Evaluation of the Incon TS-LLD Line Leak Detection System

Evaluation of the Incon TS-LLD Line Leak Detection System (for Hourly Testing, Monthly Monitoring, and Annual Line Tightness Testing) EPA Forms PREPARED FOR Incon (Intelligent Controls) July 6, 1995 Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. 1125 Valley Ridge Drive, Grain Valley, MO 64029, USA Voice (816) 443-2494, Fax (816) 443-2495 E-mail info@kwaleak.com, Web http://www.kwaleak.com

Preface The forms contained in this report are based on data collected using the EPA protocol "Standard Test Procedures for Evaluating Leak Detection Methods: "Pipeline Leak Detection Systems", EPA/530/UST-90/010, September, 1990. The work was conducted at the Leak Detection Test Center in Kansas City, Missouri, which is operated by Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. Volume 1 contains the Final Report and Volume 2 contains the Test Data. This evaluation meets the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for s. Questions regarding this evaluation should be directed to Mr. Dan Gagnon, Incon (Intelligent Controls), at (207) 283-0156. KEN WILCOX ASSOCIATES, INC. H. Kendall Wilcox, President July 6, 1995 ii

Results of the Performance Evaluation Conducted According to EPA Test Procedures Used as an Hourly Test This form summarizes the results of an evaluation to determine whether the pipeline leak detection system named below and described in Attachment 1 complies with federal regulations for conducting a line tightness test. The evaluation was conducted according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) evaluation procedure, specified in Standard Test Procedures for Evaluating Leak Detection Methods: s. The full evaluation report includes seven attachments. Tank system owners who use this pipeline leak detection system should keep this form on file to show compliance with the federal regulations. Tank system owners should check with state and local agencies to make sure this form satisfies the requirements of these agencies. System Evaluated System Name: Version of System: Incon TS-LLD Line Leak Detector Manufacturer Name: Incon (Intelligent Controls) 74 Industrial Park Road (street address) Saco, Maine 04072 (city, state, zip code) (207) 283-0156 (telephone number) Evaluation Results 1. The performance of this system (X) meets or exceeds ( ) does not meet the federal standards established by the EPA regulation for line tightness tests. The EPA regulation for an hourly test requires that the system be capable of detecting a leak as small as 3.0 gal/h with a probability of detection (P D ) of 95% and a probability of false alarm (P FA ) of 5%. 2. The estimated P FA in this evaluation is 0 % and the estimated P D against a leak rate of 3.0 gal/h defined at a pipeline pressure of 10 psi in this evaluation is 100 %. - Results Form Page 1 of 5

Criterion for Declaring a Leak 3. This system (X) uses a preset threshold ( ) measures and reports the output quantity and compares it to a predetermined threshold to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 4. This system (X) uses a single test ( ) uses a multiple-test sequence consisting of tests (specify number of tests required) separated by hours (specify the time interval between tests) to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 5. This system declares a leak if the output of the measurement system exceeds a threshold of 1.5 gal/hr (specify flow rate in gal/h) in 1 out of 1 tests (specify, for example, 1 out of 2, 2 out of 3). If more detail is required, please specify in the space provided. Evaluation Approach 6. There are five options for collecting the data used in evaluating the performance of this system. This system was evaluated (X) at a special test facility (Option 1) ( ) at one or more instrumented operational storage tank facilities (Option 2) ( ) at five or more operational storage tank facilities verified to be tight (Option 3) ( ) at 10 or more operational storage tank facilities (Option 4) ( ) with an experimentally validated computer simulation (Option 5) 7. A total of 53 tests were conducted on nonleaking line(s) between 5/9/95 (date) and 6/28/95 (date). A description of the pipeline configuration used in the evaluation is given in Attachment 3. Answer questions 8 and 9 if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. 8. The pipelines used in the evaluation were 3 inches in diameter, 175 ft in length and were constructed of fiberglass (fiberglass, steel, or other). 9. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was (X) was not present in the pipeline system. Answer questions 10 and 11 if Option 3 or 4 was used. 10. The evaluation was conducted on (how many) pipeline systems ranging in diameter from in. to in., ranging in length from ft to ft, and constructed of (specify materials). - Results Form Page 2 of 5

11. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was ( ) was not present in the majority of the pipeline systems used in the evaluation. 12. Please specify how much time elapsed between the delivery of product and the start of the data collection: (X) 0 to 6 h (time after completion of circulation and start of test) ( ) 6 to 12 h ( ) 12 to 24 h ( ) 24 h or more Temperature Conditions This system was evaluated under the range of temperature conditions specified in Table 1. The difference between the temperature of the product circulated through the pipeline for 1 h or more and the average temperature of the backfill and soil between 2 and 12 in. from the pipeline is summarized in Table 1. If Option 1, 2 or 5 was used, a more detailed summary of the product temperature conditions generated for the evaluation is presented in Attachment 4. If Option 3 or 4 was used, no artificial temperature conditions were generated. Table 1. Summary of Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Minimum Number of Conditions Required Number of Conditions Used * Range of )T(EF) ** 1 2 )T < -25 4 8-25 < )T < -15 5 10-15 < )T < -5 5 10-5 < )T < +5 5 10 +5 < )T < +15 4 8 +15 < )T < +25 1 2 )T > 25 * This column should be filled out only if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. ** )T is the difference between the temperature of the product dispensed through the pipeline for over an hour prior to the conduct of a test and the average temperature of the backfill and soil surrounding the pipe. Data Used to Make Performance Estimates 13. The induced leak rate and the test results used to estimate the performance of this system are summarized in Attachment 5. Were any test runs removed from the data set? (X) no ( ) yes If yes, please specify the reason and include with Attachment 5. (If more than one test was removed, specify each reason separately.) - Results Form Page 3 of 5

Sensitivity to Trapped Vapor 14. (X) According to the vendor, this system can be used even if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline during a test. ( ) According to the vendor, this system should not be used if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline. 15. The sensitivity of this system to trapped vapor is indicated by the test results summarized in Table 2. These tests were conducted at pump operating pressure psi with 110 ml of vapor trapped in the line at a pressure of 0 psi. The data and test conditions are reported in Attachment 6. Table 2. Summary of the Results of Trapped Vapor Tests Test No. )T (EF) Induced Leak Rate Leak Detected (yes/no) 1-2.34 3 yes 2-2.34 3 yes 3-2.34 0 no Performance Characteristics of the Instrumentation 16. State below the performance characteristics of the primary measurement system used to collect the data. (Please specify the units, for example, gallons, inches.) Quantity Measured: flowrate and temperature Resolution 0.01 gal/hr and 0.005 deg F Precision: ±0.02 gal/hr and 0.02 deg F Accuracy: 0.05 gal/hr and 0.05 deg F Minimum Detectable Quantity: 2% of total volume collected Response Time: N/A gal/hr and 5 min for temperature equilibrium Threshold is exceeded when the flow rate due to a leak exceeds 1.5 gal/h. Application of the System 17. This leak detection system is intended to test pipeline systems that are associated with underground storage tank facilities, that contain petroleum or other chemical products, that are typically constructed of rigid pipeline materials, and that typically measure up to 3 inches in diameter and 350 ft or less in length. The performance estimates are valid when: the system that was evaluated has not been substantially changed by subsequent modifications the manufacturer's instructions for using the system are followed the mechanical line leak detector ( ) is present in (X) has been removed from the pipeline (check both if appropriate) - Results Form Page 4 of 5

the waiting time between the last dispensing of product through the pipeline system and the start of data collection for the test is 0 h. the total time required to complete a test is 3 min. the volume of the product in the pipeline is less than twice the volume of the product in the pipeline system using in the evaluation, unless separate written justification for testing larger pipeline systems is presented by the manufacturer, concurred with by the evaluator, and attached to this evaluation as Attachment 8. please give any other limitations specified by the vendor or determined during the evaluation: Disclaimer: This test procedure only addresses the issue of the system's ability to detect leaks in pipelines. It does not test the equipment for safety hazards or assess the operational functionality, reliability or maintainability of the equipment. Attachments Attachment 1 - Description of the System Evaluated Attachment 2 - Summary of the Performance of the System Evaluated Attachment 3 - Summary of the Configuration of the Pipeline System(s) Used in the Evaluation Attachment 4 - Data Sheet Summarizing Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Attachment 5 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Leak Rates Used in the Evaluation Attachment 6 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Trapped Vapor Tests Attachment 7 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results Used to Check the Relationship Supplied by the Manufacturer for Combining the Signal and Noise Certification of Results I certify that the pipeline leak detection system was operated according to the vendor's instructions. I also certify that the evaluation was performed according to the procedure specified by the EPA and that the results presented above are those obtained during the evaluation. H. Kendall Wilcox, President Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. (name of person performing evaluation) (organization performing evaluation) (signature) 1125 Valley Ridge Drive (street address) July 6, 1995 Grain Valley, Missouri 64029 (date) (city, state, zip) (816) 443-2494 (telephone number) - Results Form Page 5 of 5

Results of the Performance Evaluation Conducted According to EPA Test Procedures Used as a Monthly Monitoring Test This form summarizes the results of an evaluation to determine whether the pipeline leak detection system named below and described in Attachment 1 complies with federal regulations for conducting a line tightness test. The evaluation was conducted according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) evaluation procedure, specified in Standard Test Procedures for Evaluating Leak Detection Methods: s. The full evaluation report includes seven attachments. Tank system owners who use this pipeline leak detection system should keep this form on file to show compliance with the federal regulations. Tank system owners should check with state and local agencies to make sure this form satisfies the requirements of these agencies. System Evaluated System Name: Version of System: Incon TS-LLD Line Leak Detector Manufacturer Name: Incon (Intelligent Controls) 74 Industrial Park Road (street address) Saco, Maine 04072 (city, state, zip code) (207) 283-0156 (telephone number) Evaluation Results 1. The performance of this system (X) meets or exceeds ( ) does not meet the federal standards established by the EPA regulation for line tightness tests. The EPA regulation for a monthly monitoring test requires that the system be capable of detecting a leak as small as 0.2 gal/h with a probability of detection (P D ) of 95% and a probability of false alarm (P FA ) of 5%. 2. The estimated P FA in this evaluation is 0 % and the estimated P D against a leak rate of 0.2 gal/h defined at a pipeline pressure of 30 psi in this evaluation is 100 %. - Results Form Page 1 of 5

Criterion for Declaring a Leak 3. This system (X) uses a preset threshold ( ) measures and reports the output quantity and compares it to a predetermined threshold to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 4. This system (X) uses a single test ( ) uses a multiple-test sequence consisting of tests (specify number of tests required) separated by hours (specify the time interval between tests) to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 5. This system declares a leak if the output of the measurement system exceeds a threshold of 0.1 gal/hr (specify flow rate in gal/h) in 1 out of 1 tests (specify, for example, 1 out of 2, 2 out of 3). If more detail is required, please specify in the space provided. Evaluation Approach 6. There are five options for collecting the data used in evaluating the performance of this system. This system was evaluated (X) at a special test facility (Option 1) ( ) at one or more instrumented operational storage tank facilities (Option 2) ( ) at five or more operational storage tank facilities verified to be tight (Option 3) ( ) at 10 or more operational storage tank facilities (Option 4) ( ) with an experimentally validated computer simulation (Option 5) 7. A total of 53 tests were conducted on nonleaking line(s) between 5/9/95 (date) and 7/11/95 (date). A description of the pipeline configuration used in the evaluation is given in Attachment 3. Answer questions 8 and 9 if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. 8. The pipelines used in the evaluation were 3 inches in diameter, 175 ft in length and were constructed of fiberglass (fiberglass, steel, or other). 9. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was (X) was not present in the pipeline system. Answer questions 10 and 11 if Option 3 or 4 was used. 10. The evaluation was conducted on (how many) pipeline systems ranging in diameter from in. to in., ranging in length from ft to ft, and constructed of (specify materials). - Results Form Page 2 of 5

11. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was ( ) was not present in the majority of the pipeline systems used in the evaluation. 12. Please specify how much time elapsed between the delivery of product and the start of the data collection: (X) 0 to 6 h (time after completion of circulation and start of test) ( ) 6 to 12 h ( ) 12 to 24 h ( ) 24 h or more Temperature Conditions This system was evaluated under the range of temperature conditions specified in Table 1. The difference between the temperature of the product circulated through the pipeline for 1 h or more and the average temperature of the backfill and soil between 2 and 12 in. from the pipeline is summarized in Table 1. If Option 1, 2 or 5 was used, a more detailed summary of the product temperature conditions generated for the evaluation is presented in Attachment 4. If Option 3 or 4 was used, no artificial temperature conditions were generated. Table 1. Summary of Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Minimum Number of Conditions Required Number of Conditions Used * Range of )T(EF) ** 1 2 )T < -25 4 8-25 < )T < -15 5 10-15 < )T < -5 5 10-5 < )T < +5 5 10 +5 < )T < +15 4 8 +15 < )T < +25 1 2 )T > 25 * This column should be filled out only if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. ** )T is the difference between the temperature of the product dispensed through the pipeline for over an hour prior to the conduct of a test and the average temperature of the backfill and soil surrounding the pipe. Data Used to Make Performance Estimates 13. The induced leak rate and the test results used to estimate the performance of this system are summarized in Attachment 5. Were any test runs removed from the data set? (X) no ( ) yes If yes, please specify the reason and include with Attachment 5. (If more than one test was removed, specify each reason separately.) - Results Form Page 3 of 5

Sensitivity to Trapped Vapor 14. (X) According to the vendor, this system can be used even if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline during a test. ( ) According to the vendor, this system should not be used if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline. 15. The sensitivity of this system to trapped vapor is indicated by the test results summarized in Table 2. These tests were conducted at pump operating pressure psi with 110 ml of vapor trapped in the line at a pressure of 0 psi. The data and test conditions are reported in Attachment 6. Table 2. Summary of the Results of Trapped Vapor Tests Test No. )T (EF) Induced Leak Rate Leak Detected (yes/no) 1-2.34 0.20 yes 2-6.12 0.20 yes 3-3.69 0 no Performance Characteristics of the Instrumentation 16. State below the performance characteristics of the primary measurement system used to collect the data. (Please specify the units, for example, gallons, inches.) Quantity Measured: flowrate and temperature Resolution 0.01 gal/hr and 0.005 deg F Precision: ±0.02 gal/hr and 0.02 deg F Accuracy: 0.05 gal/hr and 0.05 deg F Minimum Detectable Quantity: 2% of total volume collected Response Time: N/A gal/hr and 5 min for temperature equilibrium Threshold is exceeded when the flow rate due to a leak exceeds 0.1 gal/h. Application of the System 17. This leak detection system is intended to test pipeline systems that are associated with underground storage tank facilities, that contain petroleum or other chemical products, that are typically constructed of rigid pipeline materials, and that typically measure up to 3 inches in diameter and 350 ft or less in length. The performance estimates are valid when: the system that was evaluated has not been substantially changed by subsequent modifications the manufacturer's instructions for using the system are followed the mechanical line leak detector ( ) is present in (X) has been removed from the pipeline (check both if appropriate) - Results Form Page 4 of 5

the waiting time between the last dispensing of product through the pipeline system and the start of data collection for the test is 0 h the total time required to complete a test is 50 min to 8 hrs. (Variable depending on product and line conditions). the volume of the product in the pipeline is less than twice the volume of the product in the pipeline system using in the evaluation, unless separate written justification for testing larger pipeline systems is presented by the manufacturer, concurred with by the evaluator, and attached to this evaluation as Attachment 8. please give any other limitations specified by the vendor or determined during the evaluation: Disclaimer: This test procedure only addresses the issue of the system's ability to detect leaks in pipelines. It does not test the equipment for safety hazards or assess the operational functionality, reliability or maintainability of the equipment. Attachments Attachment 1 - Description of the System Evaluated Attachment 2 - Summary of the Performance of the System Evaluated Attachment 3 - Summary of the Configuration of the Pipeline System(s) Used in the Evaluation Attachment 4 - Data Sheet Summarizing Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Attachment 5 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Leak Rates Used in the Evaluation Attachment 6 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Trapped Vapor Tests Attachment 7 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results Used to Check the Relationship Supplied by the Manufacturer for Combining the Signal and Noise Certification of Results I certify that the pipeline leak detection system was operated according to the vendor's instructions. I also certify that the evaluation was performed according to the procedure specified by the EPA and that the results presented above are those obtained during the evaluation. H. Kendall Wilcox, President Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. (name of person performing evaluation) (organization performing evaluation) (signature) 1125 Valley Ridge Drive (street address) July 6, 1995 Grain Valley, Missouri 64029 (date) (city, state, zip) (816) 443-2494 (telephone number) - Results Form Page 5 of 5

Results of the Performance Evaluation Conducted According to EPA Test Procedures Used as a Line Tightness Test This form summarizes the results of an evaluation to determine whether the pipeline leak detection system named below and described in Attachment 1 complies with federal regulations for conducting a line tightness test. The evaluation was conducted according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) evaluation procedure, specified in Standard Test Procedures for Evaluating Leak Detection Methods: s. The full evaluation report includes seven attachments. Tank system owners who use this pipeline leak detection system should keep this form on file to show compliance with the federal regulations. Tank system owners should check with state and local agencies to make sure this form satisfies the requirements of these agencies. System Evaluated System Name: Incon TS-LLD Version of System: (see attached list for models covered by this evaluation) Manufacturer Name: Incon (Intelligent Controls) 74 Industrial Park Road (street address) Saco, Maine 04072 (city, state, zip code) (207) 283-0156 (telephone number) Evaluation Results 1. The performance of this system (X) meets or exceeds ( ) does not meet the federal standards established by the EPA regulation for line tightness tests. The EPA regulation for a line tightness test requires that the system be capable of detecting a leak as small as 0.1 gal/h with a probability of detection (P D ) of 95% and a probability of false alarm (P FA ) of 5%. 2. The estimated P FA in this evaluation is 0 % and the estimated P D against a leak rate of 0.1 gal/h defined at a pipeline pressure of 45 psi in this evaluation is 100 %. - Results Form Page 1 of 5

Criterion for Declaring a Leak 3. This system (X) uses a preset threshold ( ) measures and reports the output quantity and compares it to a predetermined threshold to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 4. This system (X) uses a single test ( ) uses a multiple-test sequence consisting of tests (specify number of tests required) separated by hours (specify the time interval between tests) to determine whether the pipeline is leaking. 5. This system declares a leak if the output of the measurement system exceeds a threshold of 0.05 gal/hr (specify flow rate in gal/h) in 1 out of 1 tests (specify, for example, 1 out of 2, 2 out of 3). If more detail is required, please specify in the space provided. Evaluation Approach 6. There are five options for collecting the data used in evaluating the performance of this system. This system was evaluated (X) at a special test facility (Option 1) ( ) at one or more instrumented operational storage tank facilities (Option 2) ( ) at five or more operational storage tank facilities verified to be tight (Option 3) ( ) at 10 or more operational storage tank facilities (Option 4) ( ) with an experimentally validated computer simulation (Option 5) 7. A total of 53 tests were conducted on nonleaking line(s) between 5/16/95 (date) and 6/22/95 (date). A description of the pipeline configuration used in the evaluation is given in Attachment 3. Answer questions 8 and 9 if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. 8. The pipelines used in the evaluation were 3 inches in diameter, 175 ft in length and were constructed of fiberglass (fiberglass, steel, or other). 9. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was (X) was not present in the pipeline system. Answer questions 10 and 11 if Option 3 or 4 was used. 10. The evaluation was conducted on (how many) pipeline systems ranging in diameter from in. to in., ranging in length from ft to ft, and constructed of (specify materials). - Results Form Page 2 of 5

11. A mechanical line leak detector ( ) was ( ) was not present in the majority of the pipeline systems used in the evaluation. 12. Please specify how much time elapsed between the delivery of product and the start of the data collection: (X) 0 to 6 h (time after completion of circulation and start of test) ( ) 6 to 12 h ( ) 12 to 24 h ( ) 24 h or more Temperature Conditions This system was evaluated under the range of temperature conditions specified in Table 1. The difference between the temperature of the product circulated through the pipeline for 1 h or more and the average temperature of the backfill and soil between 2 and 12 in. from the pipeline is summarized in Table 1. If Option 1, 2 or 5 was used, a more detailed summary of the product temperature conditions generated for the evaluation is presented in Attachment 4. If Option 3 or 4 was used, no artificial temperature conditions were generated. Table 1. Summary of Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Minimum Number of Conditions Required Number of Conditions Used * Range of )T(EF) ** 1 2 )T < -25 4 8-25 < )T < -15 5 10-15 < )T < -5 5 10-5 < )T < +5 5 10 +5 < )T < +15 4 8 +15 < )T < +25 1 2 )T > 25 * This column should be filled out only if Option 1, 2, or 5 was used. ** )T is the difference between the temperature of the product dispensed through the pipeline for over an hour prior to the conduct of a test and the average temperature of the backfill and soil surrounding the pipe. Data Used to Make Performance Estimates 13. The induced leak rate and the test results used to estimate the performance of this system are summarized in Attachment 5. Were any test runs removed from the data set? (X) no ( ) yes If yes, please specify the reason and include with Attachment 5. (If more than one test was removed, specify each reason separately.) - Results Form Page 3 of 5

Sensitivity to Trapped Vapor 14. (X) According to the vendor, this system can be used even if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline during a test. ( ) According to the vendor, this system should not be used if trapped vapor is present in the pipeline. 15. The sensitivity of this system to trapped vapor is indicated by the test results summarized in Table 2. These tests were conducted at pump operating pressure to 0 psi with 110 ml of vapor trapped in the line at a pressure of 0 psi. The data and test conditions are reported in Attachment 6. Table 2. Summary of the Results of Trapped Vapor Tests Test No. )T (EF) Induced Leak Rate Leak Detected (yes/no) 1 2.67 0 no 2 2.67 0.10 yes 3 2.67 0.10 yes Performance Characteristics of the Instrumentation 16. State below the performance characteristics of the primary measurement system used to collect the data. (Please specify the units, for example, gallons, inches.) Quantity Measured: flowrate and temperature Resolution 0.01 gal/hr and 0.005 deg F Precision: ±0.02 gal/hr and 0.02 deg F Accuracy: 0.05 gal/hr and 0.05 deg F Minimum Detectable Quantity: 2% of total volume collected Response Time: N/A gal/hr and 5 min for temperature equilibrium Threshold is exceeded when the flow rate due to a leak exceeds 0.05 gal/h. Application of the System 17. This leak detection system is intended to test pipeline systems that are associated with underground storage tank facilities, that contain petroleum or other chemical products, that are typically constructed of rigid pipeline materials, and that typically measure up to 3 inches in diameter and 350 ft or less in length. The performance estimates are valid when: the system that was evaluated has not been substantially changed by subsequent modifications the manufacturer's instructions for using the system are followed the mechanical line leak detector ( ) is present in (X) has been removed from the pipeline (check both if appropriate) - Results Form Page 4 of 5

the waiting time between the last dispensing of product through the pipeline system and the start of data collection for the test is 8 h the total time required to complete a test is 40 min. the volume of the product in the pipeline is less than twice the volume of the product in the pipeline system using in the evaluation, unless separate written justification for testing larger pipeline systems is presented by the manufacturer, concurred with by the evaluator, and attached to this evaluation as Attachment 8. please give any other limitations specified by the vendor or determined during the evaluation: Disclaimer: This test procedure only addresses the issue of the system's ability to detect leaks in pipelines. It does not test the equipment for safety hazards or assess the operational functionality, reliability or maintainability of the equipment. Attachments Attachment 1 - Description of the System Evaluated Attachment 2 - Summary of the Performance of the System Evaluated Attachment 3 - Summary of the Configuration of the Pipeline System(s) Used in the Evaluation Attachment 4 - Data Sheet Summarizing Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Attachment 5 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Leak Rates Used in the Evaluation Attachment 6 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Trapped Vapor Tests Attachment 7 - Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results Used to Check the Relationship Supplied by the Manufacturer for Combining the Signal and Noise Certification of Results I certify that the pipeline leak detection system was operated according to the vendor's instructions. I also certify that the evaluation was performed according to the procedure specified by the EPA and that the results presented above are those obtained during the evaluation. H. Kendall Wilcox, President Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. (name of person performing evaluation) (organization performing evaluation) (signature) 1125 Valley Ridge Drive (street address) July 6, 1995 Grain Valley, Missouri 64029 (date) (city, state, zip) (816) 443-2494 (telephone number) Description - Page 5 of 5

Attachment 1 Description This form provides supporting information on the operating principles of the leak detection system or on how the equipment works. This form is to be filled out by the evaluating organization with assistance from the manufacturer before the start of the evaluation. Describe the important features of the system as indicated below. A detailed description is not required, nor is it necessary to reveal proprietary features of the system. To minimize the time required to complete this form, the most frequently expected answers to the questions have been provided. For those answers that are dependent on site conditions, please give answers that apply in "typical" conditions. Please write in any additional information about the system that you believe is important. Check all appropriate boxes for each question. Check more than one box per question if it applies. If 'Other' is checked, please complete the space provided to specify or briefly describe the matter. If necessary, use all the white space next to a question to complete a description. System Name and Version: Incon TS-LLD Line Leak Detector Date: July 6, 1995 Applicability of the System 1. With what products can this system be used? (Check all applicable responses.) (X) gasoline (X) diesel (X) aviation fuel (X) fuel oil #4 (X) fuel oil #6 (X) solvent (X) waste oil (X) other (specify) Contact Incon for other applications. 2. What types of pipelines can be tested? (Check all applicable responses.) (X) fiberglass (X) steel (X) other (specify) Flexible (See Addendum to this report.) 3. Can this leak detection system be used to test double-wall pipeline systems? (X) yes ( ) no

4. What is the nominal diameter of a pipeline that can be tested with this system? ( ) 1 in. or less ( ) between 1 and 3 in. ( ) between 3 and 6 in. ( ) between 6 and 10 in. (X) other between 1 and 6 5. The system can be used on pipelines pressurized to 50 psi. The safe maximum operating pressure for this system is 50 psi. 6. Does the system conduct a test while a mechanical line leak detector is in place in the pipeline? ( ) yes (X) no General Features of the System 7. What type of test is the system conducting? (Check all applicable responses.) (X) 0.1 gal/h Line Tightness Test (X) 0.2 gal/h Monthly Monitoring Test (X) 3 gal/h Hourly Test 8. Is the system permanently installed on the pipeline? (X) yes ( ) no Does the system test the line automatically? (X) yes ( ) no If a leak is declared, what does the system do? (Check all applicable responses.) (X) displays or prints a message (X) triggers an alarm (X) alerts the operator (X) shuts down the dispensing system ( ) other 9. What quantity or quantities are measured by the system? (Please list.) flow rate of product 10. Does the system use a preset threshold that is automatically activated or that automatically turns on an alarm? (X) yes (If yes, skip question 11.) ( ) no (If no, answer question 11.) 11. Does the system measure and report the quantity? ( ) yes ( ) no Description - Page 2 of 5

If so, is the output quantity converted to flow rate in gallons per hour? ( ) yes ( ) no 12. What is the specified line pressure during a test? (X) operating pressure of line ( ) 150% of operating pressure ( ) a specific test pressure of psi Test Protocol 13. What is the minimum waiting period required between a delivery of product to an underground storage tank and the start of the data collection for a pipeline leak detection test? (X) no waiting period ( ) less than 15 min ( ) 15 min to 1 h ( ) 1 to 5 h ( ) 6 to 12 h ( ) 12 to 24 h ( ) greater than 24 h ( ) variable (Briefly explain.) 14. What is the minimum waiting period required between the last dispensing of product through the pipeline and the start of the data collection for a pipeline leak detection test? (X) no waiting period (for 3 gal/hr and 0.2 gal/hr test) ( ) less than 15 min ( ) 15 min to 1 h ( ) 1 to 4 h (X) 4 to 8 h (8 hrs for 0.1 gal/hr test) ( ) greater than 8 h ( ) variable (Briefly explain.) 15. What is the minimum amount of time necessary to set up equipment and complete a leak detection test? (Include setup time, waiting time and data collection time. If a multiple-test sequence is used, give the amount of time necessary to complete the first test as well as the total amount of time necessary to complete the entire sequence.) N/A hrs (single test) permanent installation hrs (multiple test) 16. Does the system compensate for those pressure or volume changes of the product in the pipeline that are due to temperature changes? (X) yes ( ) no 17. Is there a special test to check the pipeline for trapped vapor? ( ) yes (X) no Description - Page 3 of 5

18. Can a test be performed with trapped vapor in the pipeline? (X) yes ( ) no (if not excessive) 19. If trapped vapor is found in the pipeline, is it removed before a test is performed? ( ) yes (X) no 20. Are deviations from this protocol acceptable? ( ) yes (X) no If yes, briefly specify: 21. Are elements of the test procedure determined by on-site personnel? ( ) yes (X) no If yes, which ones? (Check all applicable responses.) ( ) waiting period between filling the tank and the beginning of data collection for the test ( ) length of test ( ) determination of the presence of vapor pockets ( ) determination of "outlier" (or anomalous) data that may be discarded ( ) other (Describe briefly.) Data Acquisition 22. How are the test data acquired and recorded? (X) manually (numerical message displayed on screen) ( ) by strip chart ( ) by microprocessor ( ) by computer 23. Certain calculations are necessary to reduce and analyze the data. How are these calculations done? ( ) manual calculations by the operator on site ( ) interactive computer program used by the operator ( ) automatically done with a computer program (X) automatically done with a microprocessor Detection Criterion 24. What threshold is used to determine whether the pipeline is leaking? 1.5 gal/h (3 gal/h test) (in gal/h) 0.10 gal/h (0.2 gal/h test) (in gal/h) 0.05 gal/h (0.1 gal/h test) (in gal/h) Description - Page 4 of 5

25. Is a multiple-test sequence used to determine whether the pipeline is leaking? ( ) yes (If yes, answer the three questions below) ( ) no (If no, skip the three questions below) How many tests are conducted? How many tests are required before a leak can be declared? What is the time between tests? (Enter 0 if the tests are conducted one after the other.) Calibration 26. How frequently are the sensor systems calibrated? (X) never ( ) before each test ( ) weekly ( ) monthly ( ) semi-annually ( ) yearly or less frequently Description - Page 5 of 5

Attachment 2 Summary of Performance Estimates Used as an Hourly Test Complete this page if the pipeline leak detection system has been evaluated as an hourly test. Please complete the first table. Completion of the last three tables is optional. (The last three tables present the performance of the system for different combinations of thresholds, probabilities of false alarm, and probabilities of detection. They are useful for comparing the performance of this system to that of other systems.) Description Performance of the as Evaluated Leak Rate P D P FA Threshold Evaluated System 3 1.00 0 1.5 EPA Standard 3 0.95 0.05 N/A Threshold Probability of False Alarm as a Function of Threshold Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Probability of Detection as a Function of Threshold for a Leak Rate of 3 gal/h Threshold Probability of Detection Not determined Not determined Smallest Leak Rate that Can be Detected with the Specified Probability of Detection and Probability of False Alarm Leak Rate Probability of Detection Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Not determined

Attachment 2 Summary of Performance Estimates Used as a Monthly Monitoring Test Complete this page if the pipeline leak detection system has been evaluated as a monthly monitoring test. Please complete the first table. Completion of the last three tables is optional. (The last three tables present the performance of the system for different combinations of thresholds, probabilities of false alarm, and probabilities of detection. They are useful for comparing the performance of this system to that of other systems.) Description Performance of the as Evaluated Leak Rate P D P FA Threshold Evaluated System 0.2 1.00 0 0.10 EPA Standard 0.2 0.95 0.05 N/A Threshold Probability of False Alarm as a Function of Threshold Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Probability of Detection as a Function of Threshold for a Leak Rate of 0.20 gal/h Threshold Probability of Detection Not determined Not determined Smallest Leak Rate that Can be Detected with the Specified Probability of Detection and Probability of False Alarm Leak Rate Probability of Detection Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Not determined

Attachment 2 Summary of Performance Estimates Used as a Line Tightness Test Complete this page if the pipeline leak detection system has been evaluated as an annual test. Please complete the first table. Completion of the last three tables is optional. (The last three tables present the performance of the system for different combinations of thresholds, probabilities of false alarm, and probabilities of detection. They are useful for comparing the performance of this system to that of other systems.) Description Performance of the as Evaluated Leak Rate P D P FA Threshold Evaluated System 0.10 1.00 0 0.05 EPA Standard 0.10 0.95 0.05 N/A Threshold Probability of False Alarm as a Function of Threshold Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Probability of Detection as a Function of Threshold for a Leak Rate of 0.10 gal/h Threshold Probability of Detection Not determined Not determined Smallest Leak Rate that Can be Detected with the Specified Probability of Detection and Probability of False Alarm Leak Rate Probability of Detection Probability of False Alarm Not determined Not determined Not determined

Attachment 3 Summary of the Configuration of the Pipeline System(s) Used in the Evaluation Options 1, 2, and 5 Specialized Test Facility, Operational Storage Tank System, or Computer Simulation Inside diameter of pipeline (in.) Length of pipeline (tank to dispenser) (ft) Volume of product in line during testing (gal) Type of material (fiberglass, steel, other 1 ) Type of product in tank and pipeline (gasoline, diesel, other 2 ) Was a mechanical line leak detector present? (yes or no) Was trapped vapor present? (yes or no) 3 3/8 in 175 ft 81.5 gal FRP unleaded gasoline no in 3 of 53 tests Bulk Modulus (B) (psi) 30,858 B/V o (psi/ml) 0.10 Storage tank capacity (gal) 560 gal 1 Specify type of construction material. 2 Specify type of product for each tank.

3 gal/hr - Hourly Attachment 4 Data Sheet Summarizing the Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Options 1 and 5 Test No. Date Nominal Time Time Duration of Time of T(TB) T(1) T(2) T(3) T(G) T(TB)-T(G) Temperature (Sorted by Test Product Circulation Circulation Circulation Temperature Test Date of Test) Began Temperature Started Ended Measurements Matrix Before Category Circulation Was Started (local (local (local (M-D-Y) (deg F) military) military) (h-min) military) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (Table 5.1) 1 9-May-95 48.33 1115 1215 1hr 1115 48.33 57.74 58.14 56.10 56.74-8.41-5 to -15 2 10-May-95 26.51 726 826 1hr 726 26.51 57.62 58.04 56.39 56.89-30.38 <-25 3 10-May-95 26.51 726 826 1hr 726 26.51 57.62 58.04 56.39 56.89-30.38 <-25 4 10-May-95 34.60 1645 1745 1hr 1645 34.60 57.12 57.49 56.09 56.52-21.92-15 to -25 5 10-May-95 34.60 1645 1745 1hr 1645 34.60 57.12 57.49 56.09 56.52-21.92-15 to -25 6 10-May-95 34.60 1645 1745 1hr 1645 34.60 57.12 57.49 56.09 56.52-21.92-15 to -25 7 11-May-95 43.67 740 845 1h 5m 740 43.67 56.69 56.55 56.15 56.30-12.63-5 to -15 8 11-May-95 51.41 1016 1116 1hr 1016 51.41 56.39 56.44 56.17 56.25-4.84-5 to +5 9 11-May-95 51.41 1016 1116 1hr 1016 51.41 56.39 56.44 56.17 56.25-4.84-5 to +5 10 11-May-95 51.41 1016 1116 1hr 1016 51.41 56.39 56.44 56.17 56.25-4.84-5 to +5 11 18-May-95 55.22 1000 1100 1hr 1000 55.22 60.30 60.36 55.22 56.93-1.71-5 to +5 12 18-May-95 55.22 1000 1100 1hr 1000 55.22 60.30 60.36 55.22 56.93-1.71-5 to +5 13 18-May-95 55.22 1000 1100 1hr 1000 55.22 60.30 60.36 55.22 56.93-1.71-5 to +5 14 18-May-95 86.44 1354 1454 1hr 1345 86.44 60.14 60.96 59.38 59.82 26.62 >+25 15 18-May-95 86.44 1354 1454 1hr 1345 86.44 60.14 60.96 59.38 59.82 26.62 >+25 16 19-May-95 66.93 745 845 1hr 745 66.93 60.92 61.38 59.50 60.08 6.85 +5 to +15 17 19-May-95 66.93 745 845 1hr 745 66.93 60.92 61.38 59.50 60.08 6.85 +5 to +15 18 19-May-95 66.93 745 845 1hr 745 66.93 60.92 61.38 59.50 60.08 6.85 +5 to +15 19 22-May-95 72.52 703 840 1hr 37min 703 72.52 60.72 61.44 58.84 59.63 12.89 +5 to +15 20 22-May-95 72.52 703 840 1hr 37min 703 72.52 60.72 61.44 58.84 59.63 12.89 +5 to +15 21 22-May-95 72.52 703 840 1hr 37min 703 72.52 60.72 61.44 58.84 59.63 12.89 +5 to +15 22 23-May-95 63.61 715 820 1hr 5min 715 63.61 60.80 61.19 59.98 60.34 3.27-5 to +5 23 23-May-95 63.61 715 820 1hr 5min 715 63.61 60.80 61.19 59.98 60.34 3.27-5 to +5 24 23-May-95 63.61 715 820 1hr 5min 715 63.61 60.80 61.19 59.98 60.34 3.27-5 to +5 25 23-May-95 78.16 1135 1250 1hr 15min 1135 78.16 63.49 64.72 60.46 61.74 16.42 +15 to +25

3 gal/hr - Hourly Attachment 4 (concluded) Data Sheet Summarizing the Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Options 1 and 5 Test No. Date Nominal Time Time Duration of Time of T(TB) T(1) T(2) T(3) T(G) T(TB)-T(G) Temperature (Sorted by Test Product Circulation Circulation Circulation Temperature Test Date of Test) Began Temperature Started Ended Measurements Matrix Before Category Circulation Was Started (local (local (local (M-D-Y) (deg F) military) military) (h-min) military) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (Table 5.1) 26 23-May-95 78.16 1135 1250 1hr 15min 1135 78.16 63.49 64.72 60.46 61.74 16.42 +15 to +25 27 23-May-95 78.16 1135 1250 1hr 15min 1135 78.16 63.49 64.72 60.46 61.74 16.42 +15 to +25 28 24-May-95 37.18 735 835 1hr 735 37.18 61.91 62.24 60.86 61.28-24.10-15 to -25 29 24-May-95 38.47 1255 1355 1hr 1255 38.47 61.03 61.14 60.93 60.99-22.52-15 to -25 30 24-May-95 38.47 1255 1355 1hr 1255 38.47 61.03 61.14 60.93 60.99-22.52-15 to -25 31 25-May-95 57.87 735 835 1hr 735 57.87 60.92 61.34 60.28 60.59-2.72-5 to +5 32 30-May-95 69.47 1000 1100 1hr 1000 69.47 60.89 61.34 59.91 60.34 9.13 +5 to +15 33 31-May-95 69.47 1000 1100 1hr 1000 69.47 60.89 61.34 59.91 60.34 9.13 +5 to +15 34 31-May-95 50.49 1605 1706 1hr 1min 1605 50.49 61.34 61.74 60.49 60.86-10.37-5 to -15 35 31-May-95 50.49 1605 1706 1hr 1min 1605 50.49 61.34 61.74 60.49 60.86-10.37-5 to -15 36 1-Jun-95 50.49 1605 1706 1hr 1min 1605 50.49 61.34 61.74 60.49 60.86-10.37-5 to -15 37 1-Jun-95 52.03 1322 1422 1hr 1322 52.03 60.47 60.53 60.56 60.54-8.51-5 to -15 38 1-Jun-95 52.03 1322 1422 1hr 1322 52.03 60.47 60.53 60.56 60.54-8.51-5 to -15 39 2-Jun-95 52.03 1322 1422 1hr 1322 52.03 60.47 60.53 60.56 60.54-8.51-5 to -15 40 2-Jun-95 85.06 925 1025 1hr 925 85.06 61.91 62.96 60.82 61.42 23.64 +15 to +25 41 2-Jun-95 85.06 925 1025 1hr 925 85.06 61.91 62.96 60.82 61.42 23.64 +15 to +25 42 2-Jun-95 85.06 925 1025 1hr 925 85.06 61.91 62.96 60.82 61.42 23.64 +15 to +25 43 2-Jun-95 82.70 1425 1525 1hr 1425 82.70 63.46 64.23 60.97 61.97 20.73 +15 to +25 44 2-Jun-95 82.70 1425 1525 1hr 1425 82.70 63.46 64.23 60.97 61.97 20.73 +15 to +25 45 5-Jun-95 51.12 1438 1541 1hr 3min 1438 51.12 64.10 64.56 62.65 63.24-12.12-5 to -15 46 5-Jun-95 51.12 1438 1541 1hr 3min 1438 51.12 64.10 64.56 62.65 63.24-12.12-5 to -15 47 14-Jun-95 74.49 1509 1610 1hr 1min 1509 74.49 67.54 68.45 64.65 65.82 8.67 +5 to +15 48 22-Jun-95 49.85 830 930 1hr 830 49.85 71.41 72.03 68.89 69.87-20.02-15 to -25 49 22-Jun-95 49.85 830 930 1hr 830 49.85 71.41 72.03 68.89 69.87-20.02-15 to -25 50 28-Jun-95 75.51 1630 1730 1h 1630 75.51 70.38 70.60 68.86 69.42 6.09-5 to +5 * 2 identical units were used in the evaluation on 2 identical lines (some times appear to overlap because of this)

3 gal/hr - Hourly Attachment 5 Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Leak Rates Used in the Evaluation Options 1 and 5 Test No. Date Induced Time between End Time Data Time Data Measured Was (Sorted by Test Leak Rate of Circulation and Collection Collection Test Threshold Date of Test) Began Start of Data Began Ended Result Exceeded? Collection for Test (local (local (Tight or (M-D-Y) (h-min) military) military) Leak) (Yes or No) 1 9-May-95 3 0 min 1215 1218 Leak Yes 2 10-May-95 3 0 min 826 829 Leak Yes 3 10-May-95 0 5 min 831 834 Tight No 4 10-May-95 3 0 min 1745 1748 Leak Yes 5 10-May-95 3 3 min 1748 1751 Leak Yes 6 10-May-95 0 7 min 1752 1755 Tight No 7 11-May-95 3 0 min 845 848 Leak Yes 8 11-May-95 3 0 min 1116 1119 Leak Yes 9 11-May-95 0 3 min 1119 1122 Tight No 10 11-May-95 0 8 min 1124 1127 Tight No 11 18-May-95 3 0 min 1100 1103 Leak Yes 12 18-May-95 3 4 min 1104 1107 Leak Yes 13 18-May-95 0 9 min 1109 1112 Tight No 14 18-May-95 3 0 min 1454 1457 Leak Yes 15 18-May-95 0 3 min 1457 1460 Tight No 16 19-May-95 3 0 min 845 848 Leak Yes 17 19-May-95 3 5 min 850 853 Leak Yes 18 19-May-95 0 11 min 856 859 Tight No 19 22-May-95 3 0 min 840 843 Leak Yes 20 22-May-95 3 8 min 848 851 Leak Yes 21 22-May-95 0 12 min 852 855 Tight No 22 23-May-95 3 0 min 820 823 Leak Yes 23 23-May-95 3 3 min 823 826 Leak Yes 24 23-May-95 0 12 min 832 835 Tight No 25 23-May-95 3 2 min 1252 1255 Leak Yes 26 23-May-95 0 5 min 1255 1258 Tight No 27 23-May-95 0 8 min 1258 1261 Tight No 28 24-May-95 0 0 min 835 838 Tight No 29 24-May-95 0 0 min 1355 1358 Tight No 30 24-May-95 0 4 min 1359 1362 Tight No 31 25-May-95 0 1 min 836 839 Tight No 32 30-May-95 3 0 min 1100 1103 Leak Yes 33 31-May-95 0 4 min 1104 1107 Tight No 34 31-May-95 3 1 min 1707 1710 Leak Yes 35 31-May-95 3 5 min 1711 1714 Leak Yes 36 1-Jun-95 0 8 min 1714 1717 Tight No 37 1-Jun-95 3 0 min 1424 1427 Leak Yes 38 1-Jun-95 3 3 min 1427 1430 Leak Yes 39 2-Jun-95 0 7 min 1431 1434 Tight No 40 2-Jun-95 3 0 min 1025 1028 Leak Yes 41 2-Jun-95 3 3 min 1028 1031 Leak Yes 42 2-Jun-95 0 7 min 1032 1035 Tight No 43 2-Jun-95 3 0 min 1525 1528 Leak Yes 44 2-Jun-95 0 3 min 1528 1531 Tight No 45 5-Jun-95 3 0 min 1541 1544 Leak Yes 46 5-Jun-95 0 3 min 1544 1547 Tight No 47 14-Jun-95 0 0 min 1610 1613 Tight No 48 22-Jun-95 3 0 min 930 933 Leak Yes 49 22-Jun-95 3 3 min 933 936 Leak Yes 50 28-Jun-95 0 0 min 1730 1733 Tight No * 2 identical units were used in the evaluation on 2 identical lines (some times appear to overlap because of this)

3 gal/hr - Hourly Attachment 6 Data Sheet Summarizing the Test Results and the Trapped Vapor Tests Options 1 and 5 Summary of Temperature Conditions Test No. Date Test Nominal Time Time Duration of Time of T(TB) T(1) T(2) T(3) T(G) T(TB)-T(G) Temperature (Sorted by Began Product Circulation Circulation Circulation Temperature Test Date of Test) Temperature Started Ended Measurements Matrix Before Category Circulation Was Started (local (local (D-M-Y) (deg F) military) (deg F) (h-min) military) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (Table 5.1) V1 6/20/95 65.71 2200 2300 1hr 2200 65.71 68.84 69.21 67.53 68.05-2.34-5 to +5 V2 6/20/95 65.71 2200 2300 1hr 2200 65.71 68.84 69.21 67.53 68.05-2.34-5 to +5 v3 6/20/95 65.71 2200 2300 1hr 2200 65.71 68.84 69.21 67.53 68.05-2.34-5 to +5 Summary of Leak Rates Test No. Date Test Pipeline Induced Leak Time between End of Time Data Time Data Measured Was Threshold Began Pressure Rate Circulation and Start of Collection Began Collection Ended Test Exceeded? Data Collection for Test Result (local (local (D-M-Y) (psi) (h-min) military) military) (yes or no) V1 6/20/95 30 3 1h 2300 2303 Leak yes V2 6/20/95 30 3 1h 3m 2303 2306 Leak yes v3 6/20/95 30 0 1h 6m 2306 2309 Pass no

0.2 gal/hr - Monthly Attachment 4 Data Sheet Summarizing the Product Temperature Conditions Used in the Evaluation Options 1 and 5 Test No. Date Nominal Time Time Duration of Time of T(TB) T(1) T(2) T(3) T(G) T(TB)-T(G) Temperature (Sorted by Test Product Circulation Circulation Circulation Temperature Test Date of Test) Began Temperature Started Ended Measurements Matrix Before Category Circulation Was Started (local (local (local (Table 5.1 (M-D-Y) (deg F) military) military) (h-min) military) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) (deg F) deg F) 1 9-May-95 48.33 1115 1215 1 h 1115 48.33 57.74 58.14 56.10 56.74-8.41-15 to -5 2 10-May-95 26.51 726 826 1 h 726 26.51 57.62 58.04 56.39 56.89-30.38 < -25 3 11-May-95 43.67 0740 845 1 h 5 min 0740 43.67 56.69 56.55 56.15 56.30-12.63-15 to -5 4 11-May-95 51.41 1016 1116 1 h 1016 51.41 56.39 56.44 56.17 56.25-4.84-5 to +5 5 12-May-95 71.73 2150 2250 1 h 2150 71.73 57.02 57.41 56.10 56.49 15.24 +15 to +25 6 16-May-95 50.19 1107 1209 1 h 2 min 1107 50.19 60.83 61.25 58.44 59.33-9.14-15 to -5 7 18-May-95 55.22 1000 1100 1 h 1000 55.22 60.30 60.36 59.63 59.87-4.65-5 to +5 8 18-May-95 86.44 1354 1454 1 h 1354 86.44 60.14 60.96 59.38 59.82 26.62 > +25 9 22-May-95 72.52 703 840 1 h 37 min 703 72.52 60.72 61.44 58.84 59.63 12.89 +5 to +15 10 23-May-95 63.61 715 820 1 h 5 min 715 63.61 60.80 61.19 59.98 60.34 3.27-5 to +5 11 24-May-95 37.18 735 835 1 h 735 37.18 61.91 62.24 60.86 61.28-24.10-25 to -15 12 24-May-95 38.47 1255 1355 1 h 1255 38.47 61.03 61.14 60.93 60.99-22.52-25 to -15 13 25-May-95 57.87 735 835 1 h 735 57.87 60.92 61.34 60.28 60.59-2.72-5 to +5 14 25-May-95 93.79 1059 1159 1 h 1059 93.79 62.17 63.64 60.17 61.16 32.63 > +25 15 26-May-95 39.82 753 853 1 h 753 39.82 61.17 60.29 59.92 60.14-20.32-25 to -15 16 29-May-95 59.85 1450 1550 1 h 1450 59.85 60.92 61.32 59.77 60.24-0.39-5 to +5 17 30-May-95 69.47 1000 1100 1 h 1000 69.47 60.89 61.34 59.91 60.34 9.13 +5 to +15 18 31-May-95 50.49 1605 1706 1 h 1 min 1605 50.49 61.34 61.74 60.49 60.86-10.37-15 to -5 19 1-Jun-95 39.92 846 946 1 h 846 39.92 61.33 61.45 60.52 60.82-20.90-25 to -15 20 1-Jun-95 52.03 1322 1424 1 h 2 min 1322 52.03 60.47 60.53 60.56 60.54-8.51-15 to -5 21 2-Jun-95 85.06 925 1025 1 h 925 85.06 61.91 62.96 60.82 61.42 23.64 +15 to +25 22 2-Jun-95 82.70 1425 1525 1 h 1425 82.70 63.46 64.23 60.97 61.97 20.73 +15 to +25 23 5-Jun-95 51.12 1438 1538 1 h 1438 51.12 64.10 64.56 62.65 63.24-12.12-15 to -5 24 5-Jun-95 50.52 1740 1840 1 h 1740 50.52 63.34 63.55 62.27 62.67-12.15-15 to -5 25 5-Jun-95 62.65 835 935 1 h 835 62.65 64.54 65.18 62.49 63.32-0.67-5 to +5