROAD;
MAKE CHANGES
Site information is compiled in three files: SAROAD site
information, MIS, and NHCI. Periodically (at least annually) the
RONC should compare data in the three files to make sure that all
data are consistent. If discrepancies are found, the RONC re-
solves them by contacting state or local agencies or making
site visits. Necessary changes to the MIS and NHCI files con-
taining incorrect or incomplete information are made by the RONC.
The SAROAD Contact is notified of all changes necessary in the
SAROAD identification file and is responsible for making them.
22. NOTIFY HQNC
AND SAROAD
CONTACT OF CHANGES
If information changes in any of the three site files
(SAROAD site information, MIS, or NHCI), the RONC.notifies the
HQNC and SAROAD Contact to ensure that they know the current pro-
gress and status of NAMS. Depending on the complexity and impact
of the changes, the RONC may make the notification written or
verbal. The SAROAD Contact is responsible for changing the
57
-------
SAROAD site file information; the RONC is responsible for chang-
ing the MIS and NHCI files.
23. CHECK FOR
COMPLETENESS,
ACCURACY, DESIGN
CRITERIA (NHCI)
The NAMS Hard Copy Information is detailed supplementary
site information used in addition to SAROAD site data and MIS
information. The NHCI report is designed to provide information
about the following: site identification, site classification,
topographic characteristics, obstructions that influence the
site, meteorology and climatology, probe siting, monitors, site
and data record histories, site representativeness, and custody
and control of data. The explanation of Action 16 in this sub-
section describes the information provided.
Routine evaluations of the NAMS site information are made by
the RONC and HQNC. The evaluations include completion of the
NHCI form and the submittal to the HQNC, RONC, and state and
local agencies that operate the sites.
The RONC checks each completed NHCI form for completeness
and accuracy and resolves problems whenever possible. The RONC
and HQNC also document compliance with design and siting criteria
(40 CFR 58).3
The RONC is responsible for ensuring that all stations found
to be in non-compliance with required NAMS siting criteria correct
58
-------
deficiencies within a reasonable period of time (usually 30
days). If correction requires more than 30 days, the RONC estab-
lishes a schedule for complying with siting and design criteria.
In either case, the RONC documents these changes and provides
copies to each agency receiving the original site evaluation
report.
24. CONFIRM NHCI
BY SITE VISIT; AS
MANY AS POSSIBLE
FIRST YEAR,
10-20% A YEAR LATER
Site information contained in the NHCI report is confirmed
during site visits by the RONC. During the first year of the
*
NAMS operation, the RONC or RONC designee should visit a major
portion of the sites. Although the RONC may designate someone
else to visit the site, the RONC is responsible for correctness
of the information. Each year thereafter, 10 to 20 percent of
the sites are visited by the RONC or RONC designee as deemed
necessary by the Regional Office.
The explanation of Action 16 in this subsection describes
the necessary checks. If any changes are made to the NHCI report
as a result of the site visits, the RONC documents them and
notifies the HQNC and the state and local agencies that operate
the affected sites. The RONC also notifies the RO SAROAD Contact
to make the appropriate changes to the SAROAD site information
file. The MIS file is corrected by the RONC.
59
-------
25. RETAIN NHCI
ORIGINAL; COPY
TO HQNC, STATE
When completed and verified, the original NHCI report is
retained by the RONC. Copies are sent both to the HQNC and to
the state or local agency operating the monitoring site.
26. REQUEST
HQNC TO
DELETE SITE
If an evaluation of the NHCI report and a site visit by the
RONC indicate that a site does not and cannot meet siting and
design criteria (40 CFR 58), the RONC must submit a request to
the HQNC for deletion of the site from the NAMS network. The
request documents the criteria that are not met at the site and
the reasons why the site cannot be made suitable. This step
ensures that unrepresentative monitoring sites are not retained
in the NAMS network. The RONC should also review other candidate
sites as possible replacements for the deleted site.
27. IF AUTHO-
RIZED, DELETE
SITE
If a monitoring site does not meet siting and design crite-
ria (40 CFR 58), the RONC requests deletion of the site from the
NAMS network. If the HQNC approves the RONC's request, the site
is deleted after formal approval by the Director MDAD. The RONC
must notify the state or local agency operating the site and
should assist the agency in locating a suitable replacement site,
60
-------
The RONC should eliminate information about the deleted site
from the NHCI active site file, but retain the information in a
retired site file for 3 years. Also, the RONC should eliminate
the site from the MIS and notify the SAROAD Contact that the site
is no longer a NAMS site. Deletion from the SAROAD file depends
on whether the site continues to operate as a SLAMS site.
28. SCREEN
COMMENTS: SEND
TO HQNC
State and local agencies that run monitoring sites often
submit comments with site data. The RONC reviews the comments on
NAMS sites, clarifies them if necessary with the submitting
agency, and sends relevant comments to the HQNC.
Some types of comments on unusual conditions such as con-
struction activity, dust storms, or traffic jams can explain
apparent data anomalies. Depending on the purpose of data col-
lection, this information could be used to explain why no data
are reported for a specified time interval or could be the basis
for deleting data from a file for specific analytical purposes.
Although comments are reviewed at the local and state level, the
RONC must also screen the comments.
29. SEPARATE
CHANGES INTO
MAJOR AND
MINOR
Data received by the SAROAD Contact after the 90-day dead-
line or data corrected after the deadline may not be added to
61
-------
the file without steps to ensure that the HQNC is aware of the
changes. The first step is for the RONC to classify all changes
or additions to the file as major or minor. Major changes
involve addition of previously missing data or large changes in
the values of previously submitted data; minor changes involve
correction of less important matters, such as dates. Classifica-
tion of changes as major or minor depends on the RONC's judgment
about their impact on interpretation and use of air quality
data.
30. NOTIFY HQNC
VERBALLY OF
MINOR CHANGES,
DATA NOT
SUBMITTED
After the RONC has reviewed the list of changes to be sub-
mitted after the 90-day deadline and has divided them into major
and minor changes, the RONC verbally notifies the HQNC of minor
changes. It is the RONC's responsibility to ensure that the
HQNC is made aware of all changes after 90 days. The RONC
should also notify the HQNC of data that will not be submitted
by the 90-day deadline.
31. PREPARE WRIT-
TEN JUSTIFICATION
FOR MAJOR CHANGES;
TO HQNC
Major changes submitted after the 90-day deadline must be
justified in writing by the RONC to the HQNC. The HQNC must be
informed by the RONC of changes in the file that affect the use
62
-------
and interpretation of air quality (AQ) data. This is a key ele-
ment of the lockout system, which was devised to prevent major
changes to the data file without notification of appropriate
personnel.
32. REVIEW AQ
DATA, SUMMARIES,
POST-EDIT
INVENTORY
After the SAROAD Contact has reviewed and corrected air
quality data that are to be submitted within the 90-day deadline,
a copy of these data is given to the RONC. The final air quality
data and data summaries are reviewed by the RONC. These data are
sent to NADB by the SAROAD contact.
The NADB creates a post-edit inventory and sends a copy to
the RO SAROAD Contact, who in turn submits it to the RONC. The
RONC reviews the post-edit inventory.
The purpose of these reviews by the RONC is to identify any
additional problems not observed by the SAROAD contact. If the
post-edit inventory reveals any additional problems with the
data, the RONC takes appropriate action to resolve them.
33. RETAIN
IN FILE
Copies of the final submittal of air quality data and of
data summaries are reviewed by the RONC. Because data flagged by
the edit check were previously reviewed and corrected, this final
review is primarily an overview of the air quality trends that
the data represent, rather than a check on the correctness of
63
-------
the data. The data and data summaries are placed on file by the
RONC and retained until the data have been updated. Any update
rejections must be resolved and summaries from the data bank
retained in the files.
34. IF NECESSARY,
REQUEST HELP
FROM HQNC OR
NADB
If problems that cannot be resolved within the Regional
Office occur, the RONC requests assistance from the HQNC or NADB
personnel. Requests may include assistance in program modifica-
tion to produce new summaries or classification on NAMS guide-
lines. Requests may be written or verbal at the discretion of
the RONC.
The RONC has much of the responsibility for timely and
complete NAMS data flow. He or she must be able to recognize
when problems may hinder the program and determine when changes
or clarifications in the system are necessary.
35. DEVELOP
DATA HANDLING
PLAN FOR RO;
COPY TO HQNC
The RONC or the ROQAC is the person most familiar with all
functions of personnel involved in NAMS data flow and therefore
most qualified to develop a data handling plan for the Regional
Office. This plan further defines responsibilities and interac-
tions within the RO and may later be altered and refined by the
RONC or ROQAC as necessary.
64
-------
A copy of the data handling plan for the Regional Office is
sent to the HQNC, ROQAC, and RONC. Because the ROQAC incorporates
the data handling plan in the RO Project and Program Plans, the
ROQAC should be consulted during the preparation and updating of
the data handling plan if the plan is developed by the RONC. This
plan is updated as appropriate.
36. REVIEW
P&A DATA
The Regional Office Quality Assurance Coordinator (ROQAC)
receives quarterly precision and accuracy (P&A) reports on
special forms from state and local agencies. The data on these
forms are reviewed by the ROQAC to see whether any problems are
evident. Review decisions are currently based on the judgment of
the ROQAC. The review generally involves a comparison of P&A
data from different submitting agencies and a comparison of P&A
data on the same site over a period of time to identify outliers
and trends. If P&A data for a given reporting agency are getting
worse, the ROQAC should investigate this trend.
Figure 4-5 shows a two-page sample form for P&A data. Pre-
cision is estimated from the results of biweekly precision
checks; these data are used to calculate a combined precision
probability interval. The calculation is based on the precision
of analyzer measurement of a test gas and the known concentration
of the test gas. Accuracy is estimated from the results of
independent audits. At the end of each calendar quarter a
combined accuracy probability interval is calculated; this is
65
-------
0\
OAIA AUISSMINI HffOHl
HCCOIIIIMO
IIAIfORCANIZAIlUN
I I I I IJ
II 1 4 »
VI AH OUAIUin UNI) COMMf 110 FORM
mi—I IOMGIOMAI. of net
I ) wi in cofy
• i
NAME of Mtronima OKOANUAIION —
AUIOMAHO ANAivnns
Fill CIS!ON
MO Of
no t»
miCIIIOMCIMCKI rtUMMkllllllT lIMIIt
to*«« um*
H;N'NJ CCD C£m r;;i,,LJ±LU
icmtii urrm
-
_
en am
um*
I;.!..LI±UJ
ACCURACY
HHMCI Of
IMCIAMUIV
MOMMlll* IMMII
»A«H>AIIO' AUDIIt
UVII »
HO O» AUN1I
«l UVU 4
g
D
M
D
D CCD
.1.-... . _ .
N;i'hi«i'i a
....... _
i MM a
tOKlH UfftH
n 1 1 K.U n 1 1 c!..[ ri 1 1 rm
touMB umii tomn urn* M'"
rj j ri i » f;,!j ri 1 1 cnn
*'"**
cm
•*•*
cm
_ ______
a cm
_ _ _
a cm ru:i_T
. _ . . IMIW« «mn
a cm i;g:Em rjj n 1 1 tu hi 1 1 i-g H 1 1
_ _ _ mini
a cm
KM»»H UfftK
tu H 1 1
lO»tl> DfMM
IU»IH umn
IUWIH uffm
icmnh umn
ionm> orrm
**"**
\ \
* COUHI OHIV MUMNC( OH inUIVktINI MONIIOHIMi M» limoi
A (Ml MM
• IMU MrmlMCl
C. VIM-CM CUM
o. nioioMiiiii
I. IAKI
f. otiiin tncirv
(continued)
Figure 4-5. Sample of precision and accuracy form.3
-------
Figure 4-5 (continued)
DATA ASSESSMENT REPORT
OMB N* M-RWU
nfPORTING'
STATE ORGANIZATION
YEAR OUAIITER SEND COMPLETED FORM
A TSP
«. SO,
c no,
O. P»
A. TV
* *°2
C NO,
D. r»
Mill!, Ill II
12345! 6 ; s
MAMF Of HfpnnTiwr. nnr.AMi7ATinM
MANUAl METHODS
PRECISION
*° °* , COLLOCATED COLLOCATED
SAMPLERS' flTCS SAMPlf&< LIMIT
I'M'I'M'I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•-M IS- 17 li- It 20-23
I'I'I'M'I'I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
t-14 1S-I7 ti-l» JO- 21
N'M-M'I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1
•-14 IS 17 11- It 20-23
I'hhhhM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ACCURACY
NO Of If vtl 1
AUDITS
lowrn uppin
|.M<|iM>l hi 1 1 1 1 l"l 1 n 1 1
uiwtfi \trvtn
l'l-l»l-hl«l !• I'M 1 l"l 1 1
"-* * io«»cn uwtH
I.M.M-hl hi I I I I l"l 1 |"| 1 1
— ~* uwvcfi orrcw
lih|ah|>|.| |o| | | | | |"| | |"| | |
1O REGIONAL OFFICE
WITH COPY TOEMSL/RTP
~0.AeiL.tY LIMITS uMITSAPfl.CA.Ll
LO-fH urn* TO.LOOCS2.-M
r»CTl I'M 1 1 TSP: MWT^3
LOWtn UPKR
l''-| 1 I'M 1 1 SO,, 4.-SOW-*
lOWtCR UPfER
I-.N..I l"l 1 1 -0,:»-NO,M3
LOWCR UfPCM
|"-| | l'l-| | | f* O.H-.PW-3
PHOBA8ILITY LIMITS
LEVCL 2 LEVEL 3
lowcn upT(n towcn UPPER
l"-| 1 1" 1 1 1 "I 1 1" 1 1 1
IOWIM umR LOWCH urrtR
1" 1 1 1" 1 1 1 1" 1 1 l"-| 1 1
LOWCR Uf*PCR IOWCR UffCR
1" 1 1 l"l 1 1 N 1 l"-| 1 1
LOWCR UfPCR LOWCR UfPCR
1" 1 1 l"l 1 1 l"-l 1 l"-| 1 1
NO OF VALID
COLLOCATEO
DATA PAIRS
MM
M-M
MM
M-W
II II
M-M
MM
3C li-M
1 COUNT ONLY MFEftCMCC OH EQUIVALENT MONITORMM MtTIIODS
67
-------
based on the percentage difference for each audit concentration
between the analyzer measurement and the known audit gas concen-
tration. In the future, limits will be set for P&A data, and
values outside these limits will have to be checked. Problems
identified by the ROQAC are reported to the RONC.
37. NOTIFY RONC
IF POTENTIAL
PROBLEMS ARE
IDENTIFIED
The RONC is informed, either verbally or in writing, about
all problems identified by the ROQAC. The purpose of this step
is to make sure that the RONC is aware of potentially invalid
data and that invalid data are not entered into the data base.
The P&A data that appear to pose problems are investigated by the
ROQAC, first by phone and then by visits to the agency if
necessary. Also, the ROQAC should carefully analyze P&A data
from agencies where problems have been identified, to ensure the
accuracy of the data.
38. RETAIN
P&A DATA
IN FILE
The ROQAC retains a copy of P&A data sent to the Regional
Office from the state or local agency on the special form shown
in Figure 4-5. A copy is also sent by the submitting agency to
EMSL to be entered into the EMSL data bank. Copies are kept on
file for as long as the data remains on file.
68
-------
39. REVIEW
STATE QA
PROGRAM PLAN
Under EPA's mandatory quality assurance policy the states
must prepare a quality assurance (QA) program plan to submit to
the ROQAC for review and approval. The QA program plan, which
represents a commitment by management to develop a QA program,
includes a policy statement that sets forth how management will
develop the quality assurance program and what items it will
include. The ROQAC will review the program plan submitted by the
state and submit comments for necessary revisions until the state
devises a program plan acceptable to the ROQAC.
40. REVIEW
STATE QA
CONTROL PLAN
As required by Section 2, Appendix A, the state agency must
submit a NAMS/SLAMS quality control program plan to the ROQAC for
review and approval. The quality control Program Plan must
cover methods, equipment, calibration, and maintenance, etc.; 40
3
CFR 58 lists all the elements required. The ROQAC must also
review the state QA control plan and submit comments for neces-
sary revisions until the state devises an acceptable plan.
41. RETAIN
PLANS IN FILE;
COPY AVAILABLE
TO RONC
69
-------
The ROQAC retains a copy of the accepted state Quality
Assurance Program Plan and Quality Control Plan. A copy of each
is also made available to the RONC.
42. DEVELOP
RO QA CONTROL AND
PROGRAM PLANS
After review and approval of the state QA Program and Con-
trol Plans, the ROQAC must under EPA's mandatory quality
assurance policy develop Regional Office Control and Program
Plans. These latter plans contain elements similar to those in
the state plans. The Regional Office QA Program Plans must be
submitted to the Quality Assurance Management Staff, Office of
Research and Development, in Washington, D.C. At a latter date
the States under EPA's mandatory quality assurance policy must
develop a SLAMS quality assurance Project Plan which is reviewed
and approved by the ROQAC.
43. CONDUCT
PERFORMANCE
AND SYSTEM
AUDITS
The ROQAC conducts performance and system audits to make
sure that the QA program performs as intended. The audits
verify the use of checks in QA control plans. Performance audits
are independent checks to evaluate the quality of data produced
by the total measurement system (sample collection, sample
analysis, and data processing) and are normally a quantitative
appraisal of quality. They are to be performed by an operator or
70
-------
analyst different from the person responsible for routine QA
measurements.
Sample collection audits include tests of flow rate devices
and checks of instrument calibration and instrument calibration
gases. Analysis audits involve analysis by the auditor of
routine samples with known concentrations. Data processing
audits involve spot checks of calculations and submission of
dummy raw data to obtain and check resulting validated data.
A system audit is an onsite inspection and review of the QA
system used to assess the total measurement system (sample
collection, sample analysis and data processing) of each monitor-
ing sensor. System audits are qualitative appraisals usually
performed before or just after monitoring has been initiated and
annually thereafter, although they may be performed anytime
during the life of the monitoring site. Quality assurance plans
should be used as the basis for conducting a system audit. Some
of the important items that should be reviewed in the audit
include:
Quality assurance organization and responsibility
Sample collection procedures
Sample analysis procedures
Data validation criteria
Calibration procedures
Control charts
Interlaboratory tests
Preventive maintenance schedules and procedures
71
-------
Subsection 1.4.16 of Reference 5 provides further details on
performance and system audits.
44. ENSURE
COMPLETENESS,
REPRESENTATIVENESS,
PRECISION, ACCURACY,
AND COMPARABILITY
The ROQAC must evaluate air quality data for completeness,
representativeness, precision, accuracy, and comparability. A
good guideline for completeness of data is that at least 75
percent of all possible data for a quarter are present. Data are
representative if they were gathered at a time typical of normal
operation and therefore if they measure what they were intended
to measure. For example, ambient CO levels gathered at midnight
are not representative of CO levels during weekday rush hours.
The ROQAC can best assess representativeness by site visits.
Precision and accuracy are checked from the P&A forms submitted
by the states (see Figure 4-5). Comparability refers to the
existence of standard temperature and pressure during testing and
the use of standard units for a given site and pollutant with
data in SAROAD format; data that need to be converted to standard
conditions or other units are referred back to the state agency
by the ROQAC.
45. VERIFY
TRACEABILITY
OF AQ DATA
72
-------
The ROQAC must verify the traceability of data annually as
part of the systems audit (Action 43). Traceability refers to
following raw data from measurement to determination of end
values. Roughly 2 to 5 percent of the total raw data and all
values exceeding NAAQS should be traced. This provides a check
of recordkeeping procedures and requires all data transformations
to be defended.
46. VERIFY USE OF
QA DATA CHECKS
The HQNC may request the ROQAC to verify that certain QA
data checks are being performed. The ROQAC should supply the
information requested by the HQNC. In most cases this informa-
tion may be supplied verbally.
4.1.2 Passive Responsibilities
Proper fulfillment of active responsibilities requires that
the RONC have knowledge of specific documents and site informa-
tion and that contact be maintained with specific individuals.
The RONC must be thoroughly familiar with information in the
following documents:
"Guideline for the Implementation of the Ambient Air
Monitoring Regulations" (40 CFR 58J1
"Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Regulations" (40 CFR
58 P
"Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measure-
ment Systems," Volumes I and II5>6
Appropriate State and Local Program and Project Quality
Assurance Plans
Regional Office Program and Project Quality Assurance
Plans
73
-------
"NAMS Management Information Users Manual"
"AEROS Manual Series, Volume II"4
The RONC must be familiar with the sites where NAMS monitors
are located. At a minimum this means knowledge of the informa-
tion contained on the NHCI form and confirmation of this informa-
tion through site visits. The RONC must be familiar enough with
sites to recommend necessary site changes if monitoring guide-
lines change. The RONC is the main person within EPA responsible
for ensuring that SAROAD, MIS, and NHCI site information is
accurate and current.
The RONC must maintain contact with state and local person-
nel responsible for the collection of air quality data and
familiar with activities at NAMS. When questions arise within
EPA about NAMS conditions, the RONC will be expected to contact
the appropriate state and local personnel to resolve the questions,
4.2 HEADQUARTERS
Headquarters is the Monitoring and Reports Branch (MRB) of
the Monitoring and Data Analysis Division (MDAD) in Durham, North
Carolina. Although they do not handle air quality data, site in-
formation, or quality assurance data, headquarters staff have
access to the data and information and have overall responsibili-
ty to ensure the attainment of NAMS monitoring objectives. The
Monitoring Section of MRB does screen data; review site informa-
tion; and recommend network approval, site additions, and
deletions. They must notify users of important changes in the
data base and issue management-level reports on such changes.
74
-------
4.2.1 Active Responsibilities
The HQNC has a number of active responsibilities relating to
the NAMS. Table 4-2 lists each responsibily and the HQNC's
corresponding authority and access to information.
The Chief, Monitoring Section (CMS), has a number of active
responsibilities relating to the NAMS. Table 4-3 list each
responsibility and the CMS's corresponding authority and access
to information.
Figure 4-6 is a flow diagram showing specific tasks per-
formed at MRB/MDAD. All tasks (rectangular boxes) are numbered,
and explanations of them follow. The headings for these explana-
tions are the same as the boxes to which they apply in Figure 4-6,
1. ENSURE MIS
HAS BEEN UPDATED
Whenever changed site information is received, the HQNC
should check that the MIS has been updated. The HQNC is kept
informed of the status of the monitoring stations through copies
of the MIS and NHCI forms received from the RONC. If the MIS
needs to be updated, this should be done by the RONC.
2. VERIFY INFOR-
MATION DURING
SITE VISIT:
20%/yr
Twenty percent of the monitoring sites are planned to be
visited by the HQNC each year. During site visits the HQNC
verifies information in the NHCI and ensures that all information
75
-------
TABLE 4-2. ACTIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE HEADQUARTERS NAMS COORDINATOR
Responsibility
Authority and access to
needed information
Track timeliness and complete-
ness of air quality data
Ensure that RONC keeps site
information updated
Inform Chief, Monitoring Section,
of areas not meeting NAMS net-
work or site design criteria
Evaluate whether monitoring regu-
lations are being implemented
Issue memo to Chief, Monitoring
Section on major changes to data
base
Issue management-level reports
on changes to the data base
Authorize all changes to air
quality data made after 90
days
The HQNC has direct access to the SAROAD
data bank and authority on lockout
The HQNC should visit 20% of the NAMS sites
per year and has authority to request RONC
to make more frequent visits if necessary
The HQNC has a copy of NHCI and authority
to recommend site additions or deletions
to Chief, Monitoring Section; the HQNC also
has access to NHCI, MIS, and SAROAD site
information
The HQNC has access to MIS, NHCI, and SAROAD
data bank; should visit 20% of sites per
year; and should examine sites with the
three highest AQ values quarterly
All changes must be authorized by the HQNC
to remove lockout
The HQNC has direct access to SAROAD data
bank
Lockout provision ensures authority
76
-------
TABLE 4-3. ACTIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHIEF, MONITORING SECTION
Responsibility
Authority and access to
needed information
Manage activities of HQNC
Issue quarterly reports to all
Division directors in OAQPS
and NADB about changes and
updates in the AQ data base
Identify and address national
issues affecting NAMS
Provide for consistency in estab-
listing NAMS and implementing
monitoring regulations
Serve as principal liason with
EMSL on QA and reference or
equivalent methods
The CMS can institute changes in procedures
used by the HQNC
Information is provided by the HQNC; the
CMS has authority to require more complete
information if necessary
The CMS has authority to recommend changes
in the operations of the entire NAMS
network but the final decision is made by
the Director, MDAD
Potential problems are identified by the
HQNC; the CMS has the authority to recom-
mend changes in the system, including the
addition or deletion of NAMS sites but
the final decision is made by the
Director, MDAD
The HQNC must provide the CMS with informa-
tion that suggests potential QA or monitor-
ing method problems
77
-------
-~"LI-0"?"--
PONC
JlONC
HOW
_"ONC
IOP» t<
HIS IC°X
^ '""""^
COP* 0'
NHCI IMM
__^x
REQUEST TO
Mini SITE
KITH
JUSf IflUT ION
_— — ^~~
NOIIIICAlriK 01
Sill INFf.-WION
10 K tWM
_
--
(.owrsis
now
vmiiuson
VERBAL
ir^TI-
AID QIIAII1I 9AIA |
NADBNC
UfillllN AJRIIORI !
7AIION 10 ADD
POSI-90-OA)
OAIA
1
URI1IEN (HtJOR) 1
OR VIRBAI (HINOR)I
JU51HHMIOH 1 1
FEW CMWG£S__| '
1
-<
— / V.
>••
EPA RRB/HJMDj
—
1
1
1
1
HQ NANS COORDINA10R (HQNC) |
*" 1. INSURE HIS
HAS BEEN UPDAIED
.— » s. nEfifu ir
SHE SHOULD
BE KICIEO
IRON NAHS
f). fyMIMlE £OH-
MNTS, TAKE APPRO
PRIATE AC1ION; COI
»TO
11
f
9. «E»IEK »0 OAIA
90 DAKS
, r
2 VIRIF
MAI KIN M
20t/yr
INFO
MING
1:
R-
6. HAM 1
HENAIIONS
" CHIEF, HIM
SEC1ION
S~"
_ A MSI
FCOH-
IIORING "*
)
10 HOI If
OF DATA A
• IIIE.D 10
ADDIO
COP) or SCREENED
"•*" LONHINIS FROH
RONC. EHSL. SIA1E
OR IOCAI AGCNC)
__^^~~
r
MEMO ON
POSSIILE
PROBI (HS
_^-"
I NAI«NC
mm- ,
IE J
CHIEF HONI10RING SCCIIONJ
IB. REVIEH, 1AKE
— - APPROPRIAIE
AC1ION
«
0
s
19. 1AICE APPROPRIAIC
Acrim 10 («stwr
IHPLIHINIA1ION
HI AIUIIA1IONS
4. Mllll* RONC
OF AN) t HANOI 0
— SIK INIOimAMIIN
i («SWI IHAI
HONIIORING RIG-
-- BEING IHI'IEHENIEI
1
7. N01IF)
11 ESIIHA1I
u . IMP1ICA1ION
^ OF CHANGES TC
OAIA USERS
ICOMHIdOA/KW
N POSSIBI1
111 OEtEIIOH
^^X*^
20. MIERHINI IF
Silt SHOMD
BE UEIE1ID
WHO ON HAJOR „,,.
OfCISIOK 0« CHANGES ANO JjT
SHI DTIITION IBPl ICA1 IONS OF Ta
IHOSI CHANGES
_^*S~~ ^_^^~"
•>\ uruiiu " ISSUt H«""".'
21. «£»)!» RiFOftl OF HIL KA>K)(I
CHANGES •• CHAHGIS; COP) 10 OAqP
I)IV . NAM). RU. HUNC
14. EVA
' OHALMf
12. REVIEW PIAN,
RI1A1N IN -
tilt
•" 13. VEHIH 1HA1
IMIE DO coomiiown
OF OAIA 15 r FBI OWING "~
DA CHECKS
15. IE P01IN11AL H. ISSUE HANACI-
QA PROBLINS. HCNI-UVtl M-
NU1III CHIEF.NON- PORTS ON S1A1US
MURING SECIION OF DAIA
J
111 (Hit WHO
CHANGES IN
9AIA
^^*^"
17. VtRltf DATA
IN 120 DAVS. CHECK
STAIUS OF DAIA
~
HMI ON
POSSIBLE
PROBI EHS
_r^^^J
J
21. EVAIUAIE;
wnrr rnsi
-------
is accurate and current. The explanation of Action 16 in Subsec-
tion 4.1.1 describes the NHCI.
3. ENSURE THAT
MONITORING REG-
ULATIONS ARE
BEING IMPLEMENTED
The HQNC is expected to know all regulations that apply to
NAMS monitoring. During site visits and review of MIS and NHCI
information, the HQNC must ensure that sites comply with applica-
ble regulations.
4. NOTIFY RONC
OF ANY CHANGED
SITE INFORMATION
If site visits indicate information that should be changed,
the HQNC should notify the RONC of the necessary changes to the
MIS and NHCI. The RONC is responsible for notifying the RO
SAROAD Contact to change the SAROAD ID information.
5. REVIEW IF
SITE SHOULD
BE DELETED
FROM NAMS
If the RONC requests that a monitoring site be deleted from
NAMS, the request is submitted to the HQNC, who reviews it and
decides whether it is justified. The HQNC may also initiate a
request to delete a site. If a deletion appears likely, the RONC
should begin looking for a replacement site.
79
-------
6. MAKE RECOM-
MENDATIONS TO
CHIEF, MONITORING
SECTION
If the HQNC agrees with the request for removal of a moni-
toring site from NAMS, the HQNC makes such a recommendation to
the CMS, who makes a decision on the recommendation. However,
final approval is made by the Director MDAD. The RONC should
provide a list of possible replacement sites so that the moni-
toring objectives will still be met.
7. NOTIFY
RONC
A formal memorandum is sent from the MDAD to the Regional
Office notifying them of the decision. In turn, if the site is
to be deleted the HQNC notifies the RONC of that decision, ac-
tually deletes the site from the MIS and removes information
about the deleted site from the NHCI active file. The RONC noti-
fies the SAROAD Contact, and notifies the appropriate state or
local agency.
8. EVALUATE COM-
MENTS, TAKE APPRO-
PRIATE ACTION; COPY TO
CHIEF, COMMENTS FILE
Along with data, state and local air monitoring agencies may
submit major comments that could be useful in interpreting re-
sults; for instance, a major change in the ozone calibration
technique, widespread (entire state) dust storms, volcanic
80
-------
eruptions, etc. The RONC reviews these comments and submits them
to the HQNC, who evaluates the comments and takes appropriate ac-
tion. This could be modifying, deleting, or adding data to the
data base, or including comments with some data. Copies of
comments and evaluations and notifications of actions taken are
submitted to the CMS and sent to the comments file for record.
The comments file is not to be used for explaining data anomalies,
9. REVIEW AQ DATA
SUBMITTED AFTER
90 DAYS
Air quality data submitted after the 90-day deadline must be
reviewed by the HQNC, who must determine whether the further data
should be added to the data base. The authorization of the HQNC
is necessary before the data can be added. The primary purpose
of this review is to estimate the implications of changes to the
data base and to identify and correct potential future problems.
10. NOTIFY NADBNC
OF DATA AUTHO-
RIZED TO BE
ADDED
When authorizing addition of data submitted after the 90-day
deadline, the HQNC must provide written notification to the
NADBNC of this authorization. The NADBNC will then remove the
lockout and permit the data to be added to the data base.
11. ESTIMATE
IMPLICATION
OF CHANGES TO
DATA USERS
81
-------
The addition of data to the data base after the 90-day
deadline may or may not affect the use and interpretation of data
submitted before the deadline. The HQNC evaluates the impact of
the added data on the data base and sends to the CMS a memo
summarizing the major changes and their possible implications.
12. REVIEW PLAN,
RETAIN IN
FILE
The RONC submits the Regional Office data handling plan to
the HQNC for review. If acceptable, the plan is retained by the
HQNC for reference. If the plan is not acceptable because of
major deficiencies, the HQNC sends it back to the RONC for
modifications.
13. VERIFY THAT
QA COORDINATOR
IS PERFORMING
QA CHECKS
The ROQAC verifies performance of QA checks verbally or in
writing through the RONC to the HQNC, who is responsible for
ensuring that required QA checks are made on NAMS data. The
ROQAC will respond to requests from the HQNC.
14. EVALUATE
QUALITY OF DATA
The HQNC must periodically assess the data from the Regional
Office to determine the quality of such data. These assessments
will be used in issuing management-level reports pertaining to
data quality, completeness, and timeliness.
82
-------
15. IF POTENTIAL
QA PROBLEMS,
NOTIFY CHIEF,
MONITORING SECTION
If the evaluation of data quality indicates potential QA
problems, the HQNC must write a memo summarizing the evaluation
and submit it to the CMS.
16. ISSUE MANAGE-
MENT-LEVEL RE-
PORTS ON STATUS
OF DATA
After evaluating data to determine the overall status, the
CMS must write a management-level report on the progress. This
report is prepared at least two times a year.
17. VERIFY DATA
IN 120 DAYS, CHECK
STATUS OF DATA
NOT SUBMITTED
The HQNC must verify the data actually in the data bank
within 120 days of the end of the quarter in which these data
were collected and must check the status of missing and incom-
plete data. If the RONC has not already notified the HQNC about
missing and incomplete data, the HQNC should contact the RONC for
an explanation.
18. REVIEW, TAKE
APPROPRIATE
ACTION
83
-------
The HQNC screens comments submitted by the RONC from the
state and local agencies and sends these comments to the CMS
(Action 8). The CMS reviews the comments and HQNC's actions,
determines whether the actions were appropriate, and takes any
further necessary steps.
19. TAKE APPROPRIATE
ACTION TO ENSURE
IMPLEMENTATION
OF REGULATIONS
The HQNC is responsible for making sure that monitoring
regulations are being implemented (Action 3) and sends a memo on
possible problems to the CMS, who then takes appropriate actions
to ensure implementation of regulations. This entails notifying
the RONC of monitoring problems and recommending solutions to
problems.
20. DETERMINE IF
SITE SHOULD
BE DELETED
When the RONC determines that a monitoring site should be
deleted from the NAMS network, a recommendation is made to the
HQNC. If in agreement, the HQNC recommends site deletion to the
CMS who decides on what action is to be taken. However, final
decision is to be made by the Director MDAD. In some cases, site
alteration can satisfy monitoring requirements; the possibility
of alteration should be determined by the HQNC and evaluated by
the CMS. Along with the request to delete the site should be a
84
-------
list of potential replacement sites. The CMS should recommend a
replacement site if a site is deleted.
21. REVIEW
CHANGES
Data approved by the CMS for inclusion in the NAMS data base
after the 90-day deadline represent changes to the data base; the
HQNC should estimate the implications of changes and report them
in a memo to the CMS. The CMS reviews the changes and implica-
tions as reported by the HQNC and issues a memo on the major
changes and their implications to data users (Actions 9, 10,
and 11) .
22. ISSUE QUARTERLY
REPORT OF ALL MAJOR
CHANGES: COPY TO OAQPS
DIV., NADB, RO, HQNC
The CMS issues quarterly reports summarizing all major
changes to the data base after the 90-day deadline and sends
copies to the Division Directors of the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards Division, Chief of the National Air Data
Branch, the Regional Office, and the HQNC's.
23. EVALUATE:
NOTIFY EMSL ON
MATTERS OF QA OR
REFERENCE METHODS
The HQNC assesses data quality and notifies the CMS of
potential QA problems. The CMS evaluates the findings of the
85
-------
HQNC and notifies EMSL of potential QA problems or problems with
reference methods used in monitoring.
4.2.2 Passive Responsibilities
Proper fulfillment of active responsibilities requires that
the HQNC have knowledge of specific documents and individuals.
The HQNC must be thoroughly familiar with information contained
in the following documents:
"Guideline for the Implementation of the Ambient Air
Monitoring Regulations" (40 CFR 58) !
"Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Regulations" (40 CFR
58)3
Regional Office Program and Project Quality Assurance
Plans
"NAMS Management Information Users Manual'
4
"AEROS Manual Series, Volume II
Current major reports and programs that use NAMS data
Further, the HQNC must maintain close contact with the appropriate
RONC's and the NADBNC.
Proper fulfillment of active responsibilities requires that
the CMS also have knowledge of specific documents, issues, and
individuals. The CMS must be thoroughly familiar with the
information contained in the "Guideline for the Implementation of
the Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations" (40 CFR 58) and "Ambient
p
Air Monitoring and Equivalent Methods" (40 CFR 53). In addition,
the CMS must be knowledgeable about national issues that can
affect NAMS and the general status and operation of the NAMS.
The CMS must also maintain contact with EMSL, OAQPS Division
86
-------
Directors, HQNC's, and Regional Office Surveillance and Analysis
(SSA)and Air and Hazardous Materials (A&HM) Divisions.
4.3 NATIONAL AIR DATA BRANCH
The National Air Data Branch (NADB) accepts air quality data
and SAROAD site information from the Regional Offices, loads the
data and information into the data bank, and maintains the data
and information for various users. Also, the NADB stores P&A
data received from the EMSL data file and combines this data with
the SAROAD data in reports. The MIS is maintained by MRB/NADB
and data are added, changed, or deleted directly by the RONC.
4.3.1 Active Responsibilities
The NADBNC has a number of active responsibilities relating
to the NAMS. Table 4-4 lists each responsibility and the NADBNC's
corresponding authority and access to information.
Figure 4-7 is a flow diagram showing specific tasks per-
formed at NADB. All tasks (rectangular boxes) are numbered, and
explanations of them follow. The headings for these explanations
are the same as the boxes to which they apply in Figure 4-7.
1. LOG IN
SUBMITTAL, ASSIGN
CONTROL ID
After the RO SAROAD Contact has completed required data
checks, the EPA NADB data processing section is notified that the
tape is ready for processing. The NADB data processing staff
logs in each submittal and assigns it a control ID. The log
87
-------
TABLE 4-4. ACTIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE NATIONAL AIR DATA BRANCH
NAMS COORDINATOR
Responsibility
Authority and access
to needed information
Ensure that NADB performs update
within 30 days of receipt of data
Serve as chief contact for NADB on
NAMS
Ensure proper integration of P&A
data into SAROAD system
Ensure that comment file is updated
and maintained
Remove lockout to permit entry of
AQ data
Resolve processing problems with
NAMS data
The NADBNC may delay processing of
SLAMS so that NAMS data can be pro-
cessed on time
All questions relating to NAMS should
be directed to NADBNC
The P&A data are accessed from the
EMSL file
Comments supplied by the HQNC are
added to comments file
Authority given by HQNC
Requests for assistance are made by
RONC or HQNC
88
-------
00
ID
!. not P051 toil
IHVUITOUT
COP* to HQNC MID
RO 5««OAD COHMCI
Figure 4-7. Tasks performed by NADB.
-------
contains the name and number of the tape and the number of
records contained on the tape. The control ID has five or six
digits. The first two are codes for the submitting state or
region, the next three indicate the Julian date on which the data
were received and the last digit designates (by A, B, C, or some
other letter) multiple sets of data if two or more sets are
entered.
2. RUN POST-EDIT
INVENTORY NA049,
COPY TO HQNC AND
RO SAROAD CONTACT
The NADB data processing section conducts a post-edit inven-
tory (NA049) of data from the Regional Office. The post-edit
program reads and verifies data on the tape and performs several
summary functions. For each site pollutant, the program tallies
and prints out the number of observations by month and quarter.
It also counts and prints out the number of additions, changes,
or deletions in the tape file, as designated by the Regional
Office. For all data classified as additions or changes, the
program prints out the three maximum observations per month. The
program also keeps a running total of the number of observations
by state on the tape. This running total must agree with the
number submitted according to the Regional Office; if it does
not, the difference must be resolved between the NADB data proc-
essing section and the RO SAROAD Contact.
90
-------
The post-edit program flags NAMS data by printing asterisks
next to all NAMS site pollutant combinations. This is essential
if NAMS and SLAMS data were not separated by the RO/SAROAD
Contact.
The printout created by the post-edit program is reviewed by
the NADBNC. A copy of the printout out tally is sent to the RONC
and the HQNC.
3. SEND COPY TO
HQNC
After the post-edit check, all data sets are merged. Then
the air quality data is run through a split program that creates
four more easily handled files; the GT file for 24-hour monitor-
ing data and the HD and ND files for continuous monitoring data
and NAMS data older than 90 days. In these split programs NAMS
data older than 90 days are put in a separate file and not
processed. A copy of the data more than 90 days old is sent to
the HQNC.
4. POST-90-DAY
DATA AUTOMATI-
CALLY LOCKED OUT
In the split programs created after the post-edit check,
NAMS data older than 90 days are written out to a separate file
and not processed. A copy of locked-out data is sent to the
HQNC. The locked-out data will not be added to the data bank
until the HQNC authorizes such addition.
91
-------
5. REMOVE LOCKOUT
FOR AUTHORIZED
DATA
The HQNC reviews the copy of locked-out air quality data and
the explanation provided by the RONC. The NADBNC then permits
the lockout to be overridden and the NADB data processing group
removes the lockout.
6. ENTER INTO
DATA SYSTEM
All data submitted before 90 days and data approved by the
HQNC after 90 days are entered into the SAROAD data bank by the
NADB data processing section. Various programs can then access
the air quality data and generate reports and summaries for EPA
and outside users.
This update involves addition of raw data stored or updated
in the raw data file. The HD data file is a low-volume file
updated every 6 months; the greater-volume GT and ND files are
updated every 3 weeks.
7. REMOVE
LOCKOUT, PERMIT
DATA TO BE
ADDED
After the HQNC has authorized addition of data more than 90
days old to the system, the NADBNC removes the lockout and
allows the data to be added.
92
-------
8. CHIEF NADB,
SEND COPY TO
NADBNC
The CMS issues quarterly reports on all major changes in air
quality data. A copy of each quarterly report is sent to the
Chief of the NADB, who provides a copy to the NADBNC. The
purpose is to facilitate notification of data users about changes
made to the data base.
9. INTEGRATE
P&A DATA INTO
SAROAD
The EMSL maintains a P&A file on the same computer as the
NADB SAROAD data files. The NADBNC is modifying the computer
programs to display air quality data and corresponding P&A data
together so that SAROAD users can obtain both files.
10. ASSIST IN
DEVELOPING RO
DATA HANDLING
PLANS .
The ROQAC must develop a Regional Office data handling plan.
The NADBNC assists the ROQAC when necessary and reviews the plan
for completeness, clarity, and inclusion of deadlines if the RONC
requests such a review.
11. RESOLVE
DATA HANDLING
PROBLEMS
93
-------
The NADBNC is responsible for resolving data handling
programs such as program errors or modifications. Also the
NADBNC is contacted by the RO SAROAD Contact for data handling
problems such as a request for a 1-day delay in the current data
update so that the RO can finish work on data that should be
included in a current update.
12. ENTER INTO
MONITORING
COMMENTS FILE
The monitoring comments file has been used to document gross
errors that may affect all the data from a state file for a
pollutant. (As of May 1980, this file contained only two or
three comments.) For example, one state that changed the cali-
bration procedure for measuring ozone levels found in 1 to 2
years that data obtained before the change was in error and
required a corrective factor. This was done and documented in
the monitoring comments file because the change affected a large
amount of data. All major comments that affect the use of the
air quality data should be sent to the HQNC. The HQNC will
screen the comments and decide which comments should be added to
the file.
4.3.2 Passive Responsibilities
The NADBNC is responsible for complete knowledge of the
AEROS data systems and should keep in contact with the RONC's and
the HQNC's. The contacts are generally not initiated by NADB
except when data processing problems arise.
94
-------
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guideline for the
Implementation of the Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations.
40 CFR 58. EPA-450/4-79-038, 1979.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Supplementary Guide-
lines for Lead Implementation Plans. EPA 450/2-78-038,
1978.
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ambient Air Quality
Surveillance Regulations. 40 CFR 58, 1980.
4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. AEROS Manual Series
Volume II: AEROS User's Manual. EPA 450/2-76-029, December
1976.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems. Volume I -
Principles. EPA-600/9-76-005, 1976.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems. Volume
II -Ambient Air Specific Methods. EPA-600/4-77-027a, 1977.
7. Farris, A., and K. Eichenbrenner. NAMS Management Informa-
tion System User's Manual. Prepared for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency by SDC Integrated Services, Inc.,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. June 11, 1979.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ambient Air Monitoring
and Equivalent Methods. 40 CFR 53. 1975 (amended 1976).
95
------- |