2nd Quarter 2019 Audit Report for Shelby County Health ...

2nd Quarter 2019 Audit Report for

Shelby County Health Department

Air Monitoring Network

Prepared for:

P.O.# B032261

Shelby County Health Department

Pollution Control/Air Monitoring

814 Jefferson Ave, Room 438R

Memphis, TN 38105

Prepared by:

1128 NW 39th Drive

Gainesville, FL 32605

Submitted:

June 2019

environmental engineering

& measurement services, inc.

Shelby County Health Department Monitoring Network Audit Second Quarter 2019

EE-MS.com/transfer/clients/Shelby Co i EEMS

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1

2.0 Audits of PM Samplers and Gaseous Pollutant Monitors .......................................5

2.1 Audit Methods and Equipment ........................................................................................ 5

2.1.1 Certification of EEMS Standards .......................................................................... 5

2.1.2 EPA Protocol Gas Standards and EEMS Mobile Laboratory ............................... 5

2.1.3 Level-2 Ozone Standard ........................................................................................ 6

2.2 Summary of Field Audit Activities .................................................................................. 6

2.3 Specific PM Sampler and Gaseous Monitor Audit Activities .......................................... 8

2.3.1 PM Sampler Audits ............................................................................................... 8

2.3.2 Gaseous Pollutant Monitor Audits ........................................................................ 9

2.3.3 Ozone Monitor Audits ........................................................................................... 9

2.3.4 Specific NO2 NOy CO and SO2 Audit Activities................................................. 10

2.4 Specific Meteorological Sensor Audit Activities ........................................................... 10

3.0 Audit Results ..............................................................................................................11

3.1 PM Audit Results ........................................................................................................... 11

3.2 NPAP-TTP Ozone Audit Results ................................................................................... 15

3.3 NPAP-TTP Sulfur Dioxide Audit Results ..................................................................... 15

3.4 NPAP-TTP Carbon Monoxide Audit Results ................................................................ 16

3.5 NPAP-TTP Nitrogen Dioxide Audit Results ................................................................. 17

3.6 Meteorological Sensor Audit Results ............................................................................. 18

3.7 Results and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 20

List of Tables

Table 1. Station Locations .............................................................................................................. 2

Table 2. Equipment Audited........................................................................................................... 2

Table 3. OAQPS Approved Audit Levels ...................................................................................... 9

Table 4. Shelby Farm PM10 and TEOM Sampler Verifications ................................................... 11

Table 5. Shelby Farm PM2.5 Samplers Verifications .................................................................... 12

Table 6. Alabama Ave. PM Samplers Verifications .................................................................... 13

Table 7. Near Road PM Sampler Verifications ............................................................................ 14

Table 8. Ozone TTP Audit Results ............................................................................................... 15

Table 9. Sulfur Dioxide TTP Audit Results ................................................................................. 16

Table 10. Carbon Monoxide TTP Audit Results .......................................................................... 16

Table 11. Nitrogen Dioxide TTP Audit Results ........................................................................... 17

Table 12. Meteorological Sensor Audit Results ........................................................................... 18


EE-MS.com/transfer/clients/Shelby Co ii EEMS

List of Figures

Figure 1. EEMS Audit Van-3 ......................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2. Edmund Orgill Park Ozone Audit ................................................................................... 7

Figure 3. Shelby Farms CO and SO2 Inlets with Audit Line Connected........................................ 7

Figure 4. Near Road Site with Audit Line Attached ...................................................................... 8

Figure 5. Temperature and Humidity Sensor Plug ....................................................................... 19

Figure 6. Temperature and Humidity Sensor Connector .............................................................. 19

List of Appendices

Appendix A Audit Data Sheets

Appendix B Maps of Locations

Appendix C Audit Standards Certifications


EE-MS.com/transfer/clients/Shelby Co iii EEMS

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

° F Degrees Fahrenheit

% RH Percent Relative Humidity

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO carbon monoxide

DAS data acquisition system

EEMS Environmental, Engineering & Measurement Services, Inc.

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FRM Federal Reference Method

lpm liters per minute

mm Hg millimeters of mercury

MPHD Metro Public Health Department

mps meters per second

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NO nitric oxide

NPAP National Performance Audit Program

OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

O3 Ozone

PE Performance Evaluation

PM particulate matter

PM2.5 particulate matter of 2.5 microns in aerodynamic diameter or less

PM10 particulate matter of 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter or less

ppm parts per million

PSD prevention of significant deterioration

QA quality assurance

rpm revolutions per minute

S/N serial number

SLAMS State or Local Air Monitoring Stations

SO2 sulfur dioxide

SOP standard operating procedure

TTP Through-The-Probe

μg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter


1. EE-MS.com/transfer/clients/Shelby Co 1 EEMS

1.0 Introduction

Environmental, Engineering & Measurement Services, Inc. (EEMS) was contracted by the Shelby

County Health Department (SCHD), Pollution Control/Air Monitoring Branch to conduct audits of

the district’s local ambient air quality gaseous and PM pollutant monitoring network. The air

quality monitoring network consists of five stations in the greater Memphis, Tennessee Metro Area

which are operated by the SCHD. The purpose of this network is to fulfill and comply with specific

monitoring requirements for State or Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) as specified by the

EPA in 40 CFR Part 58. The operation of the monitoring stations must meet the requirements in

40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A, which defines the quality assurance (QA) requirements for gaseous

and PM pollutant ambient air monitoring. The audits performed by EEMS under this contract

fulfilled the requirement for quarterly independent audits of pollutant monitors in the network. The

QA requirements can be found at:

https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/qa/APP_D%20validation%20template%20ve

rsion%2003_2017_for%20AMTIC%20Rev_1.pdf

The trained and certified EEMS field scientist followed the National Performance Audit Program

(NPAP) procedures while performing audits of all air quality monitors. The NPAP is a QA program

implemented by the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to conduct audits

of gaseous air pollutant monitors by standard methods throughout each region of the U.S. The

method includes introduction of National Institute of Standards and Traceability (NIST) audit gases

to the station monitors through the ambient sample inlet, including all filters and fittings. This

method evaluates measurement system accuracy including the entire sample train. The audit gas

concentrations are also measured and verified with an audit analyzer on-site which is calibrated at

the time of the audit.

EEMS performed the NPAP Through-The-Probe (TTP) pollutant monitor audits following EPA’s

Quality Assurance Guidance Document – Method Compendium – Field Standard Operating

Procedures (SOP) for the Federal PM2.5 Performance Evaluation Program and NPAP-TTP Audit

SOP. All procedures and guidance documents used to perform these audits can be found at the

EPA OAQPS website: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html

This report includes the results of the NPAP-TTP, meteorological sensors, and PM sampler audits

conducted on May 24 through May 30, 2019. The ambient air quality monitors audited were

operating at five stations in the network:

1. Shelby Farms - NCORE

2. SW Tennessee Community College - Near-road

3. Alabama Ave. (PM only)

4. Frayser (Ozone only)

5. Edmund Orgill Park (Ozone only)



The five stations visited are in the Memphis Metro area and in Shelby County, TN. Map images

of the sites are included in Appendix B. The monitoring station locations were obtained during the

audit visits with a GPS and are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Station Locations

Site Name Site Address Latitude Longitude Elevation (meters)

Alabama Ave. 416 Alabama Ave. 35.151241 -90.041571 75

Edmund Orgill Park 6855 Mudville Rd. 35.377981 -89.834490 118

Frayser 1330 Frayser Blvd. 35.217527 -90.019770 85

Shelby Farms (NCORE) 6388 Haley Rd. 35.151639 -89.850369 90

Southwest Tennessee Community College

(Near-road) 5767 Macon Cove 35.161218 -89.87063 78

The audited monitoring equipment operating at each site is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Equipment Audited

Site Name Monitor Make and Model S/N AQS ID

Alabama Ave.

PM2.5 (TEOM 1405) 1405A223701302

47-157-0024

FRM 2025i PM2.5 20353

Edmund Orgill Park Ozone 1138 47-157-1004

Frayser Ozone 1304 47-157-0021

Shelby Farms (NCORE)

CO (T-API T300 EU) 246

47-157-0075 SO2 (T-API T100 EU) 135

NOy (T-API T200 EU) 209

O3 (T-API T400 E) 2664



Site Name Monitor Make and Model S/N AQS ID

PM10 (FRM) (R&P 2025) 20917

PM2.5 (FRM-primary) (TEI 2025i) 203531302

PM2.5 (FRM-colo) (R&P 2025) 20921

PM2.5 (continuous) (TEI TEOM 1400A) 140AB231030006

Ambient Temperature (climatronics 100093)

J2850C

Relative Humidity (Met One 083E-0-6)

T25685

Barometric Pressure unknown

Chemical Speciation not tested

Carbon URG not tested

Southwest Tennessee Community College

(Near-road)

CO (T-API T300 U) 174

47-157-0100 NO2 (T-API200 U) 182

FRM 2025i PM2.5 20740

PM2.5 (continuous) (T-API T640) 200

Additional support materials operated at each of the stations include multi-gas dilution systems,

zero air generation systems, and NIST traceable calibration gases. The sites that measure ozone

also have level 3-certified standard photometers to verify Quality Check (QC) concentrations.

Details of the audits are presented in the following sections:

Section 2.0 Audits of PM Samplers and Gaseous Pollutant Monitors

Section 3.0 Audit Results

Appendix A Audit Data Sheets

Appendix B Maps of Locations

Appendix C Audit Standards Certifications



The preparation of this report, and all the activities and tasks described in this report, were

performed by an accredited NPAP-TTP mobile lab Field Scientist. All procedures followed during

the audits were provided by OAQPS and are available at the OAQPS website:

https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html.

Any questions related to this audit or audit report should be addressed to:

Eric Hebert EEMS Inc.

Telephone: 352-262-0802 P.O. Box 357593

Fax: 352-371-1144 Gainesville, FL 32635

E-mail: [email protected]



2.0 Audits of PM Samplers and Gaseous Pollutant Monitors

2.1 Audit Methods and Equipment

This section describes the steps followed in the performance of these audits. EEMS followed the

document referenced above rigorously. Supplemental guidance and excerpts from the method can

be found at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html.

2.1.1 Certification of EEMS Standards

All standards owned and maintained by EEMS undergo annual NIST traceable certification. The

standards include EPA Protocol Gas standards, digital multi-meters, meteorological sensors and

standards, and various flow rate measurement systems including two DeltaCal devices. Copies of

the annual certifications of the EEMS standards used for these audits are included in Appendix C.

2.1.2 EPA Protocol Gas Standards and EEMS Mobile Laboratory

EEMS owns and maintains a Thermo Environmental Instruments Inc. (TEI) 48i TLE CO analyzer

which is used to verify standard audit gas concentrations during NPAP-TTP audits. The CO

analyzer is mounted and operated in a climate controlled mobile laboratory with a multi-gas

dilution system and NIST traceable EPA Protocol Gas standards. The NIST gases include cylinders

of high concentration CO, low concentration CO, and a multi-blend NO, CO, SO2 mixture. The

mobile laboratory is equipped with its own data acquisition system (DAS). The EEMS audit Van-

3 was used for 2nd quarter audits. An image of the audit van is included in Figure 1.

Figure 1. EEMS Audit Van-3



2.1.3 Level-2 Ozone Standard

EEMS owns and maintains a Thermo Environmental Instruments Inc. (TEI) 49i level-2 ozone

standard photometer. The standard photometer is mounted and operated in the climate controlled

mobile laboratory with a multi-gas dilution system and other standards. The digital data output of

the ozone standard is monitored and recorded by the mobile laboratory DAS.

The standard photometer is transported to Research Triangle Park (RTP) North Carolina, or one of

the EPA regional laboratories for verification at least twice per year. The most recent verification

with the Standard Reference Photometer (SRP) from EPA Region 4 is included in Appendix C.

2.2 Summary of Field Audit Activities

On Friday, May 24, 2019, EEMS personnel met SCHD personnel at the Frayser site for the TTP

ozone audit. Following the audit at Frayser, the mobile lab was moved to Edmond Orgill to

complete the TTP audit of that station’s ozone monitor.

On Tuesday, May 28, EEMS personnel met SCHD personnel at the Shelby Farms NCORE site to

complete TTP audits of the CO, SO2, and NOy pollutant monitors.

On Wednesday, May 29, EEMS met SCHD personnel again at the Shelby Farms site to complete

audits of the ozone monitor, meteorological sensors, and PM samplers. Audits of the PM samplers

at both the near road and Alabama Avenue sites were also performed on Wednesday.

On Thursday, May 30, EEMS and SCHD personnel met at the Near-Road site for TTP audits of

the gaseous pollutant monitors and verification of the continuous PM sampler. An exit report and

debriefing interview with the network management team was also conducted. Field activities were

concluded on the afternoon of Thursday, May 30.

The shelter temperature sensor measurements were compared to the EEMS standard. All station

sensors audited, with the exception of the sensor at the near road site, were within 1-degree C of

the standard. The shelter temperature response at the near road site was approximately 1.4 degrees

higher than the temperature measured by the EEMS standard.

Images of some of the sites and samplers are provided in Figures 2 through 4 below.



Figure 2. Edmund Orgill Park Ozone Audit

Figure 3. Shelby Farms CO and SO2 Inlets with Audit Line Connected



Figure 4. Near Road Site with Audit Line Attached

2.3 Specific PM Sampler and Gaseous Monitor Audit Activities

This section describes the procedures used for audits of the gaseous and PM pollutant monitor

parameters at all sites. More detailed NPAP-TTP audit procedures can be found at:

https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html.

2.3.1 PM Sampler Audits

The sampler dates and times were verified for all samplers and found to be within 1 minute of the

actual time. The PM10 (first cut point) inlets were removed from the samplers and the EEMS leak

check device and DeltaCal or Bios standard were installed at the inlet to the sample train. The

samplers’ operational variables (flow rate, temperature, and pressure) were compared to the

variables as measured by the standard. The variables for all tested samplers were found within

acceptance limits, and all samplers passed leak checks with specific filter cassettes. Audit results

are included in Section 3.

The optical continuous PM2.5 sampler at the near road site was challenged using a filter to verify

the zero and the manufacturer’s standard dust to verify the span. The EEMS standard was used to

verify the inside and outside temperature, pressure, and flow rate. All tests were within acceptable

limits, however the SCHD span dust (lot number 100128-050-004) is out of certification.



2.3.2 Gaseous Pollutant Monitor Audits

The EEMS mobile laboratory audit analyzers and systems were allowed to warm-up overnight prior

to each station audit. Audits of gaseous monitors are performed by providing audit gas to monitor

inlets using Teflon “tee” connectors or Teflon bag for the Near-road sample inlet.

All monitor sample pressures and flow rates were checked prior to, and following the introduction

of audit gas to ensure that changes to the routine sampling variables did not occur as a result of the

addition of audit gas (test atmosphere) to the sampling inlet.

Audit test gas concentrations were selected from the OAQPS list of approved audit levels included

in the 40 CFR part 58 revisions. Table 3 provides the approved list of audit levels. Audit

concentrations from at least three audit levels were selected for each monitor audit. The SCHD

Department Manager provided a list of target audit levels and the EEMS audit personnel attempted

to meet those requirements. The final results of the NPAP-TTP audits are included in Section 3.0.

Table 3. OAQPS Approved Audit Levels

Audit Level Concentration Range, ppm

O3 SO2 NO2 CO

1 0.004 - 0.0059 0.0003 - 0.0029 0.0003 - 0.0029 0.020 - 0.059

2 0.006 - 0.019 0.0030 - 0.0049 0.0030 - 0.0049 0.060 - 0.199

3 0.020 - 0.039 0.0050 - 0.0079 0.0050 - 0.0079 0.200 - 0.899

4 0.040 - 0.069 0.0080 - 0.0199 0.0080 - 0.0199 0.900 - 2.999

5 0.070 - 0.089 0.0200 - 0.0499 0.0200 - 0.0499 3.000 - 7.999

6 0.090 - 0.119 0.0500 - 0.0999 0.0500 - 0.0999 8.000 - 15.999

7 0.120 - 0.139 0.1000 - 0.1499 0.1000 - 0.2999 16.000 - 30.999

8 0.140 - 0.169 0.1500 - 0.2599 0.3000 - 0.4999 31.000 - 39.999

9 0.170 - 0.189 0.2600 - 0.7999 0.5000 - 0.7999 40.000 - 49.999

10 0.190 - 0.259 0.8000 - 1.000 0.8000 - 1.000 50.000 - 60.000

2.3.3 Ozone Monitor Audits

Ozone audit test gas was generated with the ozone generator in the mobile laboratory’s dilution

system. The audit gas was delivered to the station monitor through the station inlet tubing using a



Teflon “tee” to allow the audit gas to vent at the inlet. The audit gas concentration was measured

with the level-2 standard photometer in the mobile lab and recorded by the mobile lab DAS. One

minute averages were reported by the site operator from the station monitor and compared to the

averages for the same time period from the standard.

2.3.4 Specific NO2 NOy CO and SO2 Audit Activities

Prior to beginning the NOx, NOy, CO, and SO2 audits, the EEMS audit CO analyzer was calibrated

using the mobile lab zero air system and CO gases. This was accomplished by supplying the EEMS

mobile laboratory CO analyzer with NIST gas directly from the cylinders and not through the

mobile lab dilution system. Data from this “Pre-audit” calibration was entered into the OAQPS

audit spreadsheet to be used to calculate the concentration of all audit gases generated during the

station audits.

The site audits were accomplished by generating audit test gas using the mobile laboratory dilution

system and the NIST multi-blend gas. The audit gas was delivered to the station monitors at the

station sample inlet, through all filters and fittings using Teflon tubing (and/or) a Teflon bag to

allow the audit gas to vent at the inlet. The generated audit gas CO concentrations were verified

with the mobile laboratory CO analyzer. The other audit gas concentrations were then calculated

based on the ratio of CO to the other gases in the NIST multi-blend audit gas cylinder.

Immediately following the station audits, the mobile laboratory CO analyzer was again challenged

directly with the NIST cylinder gases. The results of this “Post-audit” challenge were entered into

the OAQPS spreadsheet to correct the audit standard gas concentrations, accounting for any drift

of the mobile laboratory CO analyzer. This procedure (Pre-audit CO calibration, multipoint station

audits, and Post-audit CO challenge) is the same OAQPS standard procedure used routinely for all

NPAP-TTP audits.

2.4 Specific Meteorological Sensor Audit Activities

The site temperature and relative humidity sensors were removed from normal operation in order

to be verified with a certified EEMS standard. All station sensor values were obtained from the

station DAS.

The station temperature sensor was placed in three separate water baths with the EEMS standard

and the measurements were compared. The station relative humidity and barometric pressure

sensors were verified using NIST traceable EEMS handheld transfer standards.



3.0 Audit Results

3.1 PM Audit Results

All operational and reporting PM samplers were audited with the EEMS DeltaCal and BIOS

standards. The samplers’ date and time and all operational variables were found to be within

acceptable limits. The Shelby Farm samplers’ results are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. The

Alabama Ave. samplers’ results are included in Table 6. The Near Road samplers’ results are

included in Table 7.

Table 4. Shelby Farm PM10 and TEOM Sampler Verifications

Delta Cal Version N/A Site Shelby Farm

Time verified Yes PM-10 R&P Partisol 2025 s/n= 20917

Date verified Yes PM-2.5 TEI TEOM s/n= 140AB231030006

DeltaCal S/N 1196 EEMS 01451 DeltaCal Cert Date: 2/15/2019

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Shelby Farm Partisol 2025 PM-10

Parameter DeltaCal 2025 Site Sampler Difference Acceptance

Criteria Pass/Fail

Flow Rate (Lpm) 16.63 16.67 0.23% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Design Flow Rate (16.67 Lpm)

16.63 -0.23% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Ambient Temperature (oC) 30.7 31 0.3 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.0 749 0

≤ ± 5 mm Hg

Pass

Filter Temperature (oC) 31.5 31.9 0.4 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Leak Check 2 ≤ 25 mm Hg

Pass

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Shelby Farm TEOM 1400A PM-2.5

Parameter DeltaCal TEOM Difference Acceptance

Criteria Pass/Fail

Flow Rate (Lpm) 16.59 16.66 0.41% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Design Flow Rate (16.67 Lpm) 16.59 -0.47% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Ambient Temperature (oC) 29.7 30.5 0.8 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.0 746.3 -2.7 ≤ ± 5 mm

Hg Pass

Leak Check (main) 0.09 0.15 lpm Pass

Leak Check (bypass) 0.15 0.6 lpm Pass



Table 5. Shelby Farm PM2.5 Samplers Verifications

Delta Cal Version N/A

Site Shelby Farm

Time verified Yes

PM-2.5 Partisol 2025 Primary s/n= 203531302 POC1

Date verified Yes

PM-2.5 Partisol 2025 colo s/n= 20921 POC2

DeltaCal S/N 1196 EEMS 01451 DeltaCal Cert Date: 2/15/2019

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Shelby Farm Partisol 2025 PM-2.5 POC1


Criteria Pass/Fail

Flow Rate (Lpm) 16.97 16.72 -1.48% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Design Flow Rate (16.67 Lpm) 16.97 1.81% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Ambient Temperature (oC) 29.7 29.4 -0.3 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.5 749 -0.5 ≤ ± 5 mm

Hg Pass


Leak Check 3 ≤ 25 mm Hg

Pass

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Shelby Farm Partisol 2025 PM-2.5 POC2


Criteria Pass/Fail




Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.5 748 -1.5

≤ ± 5 mm Hg

Pass

Filter Temperature (oC) 32.0 31.7 -0.3 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Leak Check 2 ≤ 25 mm

Hg Pass



Table 6. Alabama Ave. PM Samplers Verifications

Delta Cal Version 3.37P Site Alabama Ave

Time verified Yes

PM-2.5 TEI Partisol 2025i s/n= 20737

Date verified Yes

PM-10 TEI TEOM s/n= 1405A223701302

DeltaCal S/N 1196 EEMS # 01451 DeltaCal Cert Date: 2/15/2019

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Alabama Ave Partisol 2025 PM-2.5


Criteria Pass/Fail




Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.5 749 -0.5

≤ ± 5 mm Hg

Pass

Filter Temperature (oC) 34.2 32.7 -1.5 ≤ ± 2 oC Pass

Leak Check 7 ≤ ± 25 mm Hg

Pass

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Alabama Ave TEOM 1400A PM-10

Parameter DeltaCal TEOM Difference Acceptance

Criteria Pass/Fail


Design Flow (16.67 Lpm) 16.90 1.39% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Bypass Flow (13.67 Lpm) 13.81 13.68 1.01% ≤ ± 4% Pass


Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.5 748.6 -0.9 ≤ ± 5 mm

Hg Pass

KO verification 1.53% ≤ ± 4% Pass

Leak Check (main) 0.02 0.15 lpm Pass

Leak Check (bypass) 0.01 0.6 lpm Pass



Table 7. Near Road PM Sampler Verifications

Delta Cal Version N/A Site Near Road

Time & Date Verified Yes PM 2.5 TEI Partisol 2025i s/n= W207401501

Time & Date Verified Yes PM 2.5 T-API T640 s/n= 200

BIOS S/N 287690 & EEMS# 01421 DeltaCal Cert Date: 3/4/2019

DeltaCal S/N 1196 & EEMS# 01451 DeltaCal Cert Date: 2/15/2019

Date & Site of Verification 5/29/2019 Near Road Partisol 2025i PM-2.5

Parameter DeltaCal 2025 Site Sampler

Difference Acceptance

Criteria Pass/Fail




Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 749.5 750 0.5 ≤ ± 5 mm

Hg Pass


Leak Check 5 mm ≤ 25 mm Hg

Pass

Date & Site of Verification 5/30/2019 Near Road T640 PM-2.5

Parameter BIOS or Std T640 Difference Acceptance

Criteria Pass/Fail




Barometric Pressure (mm Hg) 750 749.3 -0.7 ≤ ± 5 mm

Hg Pass

Dust test 11.3 10.9 -0.4 ≤ ± 0.5 Pass

Zero test 0.0 0.0 Pass



3.2 NPAP-TTP Ozone Audit Results

The audit results of the ozone monitors at the three sites that monitor ozone were within the

acceptance limits of ±10% of any single audit point and also within the warning limit of ±7% (or

1.5ppb for level 2). The results of the O3 audits are summarized in Table 8. The field audit forms

are included in Appendix A.

Table 8. Ozone TTP Audit Results

Site and Audit Level Audit Value (ppm)

Site Value (ppm)

% Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

Pass Warning Fail

Shelby Farm – level 6 0.10811 0.10760 -0.5 -0.00051 Pass


Shelby Farm – level 4 0.06041 0.06053 0.2 0.00012 Pass



Frayser – level 5 0.07998 0.07926 -0.9 -0.00072 Pass

Frayser – level 4 0.06537 0.06551 0.2 0.00014 Pass



Edmund Orgill – level 6 0.10700 0.10600 -0.9 -0.00100 Pass





3.3 NPAP-TTP Sulfur Dioxide Audit Results

The single SO2 monitor in the network is operated at the Shelby Farm NCORE site. The audit

results were within the acceptance limits of ±15% of any single audit point and within the warning

limit of ±10%. The low-level test points (levels 2 and 1) were within the acceptance limit of

±0.0015ppm. There were no observed problems with the accuracy of the station monitor. The

results of the SO2 audit are summarized in Table 9. The field audit forms are included in Appendix

A.



Table 9. Sulfur Dioxide TTP Audit Results


Site Value (ppm)

% Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

Pass Warning Fail




Shelby Farm – level 2 0.00269 0.0024 N/A -0.00029 Pass


3.4 NPAP-TTP Carbon Monoxide Audit Results

There are two CO monitors currently operating in the network. They are located at the Shelby

Farm and Near-road sites. The audit results of all monitors were within the acceptance limits of ±

15% and 0.4ppm of any single audit point. One audit point at the Shelby Farm site was above the

warning criteria of ± 0.030 and ± 10%. There were no observed problems with the accuracy of the

network CO monitors. The results of the CO audits are summarized in Table 10. The field audit

forms are included in Appendix A.

Table 10. Carbon Monoxide TTP Audit Results


Site Value (ppm)

% Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

Pass Warning Fail





Shelby Farm – level 2 0.0851 0.052 N/A -0.03309 Warning


Near-road – level 5 4.8054 4.879 1.5 0.07363 Pass



Near-road – level 3 0.6591 0.655 -0.6 -0.00377 Pass

Near-road – level 2 0.1632 0.155 N/A -0.00874 Pass




3.5 NPAP-TTP Nitrogen Dioxide Audit Results

The Near-road site operates a NOx monitor and the NCORE site operates a NOy monitor. The Near

Road and NCORE monitors were audited utilizing gas phase titration (GPT) with ozone to produce

NO2. An alternative method using NPN gas to challenge the NO2 channel directly was not used.

The posted OAQPS method was followed for the audit. The results were within the acceptance

limits of ± 15% of any single audit point. At the Near Road site, one of the low concentration

converter efficiency values was above 104% (114.5%) and failed. However, the overall Near Road

converter efficiency was 102.4% and passing, using the converter efficiency calculation provided

in OAQPS QA Guidance Doc 2.3.

The low-level points which are used for informational purposes and not for data validation were all

within acceptance limits. OAPQS is evaluating the low-level converter efficiency audit method

due to the difficulty in obtaining stable NOx measurements at very low concentrations during TTP

audits.

The results of the NO2 audits are summarized in Table 11. The field audit forms are included in

Appendix A.

Table 11. Nitrogen Dioxide TTP Audit Results


Site Value (ppm)

% Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

Pass Warning Fail





Shelby Farm Converter Efficiency – level 5 97.2% Pass




Shelby Farm Converter Efficiency – OAQPS QA Document 2.3 (slope/intercept calculation)

97.2% Pass



Near-road – level 4 0.01917 0.01883 -1.8 -0.00034 Pass




Site Value (ppm)

% Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

Pass Warning Fail


Near-road – level 1 0.00155 0.00161 N/A 0.00006 Pass

Near-road Converter Efficiency – level 6 102.9% Pass




Near-road Converter Efficiency – level 1 115.5% Fail

Near-road Converter Efficiency – OAQPS QA Document 2.3 (slope/intercept calculation)

102.4% Pass

3.6 Meteorological Sensor Audit Results

The meteorological sensors operating at the Shelby Farms site were audited for the first time during

the 2nd Quarter 2019 audit visit. The sonic wind sensor was not operational and was not audited.

The temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure sensors were challenged with audit

standards. The ambient temperature and humidity sensors are mounted at approximately 3 meters

above the ground. The results are summarized in Table 12.

Table 12. Meteorological Sensor Audit Results

Parameter Audit Value Station Value Difference Pass / Fail

Temperature 31.81 33.2 1.39 (° F) Fail



Relative Humidity 58.9 61.7 2.8 (% RH) Pass

Barometric Pressure 749.5 751.6 2.1 (mmHg) Pass

The current procedures require that the sensors be returned to the manufacturer once per year for

calibration and certification. The sensors are not calibrated or verified onsite. Some of the sensor

wiring is beginning to deteriorate and is in poor condition. Some signals were interrupted during

the audit procedures. Images of the temperature and humidity signal cable connections are

presented in Figures 5 and 6.



Figure 5. Temperature and Humidity Sensor Plug

Figure 6. Temperature and Humidity Sensor Connector



It is possible that some of the error observed in the signal could be due to the condition of the

wiring.

3.7 Results and Recommendations

The stations in the SCHD monitoring network are in good condition and very well run. Site

operators are knowledgeable and maintain the site monitors in very good working order.

The meteorological measurement accuracy could be improved by replacing the sensors and

wiring. It is recommended that the non-functional wind sensor be replaced with a mechanical

type that could be calibration and audited onsite. Sensors provided by the R.M. Young Company

are less expensive that those currently in use and can be calibrated on site.

It is suggested that if meteorological measurements are a priority then a program to include

calibrations and audits be developed.

APPENDIX A

Audit Data Sheets

Site Name: Edmund Orgill Audit Date: 5/24/2019

-0.00100 Pass -0.00061 Pass -0.00027 Pass -0.00028 Pass -0.00021 Pass -0.00003 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

Post Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

NOx Audit Point #5

NO Audit Point #3NO Audit Point #4

NOx Audit Point #1NOx Audit Point #2

NOx Audit Point #4

SO2 Audit level 2

Converter Efficiency NO2 level 1

NO2 Audit level 4NO2 Audit level 2

Converter Efficiency NO2 level 5Converter Efficiency NO2 level 4Converter Efficiency NO2 level 2

Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

SO2 Audit level 1

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide

SO2 Audit level 6SO2 Audit level 5

Oxides of Nitrogen


NOx Audit Point #3

NO Audit Point #5

CO Audit level 2CO Audit level 1

FINAL SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT CO BASEDEEMS Van-3

Ozone

ParameterNPAP Lab Response

(ppm)Station Response

(ppm)

-0.9

0.017130.00051 0.00048

-0.8

-0.8

Ozone audit level 5Ozone audit level 4


Pre Zero

Percent Difference

-1.2

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

0.080870.057220.03656

0.08026Ozone audit level 6

0.05695

Pass/Fail

0.10700

-0.5

0.017340.03628

0.10600

CO Audit level 5

Site Name: Edmund Orgill Airs ID: 471571004Auditor: Eric Hebert Audit Date: 05/24/19Station Manager: Judy Low / Yong Cai

Instrument: Ozone COManufacturer: Thermo TEIModel: 49i 48i TLESerial Number: 1180030022 1503464200Calibration Date: 09/07/18 CalibratedSlope 1.0029 on Intercept 0.0001098 day of audit

STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T400Property Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 1.0076 -0.0946Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:

Pass/Fail Warning Auditor Eric Hebert

Ozone audit level 6 Pass PrintOzone audit level 5 Pass Ozone audit level 4 Pass SignatureOzone audit level 3 Pass Ozone audit level 2 Pass

EPA person notified in case of audit failureAudit Limits

Pass Bias < ±10% OR difference from actual concentration < 24 hour allowable drift (0.003 ppm) Fail Bias > ±10% AND difference from actual concentration > 24 hour allowable drift (0.003 ppm)

Warning Bias > ±7% AND difference from actual concentration > 0.0015 ppm

Comments:0

0.03656 0.03628 -0.8

0.00051 0.00048

0.01734 0.01713 -1.2

0.08087 0.08026 -0.8

0.05722 0.05695 -0.5

FINAL NPAP THROUGH-THE-PROBE AUDIT REPORT

MOBILE PE LAB INSTRUMENTS

05/14/191/4 " Teflon & glass

0.82

113805/22/19

EEMS Van-3

0.10700 0.10600 -0.9

Ozone

OZONE REPORT

NPAP O3 Concentration (ppm)

FINAL OZONE AUDIT RESULTS

Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

Site Name: Frayser Audit Date: 5/24/2019

-0.00072 Pass 0.00014 Pass 0.00037 Pass 0.00028 Pass

N/A0.00032 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

Warning


Carbon Monoxide

0.065370.028170.01637


0.02854

Pass/Fail

0.07998

1.30.01665

0.07926

CO Audit level 5


Ozone



(ppm)

-0.9

0.00051 0.00083

0.2

1.7



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

NO Audit Point #2

NOx Audit Point #3

NO Audit Point #5


Oxides of Nitrogen

NO Audit Point #1

SO2 Audit level 1

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


SO2 Audit level 2




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

NOx Audit Point #5



NOx Audit Point #4

Post Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

Site Name: Frayser Airs ID: 471570021

Auditor: Eric Hebert Audit Date: 05/24/19Station Manager: Betty Brown / Judy Low


STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T400Property Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 1.0156 0.0027Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:


Ozone audit level 5 Pass PrintOzone audit level 4 Pass Ozone audit level 3 Pass SignatureOzone audit level 2 Pass Ozone audit level 1 N/A




Comments:

0.07998 0.07926 -0.9

Ozone

OZONE REPORT



Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference



04/22/191/4 " Teflon & glass

0.76

130404/15/19

EEMS Van-3

0.06537 0.06551 0.2

0.02817 0.02854 1.3

0

0.01637 0.01665 1.7

0.00051 0.00083

Site Name: Shelby Farm - NCORE Audit Date: 5/29/2019

0.00040 Pass-0.00051 Pass -0.00045 Pass 0.00012 Pass 0.00106 Pass 0.00072 Pass 0.00121 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00040 0.00080

Post Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero

NOx Audit Point #5



NOx Audit Point #4

SO2 Audit level 2




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

SO2 Audit level 1

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


Oxides of Nitrogen


NOx Audit Point #3

NO Audit Point #5



Ozone



(ppm)

-0.5

0.015480.00037 0.00158

-0.6

2.8



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

4.9

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

0.079990.060410.03729


0.06053

Pass/Fail

0.10811

0.2

0.014760.03835

0.10760

CO Audit level 5

Site Name: Shelby Farm - NCORE Airs ID: 471570075Auditor: Eric Hebert Audit Date: 05/29/19Station Manager: Joe Maness / Judy Low


STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T400UProperty Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 1.0036 -0.0040Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:


Ozone audit level 6 Pass PrintOzone audit level 5 Pass Ozone audit level 4 Pass SignatureOzone audit level 3 Pass Ozone audit level 2 Pass




Comments:0

0.03729 0.03835 2.8

0.00037 0.00158

0.01476 0.01548 4.9

0.07999 0.07954 -0.6

0.06041 0.06053 0.2



03/20/191/4" Teflon

0.78

266404/19/19

EEMS Van-3

0.10811 0.10760 -0.5

Ozone

OZONE REPORT



Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

0.0004 0.00080


N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.03407 Pass0.04032 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/A

0.06391 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00031 PassN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00076 Pass-0.00036 0.0004

Post Zero -0.00033

Post Zero -0.00034

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero -0.00001

NOx Audit Point #5



NOx Audit Point #4

0.00000

0.000260.13851

0.14092

SO2 Audit level 2




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

SO2 Audit level 1

0.00000.000290.15008

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


Oxides of Nitrogen-0.0113

0.00914.7507

0.053

-0.025


NOx Audit Point #3

0.00027

NO Audit Point #5



Ozone



(ppm)



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

Ozone audit level 5

Pass/Fail

4.791CO Audit level 5 0.8


Instrument: Ozone COManufacturer: 0 TEIModel: 0 48i TLESerial Number: 0 1503464200Calibration Date: 01/00/00 CalibratedSlope 0 on Intercept 0 day of audit

STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T300EUProperty Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 0.00 0.00Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:


CO Audit level 5 Pass PrintCO Audit level 4 N/ACO Audit level 3 N/A SignatureCO Audit level 2 N/ACO Audit level 1 N/A




-0.0113 0.053

NPAP CO Concentration (ppm)

Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

0.8

-0.0250.0091

4.7507 4.791

FINAL NPAP THROUGH-THE-PROBE AUDIT REPORTEEMS Van-3

MOBIL PE LAB INSTRUMENTS

1/4" Teflon

CO

CARBON MONOXIDE REPORT

24602/27/19

1.574/11/2019

FINAL CARBON MONOXIDE AUDIT RESULTS


N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.02023 Pass-0.02000 Pass -0.01767 Pass -0.02471 Pass -0.03309 Pass Warning-0.02611 Pass -0.02114 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00013 Pass-0.00437 Pass -0.00227 Pass -0.00135 Pass-0.00029 Pass-0.00001 Pass0.00031 Pass-0.00012 0.0002

Post Zero -0.00011

Post Zero -0.00011

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero 0.00000

NOx Audit Point #5

0.00117

0.00119


0.01647


NOx Audit Point #4

-0.8

0.00000

-0.00014

0.039410.016750.00252

0.077530.03874

0.07887

0.00248

SO2 Audit level 2




-10.8

Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

SO2 Audit level 10.002690.00127

0.00240.0013

-7.6

0.0000

0.01784

0.07960.03970.0165

-0.000150.084000.04198

-5.2-5.4

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


-38.9-65.1


-0.00482.65901.3287

-4.40.540

0.04010.0520.014-0.025

-0.025


NOx Audit Point #3

-0.00014

NO Audit Point #5


0.0851


Ozone



(ppm)



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

Ozone audit level 5

Pass/Fail

0.5648

2.639CO Audit level 4 -0.81.311 -1.3





CO Audit level 4 Pass PrintCO Audit level 4 Pass CO Audit level 3 Pass SignatureCO Audit level 2 Pass WarningCO Audit level 1 Pass




-1.3

-4.4

-0.0039 -0.025

0.0401 0.014 -65.1

0.0851 -38.9

1.311

0.052

1.3287

0.5648


Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

-0.8

-0.025-0.0048

2.6590 2.639



1/4" Teflon

CO


24602/27/19

1.574/11/2019


0.540




Pass/Fail WarningSO2 Audit level 6 Pass Auditor Eric HebertSO2 Audit level 5 Pass PrintSO2 Audit level 4 PassSO2 Audit level 2 Pass SignatureSO2 Audit level 1 Pass




-5.4

-7.6

NPAP SO2 Concentration (ppm)

0.0013

0.08400

0.0000

-5.2

-0.00012 0.0002

Percent DifferenceSite Response

(ppm)

0.00269

0.00127

0.0024 -10.8

-0.8

SO2

0.63

0.0796

05/22/19

4/10/20191/4" Teflon

FINAL SULFUR DIOXIDE AUDIT RESULTS

-0.00015

0.04198

0.01784

0.0397

0.0165

135



SULFUR DIOXIDE REPORT


N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00008 Pass0.00655 Pass 0.00210 Pass 0.00130 Pass 0.00088 Pass

N/A

-0.00008 Pass0.00280 Pass -0.00006 Pass 0.00024 Pass 0.00012 Pass

N/A

0.00077 Pass-0.00160 Pass -0.00011 Pass -0.00065 Pass -0.00058 Pass

97.2% Pass101.3% Pass97.1% Pass99.6% Pass

Converter Efficiency calculated by OAQPS QA Guidance Doc 2.3 February 2002 = 97.2% Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00035

Post Zero -0.00033

Post Zero -0.00033

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

-22.2Post Zero -0.00001

NOx Audit Point #5


0.02362 5.5


NOx Audit Point #4

2.9

0.01590

-0.11.0

-3.4-0.5

0.8

0.000150.099700.04846

0.00077

5.9

0.00000

0.020210.00445

0.02492

0.00023 0.00015

0.00261 0.00203

4.4

0.048520.024030.01528

0.095250.04770

0.101800.04980

0.09690

0.01502

SO2 Audit level 2

-14.6

0.04712 0.045520.020100.00380




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 5

SO2 Audit level 10.016280.02559

0.000250.103200.05168

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


6.9


0.00783.26681.6359


NOx Audit Point #3 0.024270.01540

0.00023

NO Audit Point #5


0.5152


Ozone



(ppm)



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

Ozone audit level 5

Pass/Fail

0.8100

CO Audit level 5


Instrument: Ozone CO Instrument:Manufacturer: Thermo TEI Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T200EUModel: 49C-PS 48i TLE Property Number:Serial Number: 0517112167 1503464200 Calibration Date:Calibration Date: 09/12/17 Calibrated Slope/Intercept: 0.000 0.000Slope 1.005036 on Indicated Flow:Intercept 0.00032915 day of audit In-Line Filter Change:

Manifold Type:

Pass/Fail Warning WarningPass Pass Pass Pass N/A

Audit Limits

Pass Bias < ±15% OR difference from actual concentration < 24 houFail Bias > ±15% AND difference from actual concentration > 24 ho

Warning Bias > ±10% AND difference from actual concentration > 0.001

Converter Efficiency Audit LimitsPass Between 96% and 104%Fail <96% or >104%

Warning Between 96%-97% or 103%-104%

Pass/Fail Warning Auditor Eric HebertPass PrintPass Pass SignaturePassPassPassPass EPA person notified in case of audit failurePass Conv eff by slope

Pass 97.2%Converter Efficiency NO2 level 1Converter Efficiency NO2 level 2Converter Efficiency NO2 level 4



NO2 Audit level 5

NO2 Audit level 1

Converter Efficiency by slope =

0.04712

0.00166

97.2%

0.02010 -0.5

0.00445 0.00380 -14.6 97.1%

0.02021

0.04552 -3.4

-0.00170

101.3%

0.00261 0.00203 -22.2 99.6%

NOx Audit Point #5

NPAP NO2 Concentration (ppm)

Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

N/A

Pass/Fail

0.0150

NO Audit Point #3

FINAL NO2 AUDIT RESULTS

NO Audit Point #2

NO Audit Point #4 NOx Audit Point #4 Pass

NO Audit Point #1

NO Audit Point #5

Converter Efficiency

PassPassNOx Audit Point #3

NOx Audit Point #2

NPAP NO Concentration (ppm)

Percent Difference

Site Response (ppm)

NPAP NOX CONCENTRATION (ppm)

0.0153

0.0236

-0.0003 -0.0003

0.0249 1.05.5

0.01540.0159 5.9

0.0243

SITE RESPONSE (ppm)

Percent Difference

0.0002

0.0997


MOBIL PE LAB INSTRUMENTSNO/NOX

FINAL NO AUDIT RESULTS FINAL NOx AUDIT RESULTS

1/4" Teflon

05/02/19

NITROGEN OXIDES REPORT

STATION INTRUMENT INFORMATION

209

0.941/0/1900

NOx Audit Point #1

0.0240

0.8

Pass

0.0002

0.0953

0.0498

0.0002

0.1018

0.0477 4.4

0.0969

0.0485

0.0002

2.9

0.0485 -0.1

6.9

Site Name: SWTCC Near Road Audit Date: 5/30/2019

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00974 Pass0.07363 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00902 Pass

0.00097 Pass0.00319 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00013 Pass

0.00098 Pass0.00016 Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/A

-0.00019 Pass

0.00007 Pass0.00104 Pass

N/AN/AN/A

0.00002 Pass

102.9% PassN/AN/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00003

Post Zero 0.00003 -0.00010

Post Zero 0.00003 -0.00016

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Post Zero 0.00000

NOx Audit Point #5



NOx Audit Point #4

0.1

1.3

0.000510.14270

0.00006

0.00002

-0.00001

-0.00046 0.000510.14011 0.14330

0.14254

SO2 Audit level 2

0.08176 0.08280




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 6

SO2 Audit level 1

-0.000500.15181

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


2.3

Oxides of Nitrogen0.0010

-0.01594.8054

-0.008

-0.006


NOx Audit Point #3

-0.00047

NO Audit Point #5



Ozone



(ppm)



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)Warning


Carbon Monoxide

Ozone audit level 6

Pass/Fail

4.879CO Audit level 5 1.5

Site Name: SWTCC Near Road Airs ID: 471570100Auditor: Eric Hebert Audit Date: 05/30/19Station Manager: Yong Cai / Judy Low


STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T300UProperty Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 1.00 0.01Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:


CO Audit level 5 Pass PrintCO Audit level 4 N/ACO Audit level 4 N/A SignatureCO Audit level 3 N/ACO Audit level 2 N/A







1/4" Teflon

CO


17404/08/19

1.8 lpm5/15/2019


Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

1.5

-0.006-0.0159

4.8054 4.879

0.0010 -0.008

Site Name: SWTCC Near Road Audit Date: 5/30/2019

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

0.00622 Pass0.00344 Pass 0.01290 Pass -0.00377 Pass -0.00874 Pass -0.00797 Pass 0.00236 Pass

-0.00008 Pass-0.00017 Pass -0.00003 Pass -0.00041 Pass -0.00046 Pass

N/A0.00020 Pass

-0.00008 Pass-0.00152 Pass -0.00083 Pass -0.00070 Pass -0.00063 Pass

N/A0.00015 Pass

0.000350.00081 Pass -0.00034 Pass -0.00033 Pass 0.00006 Pass0.00003 Pass

102.6% Pass102.7% Pass98.3% Pass114.5% Fail

Converter Efficiency calculated by OAQPS QA Guidance Doc 2.3 February 2002 = 102.4% Pass

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

Warning


Carbon Monoxide

Ozone audit level 6

Pass/Fail

0.6591

2.681CO Audit level 4 0.11.344


Ozone



(ppm)



Pre Zero

Percent Difference

Actual Difference

(ppm)

NO Audit Point #2

NOx Audit Point #3 0.018850.00421

0.00014

NO Audit Point #5


0.1632 -5.4-17.3

-0.2


0.00482.67761.3311

-0.60.655

0.04600.1550.038-0.008

0.011

NO Audit Point #1

1.0

SO2 Audit level 10.005160.00145

0.02082

0.000150.084590.04205

SO2 Audit level 4

Sulfur Dioxide


SO2 Audit level 2

-8.3

0.04789 0.048700.018830.00365




Pre Zero

NO2 Audit level 1

NO2 Audit level 50.00000

0.019170.00398

0.01881

0.00014 0.00006

0.00155 0.00161

-0.1

0.039480.019550.00484

0.078070.03881

0.077900.03878

0.07942

0.00476

-1.9

0.00430

-2.1-3.6

1.7-1.8

-13.0

0.000060.077900.03865

0.00035

-9.7

0.00002

NOx Audit Point #5

0.00134

0.00136


0.01922 -2.1


NOx Audit Point #4

-0.00033

Post Zero -0.00030 -0.00010

Post Zero -0.00031 -0.00016

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Pre Zero

Post Zero

3.9Post Zero -0.00001



STATION INSTRUMENT INFORMATIONInstrument:Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T300UProperty Number:Calibration Date:Slope/Intercept: 1.00 0.01Indicated Flow:In-Line Filter Change:Manifold Type:


CO Audit level 4 Pass PrintCO Audit level 4 Pass CO Audit level 3 Pass SignatureCO Audit level 2 Pass CO Audit level 1 Pass





0.655

EEMS Van-3


1/4" Teflon

CO


17404/08/19

1.8 lpm5/15/2019


Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

0.1

0.0110.0048

2.6776 2.681

1.0

-0.6

-0.0104 -0.008

0.0460 0.038 -17.3

0.1632 -5.4

1.344

0.155

1.3311

0.6591


Instrument: Ozone CO Instrument:Manufacturer: 0 TEI Manufacturer/Model #: T-API T200UModel: 0 48i TLE Property Number:Serial Number: 0 1503464200 Calibration Date:Calibration Date: 01/00/00 Calibrated Slope/Intercept: 0.999 -0.531Slope 0 on Indicated Flow:Intercept 0 day of audit In-Line Filter Change:

Manifold Type:

Pass/Fail Warning WarningPass Pass Pass Pass N/A

Audit Limits

Pass Bias < ±15% OR difference from actual concentration < 24 houFail Bias > ±15% AND difference from actual concentration > 24 ho

Warning Bias > ±10% AND difference from actual concentration > 0.001

Converter Efficiency Audit LimitsPass Between 96% and 104%Fail <96% or >104%

Warning Between 96%-97% or 103%-104%

Pass/Fail Warning Auditor Eric HebertPass PrintPass Pass SignaturePass PassPassPass EPA person notified in case of audit failureFail Conv eff by slope

Converter Efficiency by slope = Pass 102.4%

NOx Audit Point #1

0.00136

0.01955

-13.0

Pass

NOx Audit Point #5

NPAP NO2 Concentration (ppm)

Site Response (ppm)

Percent Difference

N/A

Pass/Fail

0.00476

NO Audit Point #3

FINAL NO2 AUDIT RESULTS

NO Audit Point #2

NO Audit Point #4 NOx Audit Point #4 Pass

NO Audit Point #1

0.00014

0.07807

0.0388

0.0001

0.0779

0.03881 -0.1

0.07942

0.03948

0.00014


MOBIL PE LAB INSTRUMENTSNO/NOX

FINAL NO AUDIT RESULTS FINAL NOx AUDIT RESULTS

1/4" Teflon

04/08/19

NITROGEN OXIDES REPORT

STATION INTRUMENT INFORMATION

182

1.1 lpm3/21/2019

SITE RESPONSE (ppm)

Percent Difference

0.0001

0.0779

-0.0002

-1.9

0.0387 -2.1

-0.2

PassPassNOx Audit Point #3

NOx Audit Point #2

0.04789

NPAP NO Concentration (ppm)

Percent Difference

Site Response (ppm)

NPAP NOX CONCENTRATION (ppm)

0.00484

0.01922

-0.0001-0.00030 -0.00031

0.0188 -3.6-2.1

0.00420.0043 -9.7

0.0189

0.0

0.0487 1.7

0.0001

102.7%

NO Audit Point #5

Converter Efficiency

0.00134

0.00136

102.6%

0.0188 -1.8

0.00398 0.0037 -8.3 98.3%

0.01917

0.00155 0.0016 3.9 114.5%



0.0000



NO2 Audit level 5

NO2 Audit level 1


0.00000

Shelby County Meteorological QA Test Results

Unadjusted Temperature

Site: Shelby Farms Date: 29-May-2019Field Scientist : E. Hebert

Site Sensor(s) Mfg.: Climatronics Ref. Std. Mfg.: Extech Ref. Std. Slope: 1.0091Model: 100093 Ref. Std. Model: 407907 Ref. Std. Intercept: -0.1104

Measurement Units: ° F Ref. Std. ID No: EEMS 01228 Certification Date: 2/12/2019

3 m probe Ref. Temp. Raw Ref. Temp. Corr. Site Temp. DAS DifferenceSensor ID. No: J2850C 31.99 31.81 33.2 1.39

81.78 81.15 81.9 0.75115.64 114.71 115.3 0.59

Average 0.91

RemarksFailFailFail

Page 1 of 1

Shelby County Meteorological QA Test Results

Unadjusted Relative Humidity/Barometric Pressure

Site: Shelby Farms Date: 29-May-2019Field Scientist : E. Hebert

Relative Humidity

Site Sensor Make: Met One Ref. Std. Mfg.: AZModel: 083E-0-6 Ref. Std. Model: AZ 8723 Ref. Std. Slope: 1.0154

Serial No: T25685 Ref. Std. ID No: EEMS 01223 Ref. Std. Intercept: -1.3456

Salt Solution Ref. Raw Ref. Corr. Site DAS Difference Remarks% RH % RH % RH % RH % RH

58.5 58.9 61.7 2.8 PASS

Average 2.76

Barometric Pressure

Site Sensor Make: RM Young Transfer Make BGIModel: Unknown Model DeltaCal Ref. Std. Slope: 1.0000

Serial No: Unknown Serial No: EEMS 01451 Ref. Std. Intercept: 0.0000

Ref. BP Raw Ref. BP Cor. Site BP DAS Error RemarksmmHg mmHg749.5 749.5 751.6 2.1 PASS

Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX B

Maps of Locations

Topo North America™ 10

Data use subject to license.

© DeLorme. Topo North America™ 10.

www.delorme.com

TN

MN (1.4°W)0 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

mikm

Scale 1 : 200,000

1 cm = 2.00 km Data Zoom 10-0




www.delorme.com

TN

MN (1.5°W)0 400 800 1200 1600 2000

0 160 320 480 640 800

ftm

Scale 1 : 17,600

1 cm = 176.0 m Data Zoom 13-5




www.delorme.com

TN

MN (1.3°W)0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

0 200 400 600 800 1000

ftm

Scale 1 : 22,400

1 cm = 224.0 m Data Zoom 13-2

APPENDIX C

Audit Standards Certifications

Date2/12/2019 - - Calibration and verification of three RTD meters with most recent certification of EEMS RTD

RTD RTD RTDAt Date 01230 / 01231 01227 / 1 01228 / 2

TMI EEMS 2/12/2019 EEMS EEMS EEMSSTD AER van3 van1

Cert # A2380069diff corrected raw corrected raw corrected raw corrected raw corrected

-25.00 -25.02 0.020 -25.016 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.15 0.00 -0.09 0.020.00 0.01 -0.010 0.016 10.32 10.33 10.35 10.34 10.56 10.09 10.31 10.57

100.00 99.99 0.010 100.007 21.10 21.11 21.12 21.12 21.43 20.89 21.19 21.35150.00 149.97 0.030 149.993 30.30 30.31 30.32 30.33 30.67 30.30 30.47 30.30

40.00 40.01 39.98 40.00 40.46 40.02 40.28 40.0347.91 47.92 47.89 47.92 48.40 47.90 48.23 47.9025.00 25.01 25.00 25.00 25.34 25.01 25.14 25.02

2019 correction: slope= 0.99989313intercept= -0.0064885

corr= 1.0000000

0.998872 1.007333 1.0090922/12/2019 0.026147 0.144973 -0.11036

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

RTD 01229

slope =intercept =

correlation =

TMI Cert data -- 1/23/2019

EEMSRTD RTD

01229 01229

Field Scientist : E. HebertSite ID: Shelby FarmsAudit/Calibration Date: 5/29/2019

Audit Equipment List Assigned to: Van 1

Reference Standard Mfg. Model SN ID Number Slope Intercept Certification DateMultimeter 1 0Voltage Source 1 0RTD (Temperature Reference) Extech 407907 EEMS 01228 1.009092 -0.11036 2/12/2019Hygrometer (RH Reference) AZ AZ 8723 EEMS 01223 1.0154 -1.3456 2/6/2019Pressure Reference BGI DeltaCal EEMS 01451 1 0 2/15/2019Wind Speed Motor - Low RM Young 18802 EEMS 01254 1 0 7/11/2018Wind Speed Motor - High RM Young 18811 EEMS 01255 1 0 7/11/2018Solar Radiation Translator 1 0Solar Radiation Sensor 1 0Compass Ushikata 190037 EEMS 01272 1 0 1/23/2019Hi-vol orifice (QA) Tisch TE-5028A 2927 EEMS 01462 0.99477 -0.00057 4/8/2019Hi-vol orifice (QS) Tisch TE-5028A 2927 EEMS 01462 1.58863 -0.00092 4/8/2019Manometer EEMS 01461 1.00000 0.00000GPS Delorme PN-60 EEMS 01006 1 0

Field Scientist Certification

Eric Hebert

Has satisfactorily completedThe US Environmental Protection Agency’s

“National Performance Audit Program (NPAP)Field Scientist Re-certification Course”

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Research Triangle Park, NC

Course Dates: April 13-14, 2017

Gregory W. NoahNPAP National Coordinator

USEPA, OAQPS, AAMG

2nd Quarter 2019 Audit Report for Shelby County Health ...

Documents

Transcript of 2nd Quarter 2019 Audit Report for Shelby County Health ...