Main Title |
Assessment of the Adequacy of the Appendix F Quality Assurance Procedures for Maintaining CEMS (Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems) Data Accuracy: Status Report 2. |
Author |
Jernigan, J. R. ;
Peeler, J. W. ;
|
CORP Author |
Entropy Environmentalists, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC.;Environmental Monitoring Systems Lab., Research Triangle Park, NC. |
Year Published |
1984 |
Report Number |
EPA-68-02-3767; EPA-600/4-84-023; |
Stock Number |
PB84-171214 |
Additional Subjects |
Quality assurance ;
Auditing ;
Air pollution control equipment ;
Electric power plants ;
Boilers ;
Sulfur dioxide ;
Nitrogen oxides ;
Monitors ;
Standards ;
Sources ;
Sampling ;
Performance evaluation ;
Carbon dioxide ;
Sources ;
Oxygen ;
Assessments ;
Tables(Data) ;
Continuous emission monitoring systems ;
Cylinder gas audits ;
Relative accuracy audits ;
Flue gas desulfurization ;
Procedures
|
Holdings |
Library |
Call Number |
Additional Info |
Location |
Last Modified |
Checkout Status |
NTIS |
PB84-171214 |
Some EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. |
|
07/26/2022 |
|
Collation |
29p |
Abstract |
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is involved in the development of 'Appendix F - Quality Assurance Procedure 1 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Gas Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for Compliance.' According to Procedure 1, each emission source owner or operator is required to follow specific quality control procedures, which are outlined in this report. Two testing methods provided in Procedure 1 are a cylinder gas audit (CGA) for CEMS that are capable of accepting calibration gases and a relative accuracy audit (RAA) for all CEMS. The current field performance audit program is designed to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the CEMS data accuracy assessment procedures in Appendix F, Procedure 1. This status report describes test results from the field audit program. The updated CGA and RAA results for all CEM tests conducted through November 1983 are included, and the CGA and RAA results are compared. |