CRUISE REPORT: P02W
(Updated JUL 2013)



Highlights


                        Cruise Summary Information


          WOCE Section Designation  P02W
Expedition designation (ExpoCodes)  318M20130321
                   Chief Scientist  Dr. James H. Swift/SIO
                Co-Chief Scientist  Dr. Sachiko Yoshida/WHOI
                             Dates  21 March 2013 - 5 May 2013
                              Ship  R/V Melville
                     Ports of call  Yokohama, Japan - Honolulu, HI

                                                 32° 30.41' N
             Geographic Boundaries  133° 1.75' E              167° 27.12' W
                                                 29° 58.22' N

                          Stations  87
      Floats and drifters deployed  1 Argo float deployed
    Moorings deployed or recovered  0

                            Contact Information:

                            Dr. James H. Swift
                    University of California San Diego
                  Physical Oceanography Research Division
      Mail Code 0214 • 9500 Gilman Drive • La Jolla, CA • 92093-0214
                               UNITED STATES
      Tel: 858-534-3387 • Fax: 858-534-7383 • Email: jswift@ucsd.edu








CRUISE REPORT: P02E
(Updated AUG 2013)



Highlights


                         Cruise Summary Information

          WOCE Section Designation  P02E
Expedition designation (ExpoCodes)  318M20130321
                   Chief Scientist  Dr. Sabine Mecking/UW
                Co-Chief Scientist  Dr. Gunnar Voet/UW
                             Dates  2013 MAY 08 - 2013 JUN 01
                              Ship  R/V Melville
                     Ports of call  Honolulu, HI - San Diego, CA

                                                 32.7150° N
             Geographic Boundaries  167.45° W                  117.1564° W
                                                   30°N

                          Stations  72
      Floats and drifters deployed  3 Argo floats deployed
    Moorings deployed or recovered  0

                           Contact Information:


                            Dr. Sabine Mecking
            University of Washington • Applied Physics Laboratory
           1013 NE 40th St • Box 355640 • Seattle  WA  98105-6698
                  Phone: 206-221-6570 • Fax: 206-543-6785
                    Email: smecking@apl.washington.edu









                            CLIVAR/Carbon P02W
                            R/V Melville MV1305

                        21 March 2013 - 5 May 2013
                      Yokohama, Japan - Honolulu, HI

                   Chief Scientist:  Dr. James H. Swift
             Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego

                  Co-Chief Scientist: Dr. Sachiko Yoshida
                   Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution



                               Cruise Report
                                5 May 2013
                             Rev. 12 July 2013



Summary

A hydrographic survey was conducted in the western North Pacific Ocean
aboard the UNOLS vessel R/V Melville from 21 March 2013 - 5 May 2013.  A
total of 87 rosette/CTD/LADCP stations were occupied on a transect running
roughly along latitude 30 deg.N.  CTD casts extended to within 10 meters of
the seafloor, and up to 36 water samples were collected throughout the
water column on all but one upcast.  CTDO (conductivity, temperature,
pressure, oxygen), transmissometer, fluorometer, and LADCP (lowered
acoustic Doppler current profiler) electronic data; rosette water samples;
and underway shipboard ADCP and carbon dioxide (CO2) measurements were
collected during the survey.  In addition, one Argo float was deployed
during this leg for NOAA/PMEL.

Salinity and dissolved oxygen samples, drawn from most bottles on every
full cast, were analyzed and used to calibrate the CTD conductivity and
oxygen sensors.  Water samples were also analyzed on board the ship for
nutrients (silicate, phosphate, nitrate, nitrite), total CO2/TCO2 (aka
dissolved inorganic Carbon/DIC), pH, total alkalinity, and transient
tracers (CFCs and SF6).

Additional water samples were collected and stored for analysis onshore:
3Helium / Tritium, 13C / 14C, dissolved organic Carbon and total dissolved
Nitrogen (DOC / TDN), d15N-NO3 / d18O-NO3, 137Cs / 134Cs / 90Sr, 129I,
density and Calcium.

Underway measurements included GPS navigation, multibeam bathymetry, ADCP,
meteorological parameters, sea surface measurements (including temperature,
conductivity/salinity, dissolved oxygen, fluorescence), and gravity.  In
addition to the permanently installed R/V Melville systems, there was a
Univ. of Washington Equilibrator Inlet Mass Spectrometer (EIMS) system,
sampling ion currents of N2, O2, Ar and CO2, and a NOAA GO 8050 underway
pCO2 system running throughout the leg.

P02 Leg 1 Narrative - J. Swift, Chief Scientist

The March-May 2013 P02 Leg 1 cruise for the NSF- and NOAA-sponsored U.S.
Global Ocean Carbon and Repeat Hydrography Program was carried out from the
Scripps Institution of Oceanography's global-class ship R/V Melville from
Yokohama, Japan, to Honolulu, Hawaii. The CTD, hydrographic, ocean carbon,
tracer, and underway measurements repeated those from Japanese-led cruises
in 1994 and from R/V Melville in 2004, enabling comparisons from the
different years.

The scientific party numbered 28: chief and co-chief scientist, res tech,
computer tech, 4 student CTD watchstanders, 1 LADCP specialist, 8 STS/ODF
techs (including temporary appointees), 7 ocean carbon techs, 2 CFC techs
plus one CFC student assistant, and 1 He/Tr tech.

At the time the science team boarded and began loading in Yokohama, some of
the expedition's equipment was already on board, having been loaded on in
San Diego - some was used on one or more previous cruise legs. The bulk of
the scientific cargo arrived in Yokohama in two lab vans, one cargo van,
and various palletized and loose cargo shipments. The vans were loaded onto
the ship and secured the day before official loading began. All shipments
arrived by the first day of official loading - the Chief Scientist could
not recall a more effortless shipping and loading experience. Equipment
installations and all other aspects of set-up went very smoothly, thanks to
untiring efforts from the SIO Shipboard Technical Support group, the ship's
officers and crew, and all in the science team - one of the most
satisfactory cruise set-ups in the Chief Scientist's experience.

R/V Melville departed Yokohama at 1242 local time on 21 March 2013 in good
weather. There was a day and a half steam to the first station.
Test/training stations underway were not feasible due to lack of clearance
for activities in the Japanese EEZ at any positions other than those for
the planned scientific stations. The locations of the first two stations
were altered from the 2004 locations because the Japanese government did
not permit the location of the first station, even though they had in 2004
(within Japanese territorial waters, i.e. within 12 nautical miles).There
was deck staff training underway; and, at the first station for each watch,
launch and recovery procedures were thoroughly reviewed. At station 001
there was a test cast to 50 meters to leak-test the bottles and check for
the expected CTD and pylon performance. After minor adjustments the P02
transect began with station/cast 001/02.

Seas were gentle for the first 12 stations. During the crossing of the
Kuroshio, attempts were made to predict ship drift during stations so that
the final station positions were close to those planned. Problems during
the first 12 stations were few, mostly relatively minor (but unusual) data
noise glitches. All shipboard measurement and sample collection programs
worked well.

A few minutes after the start of station 013, minor CTD acquisition data
glitches escalated into untenable levels of CTD noise. After
troubleshooting and tests it was determined that (1) the main DESH-6 CTD
winch itself (motor and/or its power supply) was the source of that data
noise, (2) water and corrosion were found inside the main CTD winch motor
housing (and motor), and (3) neither the main nor backup DESH-5 CTD winch
was in operable condition (the backup winch suffered control problems under
heavy load). Neither winch could be repaired at sea. The data noise
problems were not solved.

Thus the ship headed back to Yokohama at high cruise speed and delivered
the main CTD winch motor to the selected repair facility. The ship operator
also arranged for a manufacturer's winch specialist to travel from the U.S.
to the ship. Under direction of the winch specialist, repairs to the backup
(DESH-5) CTD winch went well and that winch passed a series of dockside
load handling and data noise tests.

Most unfortunately, after the repaired main CTD winch motor was
reinstalled, the debilitating noise in the CTD data was still there in
dockside tests: whenever the repaired main CTD winch electric drive motor
was turning (drawing current), with or without the CTD drum turning, it was
still generating noise. The noise was then being picked up by the CTD. The
main CTD instrument (#796) itself had not been suspect because during
testing at station 013 it was found to work perfectly with the backup CTD
winch. But during dockside tests it was eventually found that the backup
CTD (#914) worked well with the main CTD winch (and also with the backup
CTD winch). The ship left Yokohama for a second time at 2010 local time on
04 April 2013. Why one CTD was sensitive to this noise and the other not
was puzzling, and so tests continued as the ship was underway back to the
site of station 013.

During those tests an electrical configuration was determined that provided
clean CTD data in on-deck tests from the main CTD (#796) with the main CTD
winch (DESH-6). During launch and initial descent at resumed station 013/04
there were some data noise problems, but the CTD data acquisition computer
was dealing acceptably with the data stream. But later during the cast data
noise rose to very high levels, far beyond the capacity to produce science-
quality data, and so the cast was aborted with 1700 meters wire out. After
the rosette was returned to the deck, the backup CTD (#914) was switched
into the rosette. There was some noise during launch (especially) and the
upper hundreds of meters of 013/05, but only one serious data dropout (an
artifact of real-time processing which resolved during post-cast re-
averaging and spike-filtering).  Otherwise, however, station 013 was
finally completed.

Meanwhile winds were rising; although at station 014 the backup CTD was
launched, massive data noise problems - related to the slow winch descent
speeds required in heavier seas - finally forced cancellation of that cast.

It was time to switch to the backup CTD winch. In worsening weather the res
tech, captain, and others moved the rosette to the launch/recovery point
for that winch. There was then a wait for weather (winds rose to >45 knots)
and seas to improve. When winds and seas abated station 014 was
reattempted, this time with the backup winch. Smiles were wide all around
when completely noise- and error-free CTD data was observed. But joy was
short-lived when it was found that the DESH-5 backup CTD winch itself -
despite having been repaired and groomed by a company expert in port and
handily passing its tests there - could not be controlled when pay-out
speeds exceeded about 13-16 meters per minute (versus 60 m/min expected),
or haul-in speeds exceeded 6-7 (again versus 60 m/min expected). At those
speeds, a 6000 meter cast could take one day! The winch specialist and
others were immediately contacted, and many hours of tests and adjustments
ensued. Meanwhile parallel efforts continued to obtain a clean (or clean
enough) CTD data stream using the DESH-6 (main) CTD winch.

At this point excellent data quality was obtained from the backup CTD (and
probably would have been from the main CTD) when connected through the
backup CTD winch. But that winch was not controllable in the standard
manner required. The main CTD winch itself worked well, in a mechanical
sense, but neither CTD would pass noise-free data to the CTD data
acquisition computer when used with it. [It was later speculated that the
increased susceptibility of CTD #796 to the electrical/data noise, compared
to #914, may have been because it contained additional communications
circuitry which was sensitive to that noise. It seems likely that #796 was
in good working order at the time.]

The continued problems, delays, and uncertainty only worsened the lack of
knowledge and confidence in those ashore that the problems would be solved.
The latest issues were rapidly heading the ship operator, program officers,
and others ashore toward cancelling the cruise outright, with the aim of a
new attempt in 2014. But one more day was requested because the experienced
SIO Shipboard Technical Support engineer was well along with what amounts
to a rebuild of the data pathway from the winch to the CTD computer and
also systematically re-grounding everything that could possibly benefit.
And the ship's talented Chief Engineer and his staff, working with the
manufacturer's representative over the satellite telephone, were making
daily progress on regaining control of the backup winch at any desired
speed.

Indeed, about 10 hours after being granted one more day, a test cast was
made with the main CTD winch: zero data noise, zero winch problems. The
science team immediately went into full, normal operations. And within a
day the backup winch was back in full, normal operation.

By the time station 014 was completed, the cruise delay had reached more
than two weeks. The Chief Scientist had worked earlier with the science
team ashore on a revised science and station plan that addressed the key
scientific objectives of the program while using a minimum of ship days.
Still, adding even those minimum days into the schedule meant a 10-day
delay in port arrival in Honolulu, and similarly for Leg 2, which together
posed a nearly impossible situation for the U.S. ship operators and
schedulers. For example, R/V Melville was scheduled shortly after the
original arrival in San Diego (from the second leg of the expedition) for a
complex, long-planned three-ship operation that was hard-scheduled to
coordinate with a fixed-in-time set of non-ship observations. R/V Melville
already had expensive X-band radar installed for that operation. There were
key events and fiscal decisions needed to make a revised Leg 2 feasible.
This was not whatsoever a matter of changing the minds of people saying
"no", but instead of intricate timing, expensive equipment and ship days,
and mind-boggling complexity. In the end, new schedules were published for
both P02 legs, to run consecutively in 2013 on R/V Melville.

The P02 Leg 1 section includes some of the deepest main basin waters of the
World Ocean, with bottom depths at many station locations along the P02 Leg
1 track near or exceeding 6000 meters. CTD cable tension on such deep casts
is an ongoing concern among scientists, research vessel operators, funding
agencies, and UNOLS coordinating groups. A 20Hz recording tensiometer
system was installed on R/V Melville in advance of the expedition. A brief
report on observed CTD cable tensions is included with the cruise
documentation. A more complete version of that report will be provided to
interested parties.

Water depths along P02 somewhat exceeded 6000 meters over portions of the
western part of the section; the ship's multibeam sonar recorded a
9640-meter reading in the Izu-Ogasawara Trench. Some components of the
deployed rosette/CTD/LADCP system had manufacturer's maximum depth ratings
of 6000 meters. Hence the deployed package was not lowered deeper than that
level, as measured by the real-time package depth calculated from the CTD
data. Except in the Trench, in most cases the LADCP was able to "see" the
bottom, and so it should later be feasible to construct full-depth
transport calculations from the data, except over the trench itself.

Winds and seas during the P02 Leg 1 cruise were not the near-continual
impediment they can be in the Southern Ocean, but they did come up somewhat
for a day or two mid-cruise. Winds stayed under 30 knots, and there was no
gap in CTD operations. The somewhat higher seas led to the need for slower
haul-up speeds at the very deepest reaches of casts below 5500 meters.
Still, the recommended maximum CTD cable tension of 5000 lbs. was never
exceeded.

A nagging problem up through station 033 was recurring failures each cast
of up to several of the 10-liter bottles on the rosette to close promptly
when triggered (a "post trip"). [These are easily detected in North Pacific
Ocean waters due to strong vertical gradients in key water properties.]
There were one or two repeat offenders, but the problem tended to move
around each cast to different bottles, albeit mostly in the deepest,
coldest waters. The rosette team steadily experimented with small
adjustments to the bottle up-down positions on the frame and with the
lanyards to improve the angles and position of the lanyards with respect to
the release mechanisms. Yet some post-trips still took place. The thought
was that the problem could be related to a new lanyard material which was
in use for the first time - the manufacturer discontinued the material
previously used. It was stiffer (less pliable) and thus less well able to
release from the pylon mechanism. Indeed, the final fix to the post-trip
problem did not take place until a partial spool of the old material was
located on board and new release-connecting sections were installed on
every bottle.

The rosette's pylons were an ongoing concern for much of the cruise. The
36-place rosettes are rare machines, as are their 36-place pylons which
control bottle closures. SIO/STS owns two 36-place pylons, both of which
were at sea on this cruise. Through the cruise there were signs of
deteriorating reliability of the main pylon - failure to release a bottle
when signaled to do so (not a lanyard failure) - although without serious
data loss. But the time came, ahead of station 056, for the STS engineer to
swap out the main pylon with the spare. The spare worked flawlessly for two
casts and then the cast at station 058 came up with no bottles closed. (A
surprise at the time because trip confirmations were received.) The spare
pylon had suffered an internal communications failure which could not be
repaired with the spare parts available at sea.

It was necessary to decide whether or not to repeat the cast. A quick
review was made of the CTDO data from station 058 vis-a-vis those from the
previous stations, and also the water sample partial data from the previous
few stations. The CTDO data indicated that the water mass characteristics
of the bottom water at station 058 were the same as those at the previous
two stations, except that at 056 the characteristic signals of "new" bottom
water were very slightly more extreme. The silicate data also suggested
that the bottom water at 056 was very slightly more extreme in this
characteristic signal than at 055 and 057. The abyssal density signature
calculated from the CTD data was essentially flat between 057 and 058.
Therefore it was judged unnecessary to re-do station 058, which, with the
pylon replacement, would have cost about 7.5 hours. (The data loss was to
CFCs, ocean carbon, and nutrients.) The ship instead moved to 059,
resulting in a net time loss of only one hour.

Meanwhile, in checking out the main pylon, the engineer found seal leaks on
three of its 36 solenoids (#1, #12, and #35). Emergency sealing repairs
(with Scotchkote) were made to those solenoids, and the main pylon was put
back into service. One of the 36 positions (#12) was unrecoverable, leaving
35 working positions. Position #35 did not work reliably and so beginning
with station 059 #35 was closed at the surface and #36 at the level
immediately below (easily done with the computer file for the pylon) to
help ensure that #35 closes (by visual check; the plan was that if it
didn't close, it would be re-triggered until it closed). Later #1 went out,
and finally #35. This had little impact on the expedition's science goals.
Colleagues at NOAA/PMEL responded quickly to a query and shipped one of
their two 36-place pylons to Honolulu to be used as a spare on Leg 2. By
station 084 the engineer returned positions #1 and #12 to operation, and
the cruise leg was completed with, in effect, a 35-place rosette. The
engineer also planned to address what repairs he could on the two SIO
36-place pylons with parts sent from the mainland to Honolulu.

On the science side, SIO/STS CTD data processor Mary Johnson discovered
something rare at station 022/01: genuine instability (in density) in some
unusual near-boundary (Izu-Ogasawara Ridge) deep interactions between
warm/fresh & cold/salty waters. Steve Howell (University of Hawaii), who is
along as LADCP specialist, noted that the near-bottom data were near the
top of the ridge, so mixing is certainly a possibility. He also noticed
that the inversion coincided with a bit of shear in the velocity profile.

At station 075, near the date line, an Argo float was deployed for
NOAA/PMEL. Meanwhile the science team enjoyed a repeated day on the ship.
This was fortuitously timed because this happened to be a Sunday and as a
result there were two "Sunday steak nights". Many of those on board who had
not previously crossed the date line on a ship were "initiated" in a short,
fun ceremony, which was followed by a quoits tournament.

The first leg of the 2013 P02 expedition completed sampling with station
087, near 167.45 deg.W. This was followed by an approximately 2.5-day steam
to port in Honolulu, arriving the University of Hawaii Marine Center at
approximately 0800 on Sunday, 05 May. In port the ship was refueled and
reprovisioned, and about one-half the science team exchanged.

The plan for Leg 1 submitted with the original proposal had stations at no
further apart than 30 nautical miles, and extended east to 158 deg.20'W
with a total of 121 stations. Time was tight because the Chief Scientist,
when editing the ship time request form in January 2012, misunderstood what
UNOLS meant on the form by the undefined term "science days", thinking in
error that the term did not include port days. Therefore nominally the
scheduled time for Leg 1 was already short, implying that some Leg 1
stations might need to be cut between Yokohama and 158 deg.20'W. But team
members and the chief scientist realized that the original station time
estimates were too conservative and that the 121 station total was indeed
feasible.

Overall, due to additional delays following adoption of the revised/reduced
P02 station plan, it was necessary to increase station spacing (remove some
Leg 1 stations) in along-track zones less sensitive to station spacing, and
also to complete Leg 1 further west than planned. This left carryover
effects on Leg 2: two days were added to Leg 2 above and beyond the two
contingency days in the first version of the revised schedule, to carry out
stations dropped on the east end of Leg 1. The total station count to
167.45 deg.W in the original plan would have been 104, and in that same
distance 87 were completed. Because data quality was consistently
excellent, the revised station plan is expected to have successfully
achieved key program objectives, though the loss of horizontal resolution
may be felt for some science.

The reinstated two-consecutive-leg ship schedule for P02 was made possible
only through tireless efforts and good will from many persons ashore -
program managers, ship operators, the schedulers, and many PIs. These
persons dealt with seemingly endless downstream effects on other
investigators and cruises, and their efforts were crucial to the
expedition's success.

It is worth noting in the records that this was an exceptional cruise in
terms of a united, all-hands commitment to seeing the work through
together. Possibly this arose out of the shared concerns and hard work to
solve early problems, with the ship's engineers and the STS engineer in
particular devoting very long hours. But when normal operations finally
began, it showed on every face that the officers, crew, and science team
alike were delighted to be back to work, united in confidence and
enthusiasm. This outstanding attitude and cooperation among all hands
continued unabated throughout the cruise.

We are deeply appreciative of our support for this venture from the
National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and the ship backing from the US Navy. Our program managers
did a phenomenal job of seeing this through and dealing with a panoply of
downstream effects related to rescheduling to complete the program.



Principal Programs of CLIVAR/Carbon P02W


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Program                        Affiliation*   Principal Investigator   email                      |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CTDO/Rosette, Nutrients, O2,   UCSD/SIO       James H. Swift           jswift@ucsd.edu            |
|Salinity, Data Management                                                                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Transmissometer                TAMU           Wilf Gardner             wgardner@ocean.tamu.edu    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|ADCP , LADCP                   UHawaii        Eric Firing              efiring@soest.hawaii.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CFCs , SF6                     UHawaii        David Ho                 ho@hawaii.edu              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|3He , 3H                       WHOI           William Jenkins          wjenkins@whoi.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|DIC (Total CO2)                NOAA/PMEL      Richard Feely            Richard.A.Feely@noaa.gov   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|pH , Total Alkalinity          UCSD/SIO       Andrew Dickson           adickson@ucsd.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|DOC , TDN                      UCSB           Craig Carlson            carlson@lifesci.ucsb.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Radiocarbons (13C , 14C)       WHOI           Ann McNichol             amcnichol@whoi.edu         |
|                               Princeton      Robert Key               key@princeton.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|d15N-NO3 , d18O-NO3            Princeton      Daniel Sigman            sigman@princeton.edu       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|137Cs , 134Cs , 90Sr           WHOI           Ken Buesseler            kbuesseler@whoi.edu        |
|                                              Alison Macdonald         amacdonald@whoi.edu        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|129I , 127I                    LLNL           Tom Guilderson           guilderson1@llnl.gov       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Density                        UMiami/RSMAS   Frank Millero            fmillero@rsmas.miami.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dissolved Calcium              UCSD/SIO       Todd Martz               trmartz@ucsd.edu           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Argo Floats                    NOAA/PMEL      Gregory C. Johnson       Gregory.C.Johnson@noaa.gov |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|pCO2 Underway Data             NOAA           Geoffrey Lebon           Geoffrey.T.Lebon@noaa.gov  |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|EIMS Underway Data             UWash          Paul D. Quay             pdquay@uw.edu              |
|(N2, O2, Ar and CO2)                          Hilary Palevsky          palevsky@uw.edu            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Ship's Underway Data           UCSD/SIO       Frank Delahoyde          fdelahoyde@ucsd.edu        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  * Affiliation abbreviations listed on page 4




Shipboard Personnel on CLIVAR/Carbon P02W


+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Name               Affiliation* Shipboard Duties                      Shore Email                     |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Julie Arrington    NOAA/PMEL    DIC                                   julie.seahorse@gmail.com        |
|Andrew Barna       SIO/CCHDO    Data Processing / Deck                abarna@ucsd.edu                 |
|Eddie Bautista     SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                                 |
|Susan Becker       SIO/STS/ODF  Nutrients / ODF Supervisor            sbecker@ucsd.edu                |
|Katinka Bellomo    RSMAS        Console / Deck                        kbellomo@rsmas.miami.edu        |
|Tom Brown          SIO/SOMTS    Wiper                                                                 |
|Kevin Cahill       WHOI         3He/Tritium                           kcahill@whoi.edu                |
|Maverick Carey     UCSB         13C / 14C / DOC / TDN                 maverick.carey@lifesci.ucsb.edu |
|David Cervantes    SIO/MPL      Total Alkalinity                      d1cervantes@ucsd.edu            |
|John Clifford      SIO/SOMTS    3rd Asst. Engineer                                                    |
|Drew Cole          SIO/STS/RT   O2 / Deck                             dcole@ucsd.edu                  |
|David Cook         SIO/SOMTS    1st Officer                                                           |
|Cassidy Curl       SIO/SOMTS    Ordinary Seaman                                                       |
|Frank Delahoyde    SIO/STS/CR   Ship's Computer Systems               fdelahoyde@ucsd.edu             |
|Laura Fantozzi     SIO/MPL      Total Alkalinity                      lfantozzi@ucsd.edu              |
|Cletus Finnell     SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                           |
|Randy Flannigan    SIO/SOMTS    1st Asst. Engineer                                                    |
|Jeremy Fox         SIO/SOMTS    Cook                                                                  |
|Heather Galiher    SIO/SOMTS    2nd Officer                                                           |
|Eugene Gorman      LDEO         CFCs + SF6                            egorman@ldeo.columbia.edu       |
|Dana Greeley       NOAA/PMEL    DIC                                   Dana.Greeley@noaa.gov           |
|Dave Grimes        SIO/SOMTS    Boatswain                                                             |
|Brett Hembrough    SIO/STS/RT   Salinity                              bhembrough@ucsd.edu             |
|Benjamin Hickman   UHawaii      CFCs + SF6                            hickmanb@hawaii.edu             |
|Phillip Hogan      SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                                 |
|Steven Howell      UHawaii      LADCP / ADCP                          sghowell@hawaii.edu             |
|Greg Ikeda         UWash        Console / Deck / Underway pCO2 / EIMS gregikeda@gmail.com             |
|Kristin Jackson    UCSD         pH                                    kdjackson@ucsd.edu              |
|Mary Carol Johnson SIO/STS/ODF  Data Processing / Website             mcj@ucsd.edu                    |
|Bob Juhasz         SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                                 |
|Edward Keenan      SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                           |
|Jeff Kirby         SIO/SOMTS    3rd Officer                                                           |
|Sam Lindenberger   SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                           |
|Joshua Manger      SIO/STS/RT   Resident Technician                   jmanger@ucsd.edu                |
|Melissa Miller     SIO/STS/ODF  Nutrients                             melissa-miller@ucsd.edu         |
|Dave Murline       SIO/SOMTS    Master                                                                |
|Robert Palomares   SIO/STS/RT   Electronics Technician / Salinity     rpalomares@ucsd.edu             |
|Matthew Peer       SIO/SOMTS    2nd Asst. Engineer                                                    |
|Alejandro Quintero SIO/STS/ODF  O2 / Data Processing                  a1quintero@ucsd.edu             |
|Manuel Ramos       SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                                 |
|Britain Richardson SIO/MPL      pH                                    b3richar@ucsd.edu               |
|Alex Rodriguiz     SIO/SOMTS    Chief Engineer                                                        |
|Mark Smith         SIO/SOMTS    Senior Cook                                                           |
|Cruz St.Peter      TAMU         Console / Deck Watch                  stpeter@geos.tamu.edu           |
|James H. Swift     SIO          Chief Scientist                       jswift@ucsd.edu                 |
|Amanda Waite       UFlorida     Console / Deck Watch                  amandajowaite@gmail.com         |
|Gabrielle Weiss    UHawaii      CFCs + SF6                            gweiss@hawaii.edu               |
|Sachiko Yoshida    WHOI         Co-Chief Scientist                    syoshida@whoi.edu               |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  * Affiliation abbreviations are listed on page 4





+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                    KEY to Institution Abbreviations                     |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CR          Computing Resources (SIO/STS)                                |
|LDEO        Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (Columbia University)       |
|LLNL        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory                       |
|MPL         Marine Physical Laboratory (SIO)                             |
|NOAA        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration              |
|ODF         Oceanographic Data Facility (SIO/STS)                        |
|PMEL        Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (NOAA)               |
|Princeton   Princeton University                                         |
|RSMAS       Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (UMiami) |
|RT          Research Technicians (SIO/STS)                               |
|SIO         Scripps Institution of Oceanography (UCSD)                   |
|SOMTS       Ship Operations and Marine Technical Support (SIO)           |
|STS         Shipboard Technical Support (SIO)                            |
|TAMU        Texas A&M University                                         |
|UCSD        University of California, San Diego                          |
|UCSB        University of California, Santa Barbara                      |
|UFlorida    University of Florida                                        |
|UHawaii     University of Hawaii                                         |
|UMiami      University of Miami                                          |
|UWash       University of Washington                                     |
|WHOI        Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution                         |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+



CORE HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENTS: CTD DATA, SALINITY, OXYGEN AND NUTRIENTS


Oceanographic Data Facility and Research Technicians
Shipboard Technical Support
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
UC San Diego
La Jolla, CA 92093-0214


The CLIVAR/Carbon P02W repeat hydrographic line was reoccupied for the
CLIVAR/Carbon Program from 21 March 2013 - 5 May 2013 aboard R/V Melville
during a survey consisting of rosette/CTD/LADCP stations and a variety of
underway measurements.  The ship departed Yokohama, Japan on 21 March 2013
and arrived Honolulu, HI on 5 May 2013 (UTC dates).

A sea-going science team gathered from 10 oceanographic institutions
participated on the cruise.  The programs and PIs, and the shipboard
science team and their responsibilities, are listed in the Narrative
section.

Description of Measurement Techniques

1.  CTD/Hydrographic Measurements Program

A total of 87 stations were occupied with one rosette/CTD/LADCP cast
completed at each.  1 test cast(s) (1/1) and 9 aborted cast(s) (13/1-13/4
and 14/1-14/3) were not reported.  CTDO data and water samples were
collected on each rosette/CTD/LADCP cast, usually to within 10 meters of
the bottom.  Water samples measured on board or stored for shore analysis
are tabulated in the Bottle Sampling section.

Pressure, temperature, conductivity/salinity, dissolved oxygen, fluorometer
and transmissometer data were recorded from CTD profiles.  Current
velocities were measured by the RDI workhorse LADCP.  Core hydrographic
measurements consisted of salinity, dissolved oxygen and nutrient water
samples taken from each rosette cast.  The distribution of samples are
shown in the following figures.

Figure 1.0: P02W Sample Distribution, Stations 1-49.
Figure 1.1: P02W Sample Distribution, Stations 49-87.



1.1.  Water Sampling Package


Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts were performed with a package consisting of a
36-bottle rosette frame (SIO/STS), a 36-place carousel (SBE32) and 36 10.0L
Bullister-style bottles (SIO/STS) with an absolute volume of 10.4L.
Underwater electronic components consisted of a Sea-Bird Electronics
SBE9plus CTD with dual pumps (SBE5), dual temperature sensors (SBE3plus),
dual conductivity sensors (SBE4C), dissolved oxygen (SBE43), chlorophyll
fluorometer (Seapoint), transmissometer (WET Labs), altimeter (Simrad),
reference temperature (SBE35RT) and LADCP (RDI).

The CTD was mounted vertically in an SBE CTD cage attached to the bottom of
the rosette frame and located to one side of the carousel.  The SBE4C
conductivity, SBE3plus temperature and SBE43 Dissolved oxygen sensors and
their respective pumps and tubing were mounted vertically in the CTD cage,
as recommended by SBE.  Pump exhausts were attached to the CTD cage on the
side opposite from the sensors and directed downward. The transmissometer
was mounted horizontally, and the fluorometer was mounted vertically near
the bottom of the rosette frame. The altimeter was mounted on the inside of
the bottom frame ring.  The 150 KHz downward-looking Broadband LADCP (RDI)
was mounted vertically on one side of the frame between the bottles and the
CTD. Its battery pack was located on the opposite side of the frame,
mounted on the bottom of the frame.  Table 1.1.0 shows height of the
sensors referenced to the bottom of the frame:


Table 1.1.0 Heights referenced to bottom of rosette frame

      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
      |Instrument                                       Height in cm |
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
      |Pressure Sensor, inlet to capillary tube                   27 |
      |Temperature (probe tip at TC duct inlet)                   15 |
      |SBE35RT (centered between T1/T2 on same plane)             15 |
      |Rinko DO                                                   11 |
      |Transmissometer                                            12 |
      |Fluorometer                                                12 |
      |Altimeter                                                   2 |
      |LADCP (paddle center)                                       7 |
      |Outer-ring (odd #s) bottle centerline                     124 |
      |Inner-ring (even #s) bottle centerline                    111 |
      |Reference (Surface Zero tape on wire)                     280 |
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+


The rosette system was suspended from a UNOLS-standard three-conductor
0.322" electro-mechanical sea cable.  The sea cable was terminated at the
beginning of P02W.  The R/V Melville's DESH-6 winch was used for all but
one aborted cast (station 14/3).

The deck watch prepared the rosette 10-30 minutes prior to each cast.  The
bottles were cocked and all valves, vents and lanyards were checked for
proper orientation.  Once stopped on station, the rosette was moved out
from the aft hangar to the deployment location under the A-frame using an
air-powered cart and tracks.  The CTD was powered-up and the data
acquisition system started from the computer lab.  The rosette was
unstrapped from the cart.  Tag lines were threaded through the rosette
frame and syringes were removed from CTD intake ports.  The winch operator
was directed by the deck watch leader to raise the package.

The A-frame and rosette were extended outboard and the package was quickly
lowered into the water. Tag lines were removed and the package was lowered
to 10 meters, until the console operator determined that the sensor pumps
had turned on and the sensors were stable. The winch operator was then
directed to bring the package back to the surface, at which time the wire-
out reading was re-zeroed before descent.

Most rosette casts were lowered to within 10 meters of the bottom, using
the CTD depth and multibeam echosounder depth to estimate the distance, and
the altimeter and wire-out to direct the final approach.

For each up cast, the winch operator was directed to stop the winch at up
to 36 pre-determined sampling depths.  These standard depths were staggered
every station using 3 sampling schemes. To ensure package shed wake had
dissipated, the CTD console operator waited 30 seconds prior to tripping
sample bottles.  An additional 10 seconds elapsed before moving to the next
consecutive trip depth, to allow the SBE35RT time to take its readings.
The deck watch leader directed the package to the surface for the last
bottle trip.

Recovering the package at the end of the deployment was essentially the
reverse of launching, with the additional use of poles and snap-hooks
attached to tag lines for controlled recovery.  The rosette was secured on
the cart and moved into the aft hangar for sampling.  The bottles and
rosette were examined before samples were taken, and anything unusual was
noted on the sample log.

Each bottle on the rosette had a unique serial number, independent of the
bottle position on the rosette.  Sampling for specific programs was
outlined on sample log sheets prior to cast recovery or at the time of
collection.

Routine CTD maintenance included soaking the conductivity and oxygen
sensors with 1% Triton-X solution between casts to maintain sensor
stability and eliminate accumulated bio-films.  Rosette maintenance was
performed on a regular basis. Valves and o-rings were inspected for leaks.
The rosette, CTD and carousel were rinsed with fresh water as part of the
routine maintenance.


1.2.  Navigation and Bathymetry Data Acquisition

Navigation data were acquired at 1-second intervals from the ship's Furuno
GP150 GPS receiver by a Linux system beginning 21 March 2013 at 0350z, as
the R/V Melville left the dock in Yokohama, Japan.

Center-beam bathymetric and hull-depth correction data from the Kongsberg
EM-122 multibeam echosounder system were acquired by the ship, and fed into
the ODF Linux systems through a serial data feed.  A minor change in
STS/ODF software was required to read in the depth feed with the
correction.  Bathymetry and navigation data were merged and stored on the
ODF systems, and data were made available as displays on the ODF
acquisition system during casts.  Bottom depths associated with rosette
casts were recorded on the Console Logs during deployments.

Corrected multibeam center depths are reported for each cast event in the
WOCE and Exchange format files.


1.3.  CTD Data Acquisition and Rosette Operation

The CTD data acquisition system consisted of an SBE-11plus (V2) deck unit
and three networked generic PC workstations running CentOS-5.8 or -5.9
Linux. Each PC workstation was configured with a color graphics display,
keyboard and trackball. The systems each had a Comtrol Rocketport PCI
multiple port serial controller providing 8 additional RS-232 ports. The
systems were interconnected through the ship's network.  These systems were
available for real-time operational and CTD data displays, and provided for
CTD and hydrographic data management.

One of the workstations was designated the CTD console and was connected to
the CTD deck unit via RS-232. The CTD console provided an interface and
operational displays for controlling and monitoring a CTD deployment and
closing bottles on the rosette. Another of the workstations was designated
the website and database server and maintained the hydrographic database
for P02W. Redundant backups were managed automatically.

The SBE9plus CTD supplied a standard SBE-format data stream at a data rate
of 24 frames/second. The sensors and instruments used during CLIVAR/Carbon
P02W, along with pre-cruise laboratory calibration information, are listed
below in Table 1.3.0. Copies of the pre-cruise calibration sheets for
various sensors are included in Appendix D.


Table 1.3.0: CLIVAR/Carbon P02W Rosette Underwater Electronics.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                       Serial        CTD      Stations  Pre-Cruise_Calibration |
|Instrument/Sensor*      Mfr.**/Model   Number        Channel    Used       Date     Facility** |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carousel Water Sampler  SBE32+         3213290-0113  n/a     1-55,59-87     n/a                |
|Carousel Water Sampler  SBE32+         3216715-0187  n/a       56-58        n/a                |
|Reference Temperature   SBE35          3528706-0035  n/a        1-87    7-Dec-2012   SIO/STS   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CTD                     SBE9plus       09P39801-0796 n/a       1-13/4       n/a                |
|                        Paroscientific                                                         |
|Pressure                Digiquartz     796-98627     Freq.2    1-13/4   18-Dec-2012  SIO/STS   |
|                        401K-105                                                               |
|                                                                                               |
|CTD                     SBE9plus       09P52161-0914 n/a      13/5-87       n/a                |
|                        Paroscientific                                                         |
|Pressure                Digiquartz     914-110547    Freq.2   13/5-87   14-Jun-2012  SIO/STS   |
|                        401K-105                                                               |
|                                                                                               |
|Primary Pump Circuit                                                                           |
|    Temperature (T1)    SBE3plus       03P-4138      Freq.0     1-87    24-Jan-2013  SIO/STS   |
|    Conductivity (C1)   SBE4C          04-2569       Freq.1     1-87    16-Jan-2013    SBE     |
|    Dissolved Oxygen    SBE43          43-0275       Aux2/V2    1-19    12-Jul-2012    SBE     |
|    Dissolved Oxygen    SBE43          43-1071       Aux2/V2   20-87    12-Jul-2012    SBE     |
|    Pump                SBE5T          05-4890       n/a        1-87        n/a                |
|                                                                                               |
|Secondary Pump Circuit                                                                         |
|    Temperature (T2)    SBE3plus       03P-4226      Freq.3     1-87    24-Jan-2013  SIO/STS   |
|    Conductivity (C2a)  SBE4C          04-2112       Freq.4    1-66/2   24-Jan-2013    SBE     |
|    Conductivity (C2b)  SBE4C          04-3058       Freq.4   66/3-87   2-Nov-2012     SBE     |
|    Pump                SBE5T          05-4377       n/a        1-87        n/a                |
|                                                                                               |
|Optical Diss. Oxygen    {++Rinko III   105           Aux3/V4   25-87    7-Aug-2012     {JFE    |
|Rinko O2 Temperature    ARO-CAV}                     Aux3/V5                        Advantech} |
|                                                                                               |
|Chlorophyll Fluorometer Seapoint       SCF2748       Aux1/V1    1-87        n/a                |
|                                                                                               |
|Transmissometer (TAMU)  WET Labs       CST-327DR     Aux2/V3    1-87    19-Jul-2012  WET Labs  |
|                        C-Star                                                                 |
|                                                                                               |
|Altimeter (500m range)  Simrad 807     9711091       Aux1/V0    1-87        n/a                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Deck Unit (in lab)      SBE11plus V2   11P9852-0366  n/a        1-87        n/a                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   * All sensors belong to SIO/STS, unless otherwise noted.
   ** SBE = Sea-Bird Electronics
   + 36-place version
   ++ Optical oxygen sensor, new to SIO/STS; installed for evaluation purposes



An SBE35RT reference temperature sensor was connected to the SBE32 carousel
and recorded a temperature for each bottle closure. These temperatures were
used as additional CTD calibration checks. The SBE35RT was utilized using
Sea-Bird Electronics' recommendations (http://www.seabird.com).

The SBE9plus CTD was connected to the SBE32 36-place carousel, providing
for sea cable operation. Power to the SBE9plus CTD and sensors, SBE32
carousel and Simrad altimeter was provided through the sea cable from the
SIO/STS SBE11plus deck unit in the main lab.

CTD deployments were initiated by the console watch after the ship stopped
on station. The acquisition program was started and the deck unit turned on
at least 3 minutes prior to package deployment. The watch maintained a
console operations log containing a description of each deployment, a
record of every attempt to close a bottle and any relevant comments. The
deployment and acquisition software presented a short dialog instructing
the operator to turn on the deck unit, to examine the on-screen CTD data
displays and to notify the deck watch that this was accomplished.

Once the deck watch had deployed the rosette, the winch operator lowered it
to 10 meters, or deeper in heavier seas. The CTD sensor pumps were
configured with a 5-second start-up delay after detecting seawater
conductivities. The console operator checked the CTD data for proper sensor
operation and waited for sensors to stabilize, then instructed the winch
operator to bring the package to the surface and descend to a specified
target depth, based on CTD pressure available on the winch display.

The CTD profiling rate was at most 30m/min to 100m and up to 60m/min deeper
than 100m, depending on sea cable tension and sea state. As the package
descended toward the target depth, the rate was reduced to 30m/min at 100m
from the bottom.

The progress of the deployment and CTD data quality were monitored through
interactive graphics and operational displays. Bottle trip locations were
transcribed onto the console and sample logs. The sample log was used later
as an inventory of samples drawn from the bottles. The altimeter channel,
CTD depth, winch wire-out and bathymetric depth were all monitored to
determine the distance of the package from the bottom, allowing a safe
approach to 8-10 meters.

Bottles were closed on the up-cast by operating an on-screen control.  The
expected CTD pressure was reported to the winch operator for every bottle
trip. Bottles were tripped 30-40 seconds after the package stopped to allow
the rosette wake to dissipate and the bottles to flush. The winch operator
was instructed to proceed to the next bottle stop no sooner than 10 seconds
after closing bottles to ensure that stable CTD data were associated with
the trip and to allow the SBE35RT temperature sensor to measure bottle trip
temperature.

It can be necessary at some stations in higher sea states to close
shallower bottles (normally only the shallowest bottle) on the fly due to
the need to keep tension on the CTD cable. At such closures - always noted
on the CTD Console Log Sheet - the SBE35RT temperature is typically not
usable.

The package was directed to the surface by the deck for the last bottle
closure, then the package was brought on deck. The console operator
terminated the data acquisition, turned off the deck unit and assisted with
rosette sampling.


1.4.  CTD Winch and Sea Cable Issues

The R/V Melville's Markey DESH-6 (aft) winch was used for all reported
casts.  Typically, one conductor in the DESH-6 UNOLS-standard three-
conductor 0.322" electro-mechanical sea cable was used for power and
signal; the sea cable armor was used for ground.  A full (electrical and
mechanical) re-termination was done on the DESH-6 sea cable before P02W
started.

The Markey DESH-5 (forward) winch was available as a spare, and only used
for one aborted cast during P02W.  Its cable had 50-60m of rusty wire
removed prior to full re-termination before the leg began.

There was CTD signal noise in short (less than 1-second) bursts during
stations 1/1 (test), 1/2, and 2, all near-surface on the downcasts.  Prior
to station 7, a full re-termination (electrical and mechanical) was done to
the DESH-6 wire because of a kink.

CTD signal noise returned on station 8 upcast, 20m below the third bottle-
trip stop.  It was frequent and persistent, and ended just as suddenly as
it started a few minutes after the trip.

Prior to going in-water on station 12, there was much signal noise
following a large fantail slam/shudder.  It continued through two near-
surface yo-yos, then stopped completely after a few short noisy bursts just
below the surface start.

Before station 13 cast 1, an electrical retermination was done as part of
troubleshooting the observed electrical noise on station 12.  In addition,
a separate winch-to-lab-JBox cable was run to bypass the standard one, to
eliminate one more possible source of signal interference.  The cast was
aborted at 10m due to excessive noise and inability to find a usable
signal.  Two more casts were attempted after various checks and
adjustments, and both were aborted at 10m for excessive noise.

After extensive testing with various CTD and wire combinations, the DESH-6
was determined to be the source of the problem.  The Chief Engineer and his
team opened up the DESH-6 winch and found water inside the housing and
motor.  The DESH-5 was not usable due to speed-control issues using a
500-pound test weight.  The ship returned to Yokohama for winch repairs,
where the DESH-5 motor was also found to be flooded.  Winch motor repairs
were accomplished in Yokohama through a local company (DESH-6 motor), as
well as by the Melville engineering team, with the assistance of a Markey
technician who was flown in to assist.

During the transit back to station 13, signal noise problems persisted. An
experimental retermination using two of the three inner conducting wires
was attempted before station 13 cast 4.  In addition, the armor was
grounded to the unistrut in the main lab.  There were random signal cutouts
in short bursts during the downcast, but at 1410 decibars down, the pumps
started turning off/on repeatedly.  The winch was stopped near 1700 mwo
while the winch-to-lab-JBox bypass cable was re-installed; but this did not
solve the problem.  The cast was aborted, and the pump cutout issues were
traced to a water leak/short on the CTD #796 endcap under a dummy plug.

A standard electrical retermination was done prior to station 13 cast 5,
and CTD #914 was installed to replace CTD #796.  Data noise persisted,
appearing to increase with winch deceleration, on both downcast (during the
bottom approach) and upcast (slowing for each bottle stop).  The cast was
completed despite the noise, opting to clean up the data post-cast and get
moving eastward and away from jinxed station 13.

Station 14 cast 1 was aborted near 600 mwo due to excessive data noise.
Station 14 cast 2 was attempted with the DESH-5 winch; but speed-control
issues (jumping from 10 to 140 m/min in sudden spurts) caused this cast to
be aborted near 750 mwo.

Weather delays gave more time for diagnosis, and the DESH-6 winch ground to
deck was found to be faulty.  After this was fixed, station 14 cast 3 had
to be aborted at 50m due to a sea critter invading (and clogging) the
primary pump tube - arrgghhh!  Then, at last, no more CTD noise problems.

The DESH-5 winch speed-control issues were repaired within the next few
days by the engine crew, and it was available as a spare for the rest of
the leg.

A final DESH-6 mechanical termination was done prior to station 47 when it
was discovered that residual torque was causing the outer armor to unlay.

A much smaller winch issue was the LCI-90i (winch tension, speed and
payout) display, which became intermittently non-responsive mid-cast, both
at the winch control station and in the lab.  If the freeze-up happened for
more than a few seconds, the winch operator would slow down or stop until
the display returned. The display usually reset itself after a few seconds,
but at other times, someone in the main lab needed to turn a circuit
breaker off and on to fix the display.  A few times, when the winch did not
stop and the circuit-breaker reset was required, the winch payout "offset",
causing a bit of extra arithmetic for the console operator.  When payout
was substantially different from 0m by the time the rosette returned to the
surface on the upcast, it could cause some confusion (and extra tension)
for the winch operator as well.


1.5.  CTD Cable Tension on Deep Casts

As the P02 Leg 1 cruise progressed into deeper and deeper water,
significant R/V Melville science and operations issues hinged on actual CTD
cable tension and cast time performance on very deep CTD casts (maximum
cast depths deeper than 5000 meters).  Although all the U.S. work for this
program since it began in 2003 had transpired without CTD cable parting or
functionality loss, new UNOLS/NSF cable tension rules went into effect
shortly before this cruise. It was thought pre-cruise by some at the
operator and agency level that the maximum CTD cable tensions on deep casts
on this cruise would exceed the new rules. Two questions in particular
loomed in planning: (1) under what conditions would CTD cable tensions
exceed 5000 lbs., and (2) what would be the impacts on P02 station times
and operations due to efforts to keep maximum observed CTD cable tension
less than 5000 lbs.? The cruise had a waiver permitting CTD operations to
continue under some conditions if higher CTD cable tensions were observed,
but there was general concurrence that sustained P02 CTD operations with
cable tensions above 5000 lbs. should be avoided if possible.

The ship was equipped with a new 20Hz recording tensiometer, which provided
the real-time data for cast operations and the recorded data for further
study.

Experiments with step-wise increasing winch haul speed at early P02
stations in waters 4000-5000 meters deep, in good weather, showed that
maximum CTD cable tensions stayed near or less than ca. 4000 lbs. with any
haul speeds to the maximum desired haul speed of 60 meters/minute.

The first station with water depth exceeding 5000 meters was 027 (5825
meters), where 5848 meters of CTD cable were deployed. (At calculated
package depth 5860 meters, winch speed zero, cable tension ranged 3840-4380
lbs., mostly in the middle of that range.) In this case the winch operator
began to haul up at 20 meters/minute with maximum wire out, slowly
increasing speed while carefully observing cable tension. But long before
there was less than 5000 meters of wire out the winch operator was able to
increase haul speed to 60 meters per minute. Over succeeding stations the
winch operators quickly gained confidence working at higher winch speeds,
finding they could rapidly ease speeds up to 60 meters/minute haul speeds
with more than 5800 meters of wire out, meanwhile keeping maximum cable
tension below 4500 lbs.

The skill of the Melville's winch operators (two of them were the best
overall in the Chief Scientist's UNOLS experience) and their rapidly-gained
experience with the 36-place rosette in deep water with greater than 5000
meters of CTD cable deployed, permitted the faster haul speeds and shorter
net station times than the chief scientist had used in pre-cruise planning.

It is important to note that most 5000-6000 meter casts during P02 Leg 1
took place in good weather (winds 10-20 knots; low swell). During slightly
more than one day of winds in the 20-25 knot range (with periods of 25-30
knots) seas rose somewhat.  Associated with the higher level of ship motion
there were several casts that day where cable tensions rose to nearer but
still under 5000 lbs., with maximum cable deployed, even with lowered winch
haul-up speeds.

Frank Delahoyde, the STS computer engineer on board, made histograms of the
20Hz winch tension data for each day's stations, binned in 50-lb
increments. The example from a day with some of the highest observed
tensions is shown in Figure 1.5.0. It can be seen that no tensions greater
than 5000 lbs. were observed, and very few with more than 4500 lbs.


Figure 1.5.0: Melville 20 Hz winch tension histogram for 21 April 2013, a
              day when some of the highest cable tensions of the P02 Leg 1 
              cruise were recorded.


As noted above, there was little increase in CTD cable tension observed as
haul speed was increased from 30 to 60 meters per minute (or payout speed
decreased from 60 to 30 meters per minute). To demonstrate this, Steve
Howell, University of Hawaii, made a plot of all 20 Hz cable tension
readings for one day (three total CTD casts) versus wire out, colored by
winch speed -60 to +60 meters per minute (Figure 1.5.1) There was only
125-150 lb. increase in tension when reducing deploy speed from 60 to 30
meters per minute during the deepest 100 meters of deployment, and when
increasing the speed from 30 to 60 meters per minute when hauling up.

  
Figure 1.5.1: 20 Hz CTD winch cable tensions versus wire out for one day
              (23 April 2013), colored by winch speed.


The narrow dark blue bands in Figure 1.5.1 arise from a single up-cast
operated by a cautious winch operator who slowed the winch much earlier
(and hence for a longer time) than did his comrades. The "fast" winch
operators brought the package much closer to the desired bottle depth
before rapidly slowing the winch, and so their bottle stops do not show on
their casts. R/V Melville's "fast" winch operators saved appreciable time.

The cable tension observations during P02 Leg 1 also serve to demonstrate
that when large lengths of CTD cable are deployed the main cause of cable
tension spikes is ship motion (ship roll and heave). Vertical motions of
the sheave in higher seas is thought to be in the +/-2 meter/second range.
These high sheave motions create large impulse loads and high drag on
upward sheave motion and slack loads on downward sheave motion.  (Near the
sea surface, cable tension spikes and slack wire are nearly solely due to
sheave motion.) Use of a heave-compensating rosette deployment system
should then be useful in reducing maximum cable tension on operations in
higher sea states, for example those often experienced in the Southern
Ocean.


1.6.  CTD Data Processing

Shipboard CTD data processing was performed automatically during and after
each deployment using SIO/STS CTD processing software v.5.1.6-1.

During acquisition, the raw CTD data were converted to engineering units,
filtered, response-corrected, calibrated and decimated to a more manageable
0.5-second time series. Pre-cruise laboratory calibrations for pressure,
temperature and conductivity were also applied at this time.  The
0.5-second time series data were used for real-time graphics during
deployments, and were the source for CTD pressure and temperature data
associated with each rosette bottle.  Both the raw 24 Hz data and the
0.5-second time series were stored for subsequent processing. During the
deployment, the raw data were backed up to another Linux workstation every
5 minutes.

At the completion of a deployment a sequence of processing steps were
performed automatically. The 0.5-second time series data were checked for
consistency, clean sensor response and calibration shifts. A 2-decibar
pressure series was generated from the down cast data.  The pressure-series
data were used by the web service for interactive plots, sections and CTD
data distribution.  Time-series data were also available for distribution
through the website.

CTD data were routinely examined for sensor problems, calibration shifts
and deployment or operational problems.  On-deck pressure values were
monitored at the start and end of each cast for potential drift.  Alignment
of temperature and conductivity sensor data (in addition to the default
0.073-second conductivity "advance" applied by the SBE11plus deck unit) was
optimized for each pump/sensor combination to minimize salinity spiking,
using data from multiple casts of various depths after acquisition.  If the
pressure offset or conductivity "advance" values were altered after data
acquisition, the CTD data were re-averaged from the 24Hz stored data.

The primary and secondary temperature sensors (SBE3plus) were compared to
each other and to the SBE35 temperature sensor.  CTD conductivity sensors
(SBE4C) were compared to each other, then calibrated by examining
differences between CTD and check-sample conductivity values.  CTD
dissolved oxygen sensor data were calibrated to check-sample data.

As bottle salinity and oxygen results became available, they were used to
refine shipboard conductivity and oxygen sensor calibrations.  Theta-
Salinity and theta-O2 comparisons were made between down and up casts as
well as between groups of adjacent deployments.

A total of 87 full casts were made using the 36-place CTD/LADCP rosette.
Further elaboration of CTD procedures specific to this cruise are found in
the next section.


1.7.  CTD Acquisition and Data Processing Details

Adjustments to the conductivity "advance" time (default: 0.073 seconds)
were examined by re-averaging data from the stored 24 Hz data at various
time intervals, then evaluating salinity spiking and noise levels in sharp
gradients and in deep water for multiple casts.  An additional 0.08-second
"advance" was applied to the primary conductivity sensor.  The same
0.06-second "advance" was used for both secondary conductivity sensors,
since the same temperature sensor and pump were used and no differences in
salinity spiking were noted after replacing the sensor.

The new "advance" times were applied real-time starting station 53.  Casts
acquired before then were re-processed from the raw 24 Hz data into the
0.5-second time-series.

Primary T/C sensors were used for all reported CTD data because the same
sensor pair was used through-out the cruise, and there were no remarkable
problems with either sensor.

The following table identifies problems or comments noted during specific
casts (NOTE: mwo = meters of wire out on winch):


Sta/Cast         Comment

start            full (electrical + mechanical) retermination of both
                 wires.  Markey DESH-5/fwd winch had 50-60m rusty wire
                 removed prior to retermination.  Using Markey DESH-6/aft
                 winch for rosette casts.
1/1              Test cast (not reported): trip all bottles at 50m to test
                 bottle integrity.  Transmissometer caps not removed.
                 Signal noise in bursts, downcast only.
1/2              Transmissometer caps not removed.  Signal noise on
                 downcast, again in bursts.
4/1              2kn current toward East: set ship 1 mile West of intended
                 station posn.
5/1              cart/track issues at launch, 10-minute delay. Restarted
                 cast 3x after "pylon not responding" messages continued.
                 Rebooted acquisition system.  Lost 30 minutes for delays.
7/1              Possibly before this cast: full electrical and mechanical
                 retermination after wire got kinked.  (Not logged, so
                 exact station not known.)  Transmissometer calibration
                 check a few hours after cast.
8/1              MANY missed frames 20m before stop for 3933 dbar/trip 3;
                 first occurrence deep or on an upcast.
12/1             Much signal noise before going in, following big fantail
                 slam/shudder.  2 surface yo-yos to check it out; then only
                 a few short bursts of noise below surface start.
13/1             Standard electrical retermination, and separate winch-to-
                 lab-JBox cable run prior to cast, attempting to eliminate
                 electrical noise.  Too much signal noise to find good
                 data.  Cast aborted at 10m.
13/2             Delayed start due to electrical noise.  Cast aborted at
                 10m.
13/3             Aborted cast: starts/ends at 10m, appears to continue
                 where 13/2 left off,
13/4             prior to cast: experimental electrical retermination with
                 two inner conductors for signal, and ground to unistrut
                 inside lab.  Random signal cutouts in short bursts during
                 downcast; however, at 1410db down: pumps turned off and on
                 repeatedly.  Stopped winch near 1700m while winch-to-lab
                 bypass cable installed again, test showed same problem.
                 Cast aborted and brought back aboard.  Found leaking dummy
                 plug on aux4; this probably caused shorts that shut things
                 down and turned the pumps off/on, a new problem.
13/5             Standard electrical retermination prior to cast.  Now
                 using CTD #914.  Data noise appears to coincide with
                 slower winch speeds, down and up.  Despite lots of noise,
                 continued with cast and cleaned up data later.
14/1             Wind 28-33 kn at launch.  During launch, 1 tagline broke,
                 2 others kept control.  Cast aborted near 600m due to
                 excessive data noise.
14/2             Only cast with DESH-5 winch: clean signal, but winch
                 speeds out of control: cast aborted near 750mwo.
14/3             DESH-6 from this point forward. Cast aborted at 50m:
                 organic matter clogged sensor plumbing, brought back on-
                 board and cleaned.
20/1             SBE43 Oxygen sensor S/N 43-1071 replaces S/N 43-0275 prior
                 to cast.  Sea cable re-aligned on rosette prior to cast to
                 improve/eliminate bottles 13/15 lanyard hangups.
21/1             Winch display reset between 300-250m depth bottles; winch
                 readings are 35m high for each bottle shallower than that.
22/1             Deep anomalies seen in CTDO data, 1760 dbars to bottom,
                 particularly below 2100 dbars. Features appear to be real,
                 including ~0.02 sigma 2 inversion area between 2160-2260
                 dbars.  Station located just before ridge at west side of
                 trench.
25/1             Rinko III Optical Oxygen sensor and temperature thermistor
                 installed prior to cast.  (Found the missing adapter cable
                 to connect it up to the CTD.)
27/1             fluorometer very noisy on launch; transmissometer also,
                 but not so much.
33/1             returned to deck at launch before rosette in-water due to
                 closed bottle - forgot to re-cock after adjustment.
42/1             T/S differ down/up at surface.
43/1             T/S differ down/up near surface. Near seamount.
47/1             Mechanical retermination prior to cast (outer armor
                 unwinding).
48/1             down/up T/S differences 300-450db.
49/1             Winch display out at 1858m down, winch did not stop. 50m
                 offset in winch readings.
51/1             T/S differ down/up 100-350db.
53/1             transmissometer calibration check prior to cast.
54/1             +0.045 sigma theta at surface, both sensor pairs, downcast
                 only; top 6 dbars coded questionable.
56/1             spare carousel S/N 0187 installed prior to cast.
57/1             Surface water warmer/saltier than water underneath, down
                 and up (deeper on up).
58/1             No bottles tripped, despite confirmations by acquisition
                 software.  Very salty water 65-90m.
59/1             carousel replaced with original S/N 0113 prior to cast.
60/1             very high T/S gradient at bottle 36 trip (1 below
                 surface).
63/1             cast aborted due to C1/C2 difference, unresolved by taking
                 rosette down/up 20m after soak at 10m.
63/2             cleaned out pump tubes before cast 2; cast aborted - same
                 problem as cast 1. C2 sensor S/N 04-2112 removed after
                 cast. No obvious problem noted by ET during close
                 inspection.
63/3             New C2 sensor S/N 04-3058 installed prior to cast.
66/1             30-45 minute delay for carousel maintenance.
84/1             Significant down/up T/S/O differences, 750-200m.  Sudden
                 rain squall a few minutes before surface on upcast.
87/1             transmissometer calibration check the morning after this
                 last cast.


1.8.  CTD Sensor Laboratory Calibrations

Laboratory calibrations of the CTD pressure, temperature, conductivity and
dissolved oxygen sensors were performed prior to CLIVAR/Carbon P02W.  The
sensors and calibration dates are listed in Table 1.3.0.  Copies of the
calibration sheets for Pressure, Temperature, Conductivity, and Dissolved
Oxygen sensors, as well as factory and deck calibrations for the TAMU
Transmissometer, are in Appendix D.


1.9.  CTD Shipboard Calibration Procedures

Two different SBE9plus CTDs were used for rosette/CTD/LADCP casts during
CLIVAR/Carbon P02W: S/N 796 at stas 1/1-13/4, and S/N 914 at stas
13/5-87/1.  The CTDs were deployed with all sensors and pumps aligned
vertically, as recommended by SBE.

The SBE35RT Digital Reversing Thermometer (S/N 3528706-0035) served as an
independent calibration check for T1 and T2 sensors.  In situ salinity and
dissolved O2 check samples collected during each cast were used to
calibrate the conductivity and dissolved O2 sensors.

1.9.1.  CTD Pressure

The Paroscientific Digiquartz pressure transducers (S/N 796-98627 and S/N
914-110547) were calibrated in December and June 2012 (respectively) at the
SIO/STS Calibration Facility.  The calibration coefficients provided on the
reports were used to convert frequencies to pressure.  The SIO/STS pressure
calibration coefficients already incorporate the slope and offset term
usually provided by Paroscientific.

The initial deck readings for pressure indicated a pressure offset was
needed, typically because CTDs are calibrated horizontally but deployed
vertically.  An additional -0.7 decibar offset was applied during data
acquisition/block-averaging for stations 1-39.  A review after station 39
showed that -0.9 decibars was a better choice for the second CTD.  Stations
13/5-39 were re-averaged with the larger offset, and the new offset was
used during acquisition for the remaining stations on Leg 1/P02W.

Residual pressure offsets (the difference between the first and last
submerged pressures, after the offset corrections) varied from -0.3 to +0.2
decibars.  Pre- and post-cast on-deck/out-of-water pressure offsets varied
from -0.2 to +0.2 decibars before the casts, and -0.3 to +0.4 decibars
after the casts.  The in/out pressures within a cast were very consistent.


1.9.2.  CTD Temperature

The same SBE3plus primary temperature sensor (T1: 03P-4138) and secondary
temperature sensor (T2: 03P-4226) were used during P02W.  Calibration
coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations, plus shipboard
temperature corrections determined during the cruise, were applied to raw
primary and secondary sensor data during each cast.

A single SBE35RT (3528706-0035) was used as a tertiary temperature check.
It was located equidistant between T1 and T2 with the sensing element
aligned in a plane with the T1 and T2 sensing elements.  The SBE35RT
Digital Reversing Thermometer is an internally-recording temperature sensor
that operates independently of the CTD. It is triggered by the SBE32
carousel in response to a bottle closure.  The SBE35RT on P02W was set to
internally average over 4 sampling cycles (a total of 4.4 seconds).

According to the manufacturer's specifications, the typical stability for
an SBE35RT sensor is 0.001 deg.C/year.  A post-cruise calibration for this
sensor (18-Jun-2013) showed essentially no change (at most 0.0001 deg.C)
over the 6 months since the pre-cruise calibration.

Two independent metrics of calibration accuracy were examined. At each
bottle closure, the primary and secondary temperature were compared with
each other and with the SBE35RT temperature.  CTD temperature calibrations
for P02W were re-evaluated during Leg 2/P02E, with the added benefit of
seeing data from more stations.

Both temperature sensors were examined for drift with time, using the more
stable SBE35RT at a smaller range of deeper trip levels (4000-5000
decibars).  Even in this small pressure range, the time drift was impacted
by the pressure effect on the sensors.  In order to better align deeper and
shallower data, a second-order pressure correction was first applied to
each temperature sensor, using all bottles where the T1-T2 difference was
less than +/-0.005 (to omit high-gradient bottles that might skew the
results),

Neither of the sensors exhibited a temperature-dependent slope.  But both
T1 and T2 had a residual time dependence (offset drift) that flattened out
after the first half of Leg 1.  T2 differences shifted slightly around day
35, after the C2 sensor was replaced.

All casts together were used for the T1 drift corrections, but stations
1-62 and 63-159 were fit separately for the T2 drift.  Data deeper than
1800 decibars were used to determine second-order corrections to pull
deeper T2 differences in line with shallower differences.

A final check of corrected data showed that T2 was still slightly off for
the first few casts following the C2 sensor change-out.  Assuming that the
sensor was jostled slightly, an additional +0.0003 deg.C offset was applied
to T2 temperature data for stations 63-68 only.

Pressure-dependent corrections were then re-checked, and no further
adjustments were warranted.

The final corrections for T1 temperature data reported on P02W are
summarized in Appendix A.  Corrections made to both temperature sensors had
the form:

                        T(ITS90)=T+tp2*P2+tp1*P+t0


Residual temperature differences after correction are shown in figures
1.9.2.0 through 1.9.2.8.

  
Figure 1.9.2.0: SBE35RT-T1 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.2.1: Deep SBE35RT-T1 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.9.2.2: SBE35RT-T2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.2.3: Deep SBE35RT-T2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.9.2.4: T1-T2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.2.5: Deep T1-T2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.9.2.6: SBE35RT-T1 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.2.7: SBE35RT-T2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.2.8: T1-T2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).


The 95% confidence limits for the mean low-gradient differences are
+/-0.00727 deg.C for SBE35RT-T1 and +/-0.00360 deg.C for T1-T2.  The 95%
confidence limit for deep temperature residuals (where pressure > 1800
dbars) is +/-0.00072 deg.C for SBE35RT-T1 and +/-0.00049 deg.C for T1-T2.

1.9.3.  CTD Conductivity

A single SBE4C primary conductivity sensor (C1/04-2569) and two SBE4C
secondary conductivity sensors (C2a/04-2112 at stations 1-62, and
C2b/04-3058 at stations 63/3-87) were used during P02W.  Conductivity
sensor C2a was removed after 2 attempts to start station 63 because it
would not stabilize at the surface soak, and cleaning the pump circuit out
did not fix the problem.  Primary TC sensor data were used to report final
CTD data because the same sensor pair was used during the entire leg.

Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations were
applied to convert raw frequencies to conductivity. Shipboard conductivity
corrections, determined during the cruise, were applied to primary and
secondary conductivity data for each cast.  Conductivity corrections for
Leg 1/P02W were re-evaluated at the end of Leg 2/P02E, and included
stations from both legs in order to determine better corrections.

Corrections for both CTD temperature sensors were finalized before
analyzing conductivity differences.  Two independent metrics of calibration
accuracy were examined. At each bottle closure, the primary and secondary
conductivity were compared with each other.  Each sensor was also compared
to conductivity calculated from check sample salinities using CTD pressure
and temperature.

There was some shifting back-and-forth of bottle-CTD differences throughout
the cruise. An investigation indicated it was typically the result of
bottle salinity differences of 0.001-0.002 from run-to-run.  No cause or
resolution was ever determined.  Theta-Salinity comparisons showed that
cast-to-cast deep CTD data were well-aligned before applying any offsets.
Differences from all stations were included in the fits for conductivity
corrections, despite the rapid decline of C2a starting with stations in the
late 50s until that sensor was removed.

The differences between primary and secondary temperature sensors were used
as filtering criteria for all conductivity fits to reduce the contamination
of conductivity comparisons by package wake.  The coherence of this
relationship is shown in figure 1.9.3.0.


Figure 1.9.3.0: Coherence of conductivity differences as a function of
                temperature differences.


Uncorrected conductivity comparisons are shown in figures 1.9.3.1 through
1.9.3.3.


Figure 1.9.3.1: Uncorrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (-0.01
                deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.2: Uncorrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (-0.01
                deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.3: Uncorrected C1-C2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).


Offsets for each C sensor were evaluated for drift with time using
C(Bottle)-C(CTD) differences from a smaller range of deeper pressures
(2800-4800 decibars), in order to exclude most of the pressure effect on
the sensors.  A second-order fit of differences vs time was determined for
each sensor, accounting for a slower rate of change partway through Leg 1.
Sensor C2a was drifting faster just before it was changed out, so stations
56-62 were excluded from those drift calculations.  The offset drift
calculated for C2a/stations 1-55 was applied to all C2a stations.

C(Bottle)-C(CTD) differences were then evaluated for response to pressure
and/or conductivity, which typically shifts between pre- and post-cruise
SBE laboratory calibrations.  A comparison of the residual differences
indicated that a parabolic conductivity-dependent correction was required
for each sensor.  Small adjustments to the time-dependent corrections for
C1 and C2a were re-calculated using stations 1-159 and 1-62, respectively.

After applying time- and conductivity-dependent corrections, the pressure-
dependent coefficients for conductivity were calculated.  The correction
was linear for C1, and parabolic for each C2 sensor, in order to pull in
the differences from very deep data (below 5800 decibars) on P02W casts.

Sensor C2a, which completely failed at the start of station 63, was
apparently misbehaving for most of its use (in hindsight).  This was very
evident when checking a plot of residual S1-S2 vs Pressure: differences
slid to a +0.001 max around 400 decibars, then dropped to -0.001 around 700
decibars. The deeper residual differences had a mild parabolic shape.  The
C2a pressure-dependent correction was recalculated, using only bottle data
below 800 decibars.  Then the C2a conductivity coefficients were
recalculated using all bottle data; this substantially reduced the "wave"
in the S1-S2 differences below 1000 decibars.  Fortunately, these C2a data
were only used as a secondary calibration check for the primary
conductivity sensor, and were not used for any reported data.

A few small offset adjustments, based on Theta-Salinity comparisons with
adjacent casts, were applied as follows:

     +0.0002 mS/cm to C1/stations  43, 57-58
     +0.0003 mS/cm to C2a/stations 54-62
     +0.0002 mS/cm to C2b/station  63

After adjustments, deep Theta-Salinity profiles of adjacent casts agreed
well for both sensor pairs.

The residual conductivity differences after correction are shown in figures
1.9.3.4 through 1.9.3.15.


Figure 1.9.3.4:  Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.5:  Deep Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (Pressure >= 1800 
                 dbars).
Figure 1.9.3.6:  Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-
                 T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.7:  Deep Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 
                 dbars).
Figure 1.9.3.8:  Corrected C1-C2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.9:  Deep Corrected C1-C2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.9.3.10: Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by pressure (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.11: Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by pressure (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.12: Corrected C1-C2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.13: Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by conductivity (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.14: Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by conductivity (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.15: Corrected C1-C2 by conductivity (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).


The final corrections for the sensors used on P02W are summarized in
Appendix A.  Corrections made to the primary conductivity sensor had the
form:
                       corC=C+cp1*P+c2*C**2+c1*C+c0

Corrections made to the secondary conductivity sensors had the form:

                   corC=C+cp2*P**2+cp1*P+c2*C**2+c1*C+c0

Salinity residuals after applying shipboard P/T/C corrections are
summarized in figures 1.9.3.16 through 1.9.3.18.  Only CTD and bottle
salinity data with "acceptable" quality codes are included in the
differences.


Figure 1.9.3.16: Salinity residuals by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.17: Salinity residuals by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.3.18: Deep Salinity residuals by station (Pressure >= 1800 
                 dbars).


Figures 1.9.3.17 and 1.9.3.18 represent estimates of the salinity accuracy
of P02W.  The 95% confidence limits are +/-0.00295 relative to bottle
salinities for all salinities, where T1-T2 is within +/-0.01 deg.C; and
+/-0.00166 relative to bottle salinities for deep salinities, where
pressure is more than 1800 decibars.


Post-Cruise Conductivity Calibrations

Post-cruise calibrations for all 3 conductivity sensors were done and
available before finishing this last revision of the data report.

Sensor C1 appears to have had a large change: more than 0.007 mS/cm at 60
mS/cm.  The maximum conductivity measured during Leg 1/P02W was 50.5 mS/cm,
and only 45 mS/cm by the end of Leg 2/P02E.  The post-cruise shift in the
conductivity residual (SBE4C-Standard on SBE Lab.Cal. plots) was
approximately +0.0045/+0.003 (C1/C2b) at 50 mS/cm, and +0.003/+0.0015
(C1/C2b) at 45 mS/cm.  This is consistent with what was seen in uncorrected
near-surface conductivities at the end of leg 2.

The fact that sensor C2a did not require any repairs and had barely changed
from its pre-cruise calibration was surprising.  This did not reflect what
was observed during P02W, where there appeared to be a weird pressure
effect on this sensor.  Pressure effects on SBE4C sensors have never been
evaluated in a laboratory, so far as we know.  All calibrations are done at
atmospheric pressure, plus the pressure caused by a meter or so of water.
It is a moot point for P02W, since sensor C2a was never used for any
reported data on this leg.


1.9.4.  CTD Dissolved Oxygen

Two different SBE43 dissolved O2 sensors, DO/43-0275 and DO/43-1071, were
used during P02W. Sensor 43-0275 was used from station 1 through station
19. This sensor was replaced by 43-1071 for the remainder of the P02W
stations due to increasing noise observed, especially at higher pressures.
The SBE43 dissolved O2 sensor was plumbed into the primary T1/C1 pump
circuit after C1.

Each SBE43 DO sensor was calibrated to dissolved O2 bottle samples taken at
bottle stops by matching the down cast CTD data to the up cast trip
locations on isopycnal surfaces, then calculating CTD dissolved O2 using a
DO sensor response model and minimizing the residual differences from the
bottle samples. A non-linear least-squares fitting procedure was used to
minimize the residuals and to determine sensor model coefficients, and was
accomplished in three stages.

The time constants for the lagged terms in the model were first determined
for the sensor.  These time constants are sensor-specific but applicable to
an entire cruise.  Next, casts were fit individually to bottle sample data.

Bottle oxygens from nearby casts with similar deep TS structure were used
to help fit CTD O2 data for casts with one or more mis-tripped bottles, and
for station 58, where no bottles tripped at all.  Finally, consecutive
casts were compared on plots of Theta vs O2 to verify consistency over the
course of P02W.

At the end of the cruise, standard and blank values for bottle oxygen data
were smoothed, and the bottle oxygen values were recalculated.  The changes
to bottle oxygen values were less than 0.01 ml/l for most stations.  CTD O2
data were re-calibrated to the smoothed bottle values after the leg.

Final CTD dissolved O2 residuals are shown in figures 1.9.4.0-1.9.4.2.

 
Figure 1.9.4.0: O2 residuals by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.4.1: O2 residuals by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.9.4.2: Deep O2 residuals by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).


The standard deviations of 2.101 umol/kg for all oxygens and 0.705 umol/kg
for deep oxygens are only presented as general indicators of goodness of
fit.  SIO/STS makes no claims regarding the precision or accuracy of CTD
dissolved O2 data.

The general form of the SIO/STS DO sensor response model equation for
Clark-style cells follows Brown and Morrison [Brow78], Millard [Mill82] and
Owens & Millard  [Owen85].  SIO/STS models DO sensor responses with lagged
CTD data. In situ pressure and temperature are filtered to match the sensor
responses.  Time constants for the pressure response (p), a slow (Tf) and
fast (Ts) thermal response, package velocity (dP), thermal diffusion (dT)
and pressure hysteresis (h) are fitting parameters. Once determined for a
given sensor, these time constants typically remain constant for a cruise.
The thermal diffusion term is derived by low-pass filtering the difference
between the fast response (Ts) and slow response (Tl) temperatures. This
term is intended to correct non-linearities in sensor response introduced
by inappropriate analog thermal compensation.  Package velocity is
approximated by low-pass filtering 1st-order pressure differences, and is
intended to correct flow-dependent response.  Dissolved O2 concentration is
then calculated:

     O2ml/l=[C1*VDOe**(C2*Ph/5000)+C3]*fsat(T,P)*e**(C4*Tl+C5*Ts+C7*Pl+C6*dOc/dt+C8*dP/dt+C9*dT)(1.9.4.0)

where:

O2ml/l      Dissolved O2 concentration in ml/l;
VDO         Raw sensor output;
C1          Sensor slope
C2          Hysteresis response coefficient
C3          Sensor offset
fsat(T,P)   O2 saturation at T,P (ml/l);
T           in situ temperature (deg.C);
P           in situ pressure (decibars);
Ph          Low-pass filtered hysteresis pressure (decibars);
Tl          Long-response low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
Ts          Short-response low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
Pl          Low-pass filtered pressure (decibars);
dOc/dt      Sensor current gradient (microamps/sec);
dP/dt       Filtered package velocity (db/sec);
dT          low-pass filtered thermal diffusion estimate (Ts - Tl).
C4-C9       Response coefficients.


CTD O2 ml/l data are converted to umol/kg units on demand.

Manufacturer information on the SBE43 DO sensor, a modification of the
Clark polarographic membrane technology, can be found at
http://www.seabird.com/application_notes/AN64.htm.

A faster-response JFE Advantech Rinko III ARO-CAV Optical DO sensor, with
its own oxygen temperature thermistor, was installed on the rosette and
integrated with the SIO/STS CTD from station 25 onward.  ODF intends to
evaluate it side-by-side with the SBE43 data, considering its possible use
for future expeditions.  Please contact ODF (odfdata@sts.ucsd.edu) for
further information.  Manufacturer information about the Rinko III sensor
can be found at:

        http://www.jfe-advantech.co.jp/eng/ocean/rinko/rinko3.html.


1.10.  Bottle Sampling

At the end of each rosette deployment water samples were drawn from the
bottles in the following order:


     o   CFC-12, CFC-11, CFC-113 and SF6
     o   3He
     o   Dissolved O2
     o   Dissolved Inorganic Carbon (DIC)
     o   pH
     o   Total Alkalinity
     o   13C and 14C
     o   Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN)
     o   Tritium
     o   Nutrients
     o   d15N-NO3 / d18O-NO3
     o   Salinity
     o   137Cs / 134Cs / 90Sr
     o   129I
     o   Millero Density
     o   Dissolved Calcium



Bottle serial numbers were assigned at the start of the leg, and typically
corresponded to their rosette/carousel position.  Aside from various
repairs to bottles along the way, two bottles were replaced during this
leg:


Table 1.10.0: P02W Summary of Replaced Bottles

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carousel    Original    Replacement   Before    Reason                                |
|position   Bottle S/N   Bottle S/N    Station   for Change                            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   5           05           37          15      Damage on bottle near O-ring seat.    |
|   22          22           38          40      Vent could not be reliably tightened. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


The correspondence between individual sample containers and the rosette
bottle position (1-36) from which the sample was drawn was recorded on the
sample log for the cast.  This log also included any comments or anomalous
conditions noted about the rosette and bottles.  One member of the sampling
team was designated the sample cop, whose sole responsibility was to
maintain this log and ensure that sampling progressed in the proper drawing
order.

Normal sampling practice included opening the drain valve and then the air
vent on the bottle, indicating an air leak if water escaped.  This
observation, together with other diagnostic comments (e.g., "lanyard caught
in lid", "valve left open") that might later prove useful in determining
sample integrity, were routinely noted on the sample log.  Drawing oxygen
samples also involved taking the sample draw temperature from the bottle.
The temperature was noted on the sample log and was sometimes useful in
determining leaking or mis-tripped bottles.

Once individual samples had been drawn and properly prepared, they were
distributed for analysis.  Oxygen, nutrient and salinity analyses were
performed on computer-assisted (PC) analytical equipment networked to the
data processing computer for centralized data management.


1.11.  Bottle Tripping Issues

Numerous bottle tripping and/or carousel issues occurred during P02W.  Most
mis-trips occurred shallower than the trigger depth, and were attributed to
lanyards failing to fully slide off the latches, or snagging somewhere on
the rosette during the release process.  Most of these problems were
resolved within a few casts by either re-aligning the center-point of some
bottles on the rosette, to get a better lanyard angle when the carousel
latch was released; or by re-aligning the lanyards during cocking to avoid
obstructions or snagging points.

There were far more bottle tripping problems in the first 15 (deeper)
bottles, raising the possibility that temperature or pressure were
affecting the SBE32 carousel or the pliability of the lanyard material.
Around station 40, some of the "tried and true" lanyard line (no longer
made, but less "stiff" than the new line) was found and used to re-rig the
release-connecting lanyard sections on all of the bottles.  Only a few
minor "tweaks" were required after that point to end the lanyard release /
snagging issues.

All but two mis-tripped samples closed shallower in the water column than
the trigger depth. Table 1.11.0 is a summary of bottle mis-trips (code 4)
by carousel position.


Table 1.11.0: P02W Summary of Mis-Trips

+---------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|Carousel   Number Carousel | Number of   Carousel  | Number of             |
|Position      Mis-Trips    | Position    Mis-Trips | Position    Mis-Trips |
+---------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|    1             2        |    13           5     |    25           0     |
|    2             2        |    14           2     |    26           0     |
|    3             0        |    15          12     |    27           0     |
|    4             3        |    16           0     |    28           0     |
|    5             4        |    17           0     |    29           0     |
|    6             3        |    18           0     |    30           0     |
|    7             8        |    19           0     |    31           1     |
|    8             0        |    20           0     |    32           0     |
|    9             0        |    21           0     |    33           0     |
|   10             0        |    22           1     |    34           0     |
|   11             1        |    23           0     |    35           0     |
|   12             0        |    24           1     |    36           1     |
+---------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+


Occasionally, repeat "problem" bottles (leaking, mis-trips or latch trigger
issues) were intentionally tripped at the same depth as another bottle in
order to check for proper closure before tripping them at a unique depth on
future casts.  These planned "double" trip levels are documented in Table
1.11.1 below.


Table 1.11.1: P02W Summary of Planned Same-Depth Bottle Trips.

          +-----------------------------------------------------+
          |Carousel   Applies to    Bottle Tripped              |
          |Position   Station(s)    at Same Depth               |
          +-----------------------------------------------------+
          |   1       84            2                           |
          |   12      68,84         11                          |
          |   15      30-33,38-41   14 (16 for station 41 only) |
          |   35      68,72         36                          |
          +-----------------------------------------------------+


A new problem reared its ugly head later in the leg: a few of the carousel
latches failed to trigger because of building corrosion from water seepage
into some of the individual magnetic releases (solenoids).  The spare
36-place carousel was pulled out of the spare rosette and placed into the
primary rosette between stations 55 and 56, a very labor-intensive task.
The new carousel fired reliably for exactly two casts - and on the third
cast, after 36 positive confirmations on the acquisition display, all 36
bottles came up open.  In addition, the SBE35RT failed to store any
samples, indicating the carousel never triggered it to take readings,
either.  It was determined that the carousel was spitting out gibberish for
confirmations, was flooded, and was not repairable at sea.

The original carousel was patched up and put back into service, minus
position 35.  The leaks were temporarily plugged with Scotchkote, but three
positions failed to fire reliably.  These positions were sealed up, and
their respective bottles were removed from the rosette and eliminated from
the tripping scheme until/unless the leaks could be stopped.

Table 1.11.2 summarizes when carousel positions were re-ordered or
completely pulled from the default tripping line-up during P02W.


Table 1.11.2: P02W Summary of Unusual Tripping Sequences.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carousel   Stations                                                               |
|Position   Affected   Comment                                                     |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   1        78-83     Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)     |
|   12       69-83     Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)     |
|   35       59-81     Bottle intentionally tripped out-of-order (last/at surface) |
|   35       82-87     Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)     |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Several backup plans were pursued ashore for the second leg of P02, but
SBE32 36-place carousels are few and far between compared to the 24-place
carousels.  Eventually a spare 36-place carousel was found/borrowed from
NOAA/PMEL and sent to the Hawaii port stop, to be used only if all else
failed.

Individual mis-tripped bottles and samples taken from them have been
quality-coded 4; more detailed comments appear in Appendix C.


1.12.  Bottle Data Processing

Water samples collected and properties analyzed shipboard were centrally
managed in a relational database (PostgreSQL 8.1.23) running on a Linux
system. A web service (OpenACS 5.5.0 and AOLServer 4.5.1) front-end
provided ship-wide access to CTD and water sample data.  Web-based
facilities included on-demand arbitrary property-property plots and
vertical sections as well as data uploads and downloads.

The sample log information and any diagnostic comments were entered into
the database once sampling was completed.  Quality flags associated with
sampled properties were set to indicate that the property had been sampled,
and sample container identifications were noted where applicable (e.g.,
oxygen flask number).  Acquisition and sampling details were also made
available on the ODF shipboard website post-cast with scanned versions of
the Console and Sample logs.

Analytical results were provided on a regular basis by the various
analytical groups and incorporated into the database. These results
included a quality code associated with each measured value and followed
the coding scheme developed for the World Ocean Circulation Experiment
Hydrographic Programme (WHP) [Joyc94].

Table 1.12.0 shows the number of samples drawn and the number of times each
WHP sample quality flag was assigned for each basic hydrographic property:


Table 1.12.0: Frequency of WHP quality flag assignments.

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                 Rosette Samples Stations      1-    87                  |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|              Reported                  WHP Quality Codes                |
|              levels       1        2     3      4     5      7       9  |
+------------++----------+------------------------------------------------+
| Bottle     ||  3021    |  0     2904    13     50     0      0      54  |
| CTD Salt   ||  3021    |  0     3021     0      0     0      0       0  |
| CTD Oxy    ||  3021    |  0     3021     0      0     0      0       0  |
| Salinity   ||  2930    |  0     2840    32     58     1      0      90  |
| Oxygen     ||  2915    |  0     2858     7     50     2      0     104  |
| Silicate   ||  2942    |  0     2889     0     53     1      0      78  |
| Nitrate    ||  2942    |  0     2890     0     52     1      0      78  |
| Nitrite    ||  2942    |  0     2890     0     52     1      0      78  |
| Phosphate  ||  2942    |  0     2887     2     53     1      0      78  |
+------------++----------+------------------------------------------------+


Additionally, data investigation comments are presented in Appendix C.

Various consistency checks and detailed examination of the data continued
throughout the cruise.  Chief Scientist, Dr. James H. Swift, reviewed the
data and compared it with historical data sets.


1.13.  Salinity Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

One salinometer, a Guildline Autosal 8400B (S/N 69-180), was used
throughout P02W. This salinometer utilized the typical National Instruments
interface to decode Autosal data and communicate with a Windows-based
acquisition PC. All discrete salinity analyses were done in the R/V
Melville's Photo Lab.

Samples were analyzed after they had equilibrated to laboratory
temperature, usually within 6-20 hours after collection. The salinometer
was standardized for each group of analyses (typically 1 cast, sometimes 2;
up to 72 samples) using two fresh vials of standard seawater per group.

Salinometer measurements were made by a computer using LabVIEW software
developed by SIO/STS. The software maintained an Autosal log of each
salinometer run which included salinometer settings and air and bath
temperatures.  The air temperature was monitored via digital thermometer
and displayed on a 48-hour strip-chart via LabVIEW in order to observe
cyclical changes.  The program guided the operator through the
standardization procedure and making sample measurements.  The analyst was
prompted to change samples and flush the cell between readings.

Standardization procedures included flushing the cell at least 2 times with
a fresh vial of Standard Seawater (SSW), setting the flow rate to a low
value during the last fill, and monitoring the STD dial setting.  If the
STD dial changed by 10 units or more since the last salinometer run (or
during standardization), another vial of SSW was opened and the
standardization procedure repeated to verify the setting.

Each salt sample bottle was agitated to minimize stratification before
reading on the salinometer.  Samples were run using 2 flushes before the
final fill. The computer determined the stability of a measurement and
prompted for additional readings if there appeared to be drift. The
operator could annotate the salinometer log, and would routinely add
comments about cracked sample bottles, loose thimbles, salt crystals or
anything unusual in the amount of sample in the bottle.

After warming to near bath temperature, the next or current case to be run
sat to the left of the Autosal, next to the standard seawater. The amount
of time each case spent at each location varied depending on sample
temperature and rate of analysis by the operator.


Sample Collection, Equilibration and Data Processing

A total of 2930 rosette salinity samples were measured.  An additional 14
samples were run for calibrating the underway TSG system.  162 vials of
standard seawater (IAPSO SSW) were used.

Salinity samples were drawn into 200 ml Kimax high-alumina borosilicate
bottles, which were rinsed three times with the sample prior to filling.
The bottles were sealed with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and kept
closed with Nalgene screw caps. This assembly provides very low container
dissolution and sample evaporation. Prior to sample collection, inserts
were inspected for proper fit and loose inserts replaced to ensure an
airtight seal.

After samples were brought back to the analysis lab, the full case was
placed on a wooden frame and sealed around all edges to the workbench top.
Salt bottle storage boxes have either an open grid pattern material or have
holes drilled between bottle locations to facilitate air circulation
between the bottles from bottom to top.  A fan circulated warm air drawn
from behind the Autosal to the underside of the salt case.

A thermometer was placed between two bottles that represent cooler but not
the coldest temperatures, typically bottles 9 and 15 for the square cases
and alongside bottle 3, on the inner side, for the rectangular cases.  Warm
air circulated through the case until indicated glass temperature was
within 1 deg.C of bath temperature.  The case was removed from the warming
frame and allowed to stand for 10 to 30 minutes before analyzing the salts.

Equilibration times were logged for all casts.  Laboratory temperatures
were logged at the beginning and end of each run.

PSS-78 salinity [UNES81] was calculated for each sample from the measured
conductivity ratios.  The difference between the initial vial of standard
water and the next one run as an unknown was applied as a linear function
of elapsed run time to the measured ratios. The corrected salinity data
were then incorporated into the cruise database.

Data processing included double checking that the station, sample and box
number had been correctly assigned, and reviewing the data and log files
for operator comments. Discrete salinity data were compared to CTD
salinities and were used for shipboard sensor calibration.


Laboratory Temperature

The salinometer water bath temperature was maintained at 24 deg.C.  The
ambient laboratory air temperature varied from 20 to 25.5 deg.C during the
sample analyses, typically between 21 and 24 deg.C.


Standards

IAPSO Standard Seawater Batch P-153 was used to standardize all stations.


Analytical Problems

No analytical problems were encountered on CLIVAR/Carbon P02W.


Results

After the first two runs of this leg, where the standard dial was higher,
the setting rarely changed and only by small amounts.  Aside from the first
run, where there was some confusion about the end standardization, the
drift in readings within any single run was very low (within +/-0.00003)
for the rest of P02W (about +/-0.0005 in salinity).  There were up to
0.0015 shifts in Bottle-CTD salinity differences observed between the runs
of the two analysts, but no cause could be determined other than possible
day/night room temperature variations.  These differences would not be
unusual in the less-than-ideal shipboard laboratory environment. The
results fall within the estimated accuracy of bottle salinities run at sea
- usually better than +/-0.002 relative to the particular standard seawater
batch used.


1.14.  Oxygen Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an SIO/ODF-designed automated
oxygen titrator using photometric endpoint detection based on the
absorption of 365nm wavelength ultraviolet light. The titration of the
samples and the data logging were controlled by ODF PC software compiled in
LabVIEW. Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Brickman Dosimat 765 buret driver
fitted with a 1.0 mL buret. The ODF method used a whole-bottle modified-
Winkler titration following the technique of Carpenter[Carp65] with
modifications by Culberson et al. [Culb91], but with higher concentrations
of potassium iodate standard (~0.012N) and thiosulfate solution (~55 gm/l).
Standard KIO3 solutions prepared ashore were run daily (approximately every
2-4 stations), unless changes were made to the system or reagents.
Reagent/distilled water blanks were also determined daily, or more often if
a change in reagents required it to account for presence of oxidizing or
reducing agents.

Sampling and Data Processing

2915 samples were analyzed from 87 stations on P02W. Samples were collected
for dissolved oxygen analyses soon after the rosette was brought on board.
Six different cases of 24 flasks each were rotated by station to minimize
any potential flask calibration issues. Using a silicone drawing tube,
nominal 125ml volume-calibrated iodine flasks were rinsed 3 times with
minimal agitation, then filled and allowed to overflow for at least 3 flask
volumes. The sample drawing temperatures were measured with an electronic
resistance temperature detector (OmegaTM HH370 RTD) embedded in the drawing
tube. These temperatures were used to calculate umol/kg concentrations, and
as a diagnostic check of bottle integrity. Reagents (MnCl2 then NaI/NaOH)
were added to fix the oxygen before stoppering. The flasks were shaken to
assure thorough dispersion of the precipitate, once immediately after
drawing, and then again after about 20 minutes. A water seal was applied to
the rim of each bottle in between shakes.

The samples were analyzed within 1 hour of collection, and the data
incorporated into the cruise database.

Thiosulfate normalities were calculated from each standardization and
corrected to 20 deg.C. The thiosulfate normalities and blanks were
monitored for possible drifting or other problems when new reagents were
used. An average blank and thiosulfate normality were used to recalculate
oxygen concentrations. The thiosulfate was changed between stations 42 and
43. The first set of averages were performed on Stations 1 through 42. The
second set was done on Stations 43 through 87. The difference between the
original and "smoothed" data averaged 0.06% over the course of the cruise.

Bottle oxygen data were reviewed to ensure station, cast, bottle number,
flask, and draw temperature were entered properly. Comments made during
analysis were reviewed, and anomalies were investigated and resolved. If an
incorrect end point was encountered, the analyst re-examined raw data and
the program recalculated a correct end point.

After the data were uploaded to the database, bottle oxygen was graphically
compared with CTD oxygen and adjoining stations. Any points that appeared
erroneous were reviewed and comments made regarding the final outcome of
the investigation. These investigations and final data coding are reported
in Appendix C.

Volumetric Calibration

Oxygen flask volumes were determined gravimetrically with degassed
deionized water to determine flask volumes at ODF's chemistry laboratory.
This was done once before using flasks for the first time and periodically
thereafter when a suspect volume is detected. The volumetric flasks used in
preparing standards were volume-calibrated by the same method, as was the
10 mL Dosimat buret used to dispense standard iodate solution.

Standards

Liquid potassium iodate standards were prepared and tested in 6 liter
batches and bottled in sterile glass bottles at ODF's chemistry laboratory
prior to the expedition. The normality of the liquid standard was
determined by calculation from weight of powder temperature of solution and
flask volume at 20 deg.C. The standard was supplied by Alfa Aesar (lot
B05N35) and has a reported purity of 99.4-100.4%. All other reagents were
"reagent grade" and were tested for levels of oxidizing and reducing
impurities prior to use.

Analytical Problems

No analytical problems were encountered on CLIVAR/Carbon P02W.


1.15.  Nutrient Analysis

Summary of Analysis

2942 samples from 87 CTD stations were analyzed.

The cruise started with new pump tubes; they were changed twice, after
stations 27 and 55.  Four sets of Primary/Secondary standards were made up
over the course of the cruise. The cadmium column efficiency was checked
periodically and ranged between 95%-100%. When the efficiency was found to
be below 97%, the column was replaced.


Equipment and Techniques

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate plus nitrite, and nitrite)
were performed on a Seal Analytical continuous-flow AutoAnalyzer 3 (AA3).

The analytical methods used are described by Gordon et al. [Gord92], Hager
et al. [Hage68] and Atlas et al. [Atla71].  The details of modification of
analytical methods used for this cruise are also compatible with the
methods described in the nutrient section of the GO-SHIP repeat hydrography
manual [Hyde10].


Nitrate/Nitrite Analysis

A modification of the Armstrong et al. [Arms67] procedure was used for the
analysis of nitrate and nitrite. For nitrate analysis, a seawater sample
was passed through a cadmium column where the nitrate was reduced to
nitrite.  This nitrite was then diazotized with sulfanilamide and coupled
with N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine to form a red dye.  The sample was then
passed through a 10mm flowcell and absorbance measured at 540nm. The
procedure was the same for the nitrite analysis but without the cadmium
column.

REAGENTS

Sulfanilamide

Dissolve 10g sulfanilamide in 1.2N HCl and bring to 1 liter volume.  Add 2
drops of 40% surfynol 465/485 surfactant.  Store at room temperature in a
dark poly bottle.

Note: 40% Surfynol 465/485 is 20% 465 plus 20% 485 in DIW.

          N-(1-Naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochloride (N-1-N)

Dissolve 1g N-1-N in DIW, bring to 1 liter volume. Add 2 drops 40% surfynol
465/485 surfactant.  Store at room temperature in a dark poly bottle.
Discard if the solution turns dark reddish brown.

Imidazole Buffer

Dissolve 13.6g imidazole in ~3.8 liters DIW.  Stir for at least 30 minutes
to completely dissolve. Add 60 ml of CuSO4 + NH4Cl mix (see below).  Add 4
drops 40% Surfynol 465/485 surfactant. Let sit overnight before proceeding.
Using a calibrated pH meter, adjust to pH of 7.83-7.85 with 10% (1.2N) HCl
(about 20-30 ml of acid, depending on exact strength).  Bring final
solution to 4L with DIW.  Store at room temperature.

NH4Cl + CuSO4 mix

Dissolve 2g cupric sulfate in DIW, bring to 100 m1 volume (2%).  Dissolve
250g ammonium chloride in DIW, bring to l liter volume.  Add 5ml of 2%
CuSO4 solution to this NH4Cl stock. This should last many months.


Phosphate Analysis

Ortho-Phosphate was analyzed using a modification of the Bernhardt and
Wilhelms [Bern67] method. Acidified ammonium molybdate was added to a
seawater sample to produce phosphomolybdic acid, which was then reduced to
phosphomolybdous acid (a blue compound) following the addition of
dihydrazine sulfate.  The sample was passed through a 10mm flowcell and
absorbance measured at 820nm.

REAGENTS

Ammonium Molybdate

H2SO4 solution: Pour 420 ml of DIW into a 2 liter Ehrlenmeyer flask or
beaker, place this flask or beaker into an ice bath.  SLOWLY add 330 ml of
concentrated H2SO4.  This solution gets VERY HOT!! Cool in the ice bath.
Make up as much as necessary in the above proportions.

Dissolve 27g ammonium molybdate in 250ml of DIW. Bring to 1 liter volume
with the cooled sulfuric acid solution. Add 3 drops of 15% DDS surfactant.
Store in a dark poly bottle.


Dihydrazine Sulfate

Dissolve 6.4g dihydrazine sulfate in DIW, bring to 1 liter volume and
refrigerate.

Silicate Analysis

Silicate was analyzed using the technique of Armstrong et al. [Arms67]
Acidified ammonium molybdate was added to a seawater sample to produce
silicomolybdic acid which was then reduced to silicomolybdous acid (a blue
compound) following the addition of stannous chloride.  The sample was
passed through a 10mm flowcell and measured at 660nm.

REAGENTS

Tartaric Acid

Dissolve 200g tartaric acid in DW and bring to 1 liter volume.  Store at
room temperature in a poly bottle.

Ammonium Molybdate

Dissolve 10.8g Ammonium Molybdate Tetrahydrate in ~ 900ml DW. Add 2.8ml
H2SO4* to solution, then bring volume to 1000ml.

Add 3-5 drops 15% SDS surfactant per liter of solution.

Stannous Chloride stock (as needed)

Dissolve 40g of stannous chloride in 100 ml 5N HCl.  Refrigerate in a poly
bottle.

NOTE: Minimize oxygen introduction by swirling rather than shaking the
solution. Discard if a white solution (oxychloride) forms.

Working (every 24 hours): Bring 5 ml of stannous chloride stock to 200 ml
final volume with 1.2N HCl. Make up daily - refrigerate when not in use in
a dark poly bottle.


Sampling

Nutrient samples were drawn into 40 ml polypropylene screw-capped
centrifuge tubes.  The tubes and caps were cleaned with 10% HCl and rinsed
2-3 times with sample before filling.  Samples were analyzed within 1-3
hours after sample collection, allowing sufficient time for all samples to
reach room temperature.  The centrifuge tubes fit directly onto the
sampler.


Data collection and processing

Data collection and processing was done with the software (AACE ver. 6.07)
provided with the instrument from SEAL Analytical.  After each run, the
charts were reviewed for any problems during the run, any blank was
subtracted, and final concentrations (uM) were calculated, based on a
linear curve fit.  Once the run was reviewed and concentrations calculated
a text file was created.  That text file was reviewed for possible problems
and then converted to another text file with only sample identifiers and
nutrient concentrations that was merged with other bottle data.


Standards and Glassware calibration

Primary standards for silicate (Na2SiF6), nitrate (KNO3), nitrite (NaNO2),
and phosphate (KH2PO4) were obtained from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co.
and/or Fisher Scientific.  The supplier reports purities of >98%, 99.999%,
97%, and 99.999 respectively.

All glass volumetric flasks and pipettes were gravimetrically calibrated
prior to the cruise.  The primary standards were dried and weighed out to
0.1 mg prior to the cruise.  The exact weight was noted for future
reference.  When primary standards were made, the flask volume at 20 deg.C,
the weight of the powder, and the temperature of the solution were used to
buoyancy correct the weight, calculate the exact concentration of the
solution, and determine how much of the primary was needed for the desired
concentrations of secondary standard.  Primary and secondary standards were
made up every 7-10 days.  The new standards were compared to the old before
use.

All the reagent solutions, primary and secondary standards were made with
fresh distilled deionized water (DIW).


Quality Control

All data were reported in uM (micromoles/liter). NO3, PO4, and NO2 were
reported to two decimal places and SiO3 to one. Accuracy is based on the
quality of the standards; the levels were:


Table 1.15.1: CLIVAR/Carbon P02W Nutrient Accuracy

                         Parameter   Accuracy (uM)
                         --------------------------
                            NO3          0.05
                            PO4          0.004
                           SiO3           2-4
                            NO2          0.05


Precision numbers for the instrument were the same for NO3 and PO4 and a
little better for SiO3 and NO2 (1 and 0.01 respectively).

The detection limits for the methods/instrumentation were:


Table 1.15.2: CLIVAR/Carbon P02W Nutrient Detection Limits

                     Parameter   Detection Limits (uM)
                     ----------------------------------
                      NO3+NO2            0.02
                        PO4              0.02
                       SiO3               0.5
                        NO2              0.02


As is standard ODF practice, a deep calibration check sample was run with
each set of samples and the data are tabulated below.


Table 1.15.3: CLIVAR/Carbon P02W RMNS cruise-averaged data

                      Parameter   Concentration (uM)
                      -------------------------------
                         NO3        41.7 +/- 0.21
                         PO4        2.94 +/- 0.01
                        SiO3       162.15 +/- 0.58


Reference materials for nutrients in seawater (RMNS) were also used as a
check sample run with each set of seawater samples. The RMNS preparation,
verification, and suggested protocol for use of the material are described
by Aoyama et al. [Aoya06] [Aoya07] [Aoya08] and Sato et al. [Sato10].  RMNS
batch BX was used on this cruise, with each bottle being used once or twice
before being discarded and a new one opened. Data are tabulated below,
along with the assigned values.


Table 1.15.0: CLIVAR/Carbon P02W Concentration of RMNS standard (uM)

             Parameter   Concentration (umol kg-1)   Assigned
             -------------------------------------------------
                NO3           43.08 +/- 0.16            43
                PO4            2.9  +/- 0.02          2.906
               SiO3           138.7 +/- 0.55           136
                NO2           0.04 +/- 0.006          0.034



Analytical Problems

The phosphate channel was a source of trouble, requiring nearly everything
but the glassware to be replaced before samples from station 060 could be
analyzed. Peaks were shaky and the baseline jumped up and recovered later,
causing uncertain sample values that necessitated reruns of individual
samples and sometimes even of whole stations. The flowcell, reagents, and
control module were switched out for spares in succession, but problems
persisted. No 820nm spare filter was available so an 880nm was traded in
and settings adjusted, resulting in no issues until station 87. Prior to
that station's analysis, the baseline again became inconsistent. The
original photometer, flowcell, filter and lamp were replaced on the machine
for the final sample run. Further trouble-shooting between legs will take
place.



References

Aoya06.
     Aoyama, M., "Intercomparison Exercise for Reference Material for
     Nutrients in Seawater in a Seawater Matrix," Technical Reports of the
     Meteorological Research Institute No.50, p. 91, Tsukuba, Japan.
     (2006a).

Aoya08.
     Aoyama, M., Barwell-Clark, J., Becker, S., Blum, M., Braga, E.S.,
     Coverly, S.C., Czobik, E., Dahllof, I., Dai, M.H., Donnell, G.O.,
     Engelke, C., Gong, G.C., Hong, Gi-Hoon, Hydes, D. J., Jin, M. M.,
     Kasai, H., Kerouel, R., Kiyomono, Y., Knockaert, M., Kress, N.,
     Krogslund, K. A., Kumagai, M., Leterme, S., Li, Yarong, Masuda, S.,
     Miyao, T., Moutin, T., Murata, A., Nagai, N., Nausch, G., Ngirchechol,
     M. K., Nybakk, A., Ogawa, H., Ooijen, J. van, Ota, H., Pan, J. M.,
     Payne, C., Pierre-Duplessix, O., Pujo-Pay, M., Raabe, T., Saito, K.,
     Sato, K., Schmidt, C., Schuett, M., Shammon, T. M., Sun, J., Tanhua,
     T., White, L., Woodward, E.M.S., Worsfold, P., Yeats, P., Yoshimura,
     T., A.Youenou, and Zhang, J. Z., "2006 Intercomparison Exercise for
     Reference Material for Nutrients in Seawater in a Seawater Matrix,"
     Technical Reports of the Meteorological Research Institute No. 58, p.
     104pp (2008).

Aoya07.
     Aoyama, M., Susan, B., Minhan, D., Hideshi, D., Louis, I. G., Kasai,
     H., Roger, K., Nurit, K., Doug, M., Murata, A., Nagai, N., Ogawa, H.,
     Ota, H., Saito, H., Saito, K., Shimizu, T., Takano, H., Tsuda, A.,
     Yokouchi, K., and Agnes, Y., "Recent Comparability of Oceanographic
     Nutrients Data: Results of a 2003 Intercomparison Exercise Using
     Reference Materials.," Analytical Sciences, 23: 115, pp. 1-1154
     (2007).

Arms67.
     Armstrong, F. A. J., Stearns, C. R., and Strickland, J. D. H., "The
     measurement of upwelling and subsequent biological processes by means
     of the Technicon Autoanalyzer and associated equipment," Deep-Sea
     Research, 14, pp. 381-389 (1967).

Atla71.
     Atlas, E. L., Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A
     Practical Manual for Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer(R) in Seawater
     Nutrient Analyses Revised," Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22, p.
     49, Oregon State University, Department of Oceanography (1971).

Bern67.
     Bernhardt, H. and Wilhelms, A., "The continuous determination of low
     level iron, soluble phosphate and total phosphate with the
     AutoAnalyzer," Technicon Symposia, I, pp. 385-389 (1967).

Brow78.
     Brown, N. L. and Morrison, G. K., "WHOI/Brown conductivity,
     temperature and depth microprofiler," Technical Report No. 78-23,
     Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1978).

Carp65.
     Carpenter, J. H., "The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the
     Winkler dissolved oxygen method," Limnology and Oceanography, 10, pp.

Culb91.
     Culberson, C. H., Knapp, G., Stalcup, M., Williams, R. T., and
     Zemlyak, F., "A comparison of methods for the determination of
     dissolved oxygen in seawater," Report WHPO 91-2, WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Office (Aug 1991).

Gord92.
     Gordon, L. I., Jennings, J. C., Jr., Ross, A. A., and Krest, J. M., "A
     suggested Protocol for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of Seawater
     Nutrients in the WOCE Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean
     Fluxes Study," Grp. Tech Rpt 92-1, OSU College of Oceanography Descr.
     Chem Oc. (1992).

Hage68.
     Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A Practical Manual for
     Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer(R) in Seawater Nutrient Analyses.,"
     Final report to Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Contract
     14-17-0001-1759., p. 31pp, Oregon State University, Department of
     Oceanography, Reference No. 68-33. (1968).

Hyde10.
     Hydes, D. J., Aoyama, M., Aminot, A., Bakker, K., Becker, S., Coverly,
     S., Daniel, A., Dickson, A. G., Grosso, O., Kerouel, R., Ooijen, J.
     van, Sato, K., Tanhua, T., Woodward, E. M. S., and Zhang, J. Z.,
     "Determination of Dissolved Nutrients (N, P, Si) in Seawater with High
     Precision and Inter-Comparability Using Gas-Segmented Continuous Flow
     Analysers" in GO-SHIP Repeat Hydrography Manual: A Collection of
     Expert Reports and Guidelines. IOCCP Report No. 14, ICPO Publication
     Series No 134 (2010a).

Joyc94.
     Joyce, T., ed. and Corry, C., ed., "Requirements for WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Data Reporting," Report WHPO 90-1, WOCE Report No. 67/91,
     pp. 52-55, WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office, Woods Hole, MA, USA
     (May 1994, Rev. 2). UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT.

Mill82.
     Millard, R. C., Jr., "CTD calibration and data processing techniques
     at WHOI using the practical salinity scale," Proc. Int. STD Conference
     and Workshop, p. 19, Mar. Tech. Soc., La Jolla, Ca. (1982).

Owen85.
     Owens, W. B. and Millard, R. C., Jr., "A new algorithm for CTD oxygen
     calibration," Journ. of Am. Meteorological Soc., 15, p. 621 (1985).

Sato10.
     Sato, K., Aoyama, M., and Becker, S., "RMNS as Calibration Standard
     Solution to Keep Comparability for Several Cruises in the World Ocean
     in 2000s.," Aoyama, M., Dickson, A.G., Hydes, D.J., Murata, A., Oh,
     J.R., Roose, P., Woodward, E.M.S., (Eds.) Comparability of nutrients
     in the world's ocean., pp. 43-56, Tsukuba, JAPAN: MOTHER TANK (2010b).

UNES81.
     UNESCO, "Background papers and supporting data on the Practical
     Salinity Scale, 1978," UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, No.
     37, p. 144 (1981).



                   Transmissometer Shipboard Procedures
                          PI: Wilford D. Gardner
                   Texas A&M Department of Oceanography
                          wgardner@ocean.tamu.edu



Instrument: WET Labs C-Star Transmissometer - S/N CST-327DR

Air Calibration:

• Calibrated the transmissometer in the lab at beginning, middle and end of 
  leg 1 with a pigtail cable attachment to CTD.
• Washed and dried the windows with Kimwipes and distilled water.
• Recorded the final values for unblocked and blocked voltages plus air 
  temperature on the Transmissometer Calibration/Cast Log.
• Compared the output voltage with the Factory Calibration data.
• Computed updated calibration coefficients.

Deck Procedures:

• Washed the transmissometer windows before every cast. Rinsed both windows 
  with a distilled water bottle that contains 2-3 drops of liquid soap. 
  This was the last procedure before the CTD went in the water.
• Rinse instrument with fresh water at end of cruise.

Summary:

Deck calibrations were carried out 3 times during P02W - near the start of 
the leg, the middle of the leg and the morning after the last station was 
completed. Results of the pre-cruise laboratory calibration, and deck 
calibrations done during this cruise, appear at the end of Appendix D with 
the other instrument/sensor laboratory calibrations.

After preparing the transmissometer for deployment (see Deck Procedures 
above), CST-327DR was sent with the rosette for every CTD cast during P02W 
(Leg 1) on RN Melville. Data were reported through a CTD a/d channel, then 
converted to raw voltages without applying any corrections. The data were 
averaged into half-second blocks with the CTD data, and later converted 
into 2-dbar block-averaged data files. The raw voltage data will be 
reported to Wilf Gardner for further processing post-cruise, and later 
merged in with the CTD data at CCHDO.

No problems were encountered with the transmissometer during this leg.




Cruise Report: LADCP data from CLIVAR P02W 2013
               Steven Howell



Personnel

UH LADCP group: Eric Firing (PT), François Ascani, and Julia Hummon

Shipboard operators: Steven Howell, UH and 
                     Katinka Bellomo, University of Miami

System description

The University of Hawaii (UH) ADCP group used a Teledyne/RDI Workhorse 
150 kHz Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (LADCP, serial number 
16283, with beams 200 from vertical) to measure ocean currents during the 
spring 2013 CLIVAR/Carbon P02W cruise from Yokohama, Japan to Honolulu, 
Hawaii. The instrument was held near the base of the rosette by an 
anodized aluminum collar connected to three struts that were in turn 
bolted to the rosette frame. Secondary restraint was provided by a 
ratchet strap tightened around the instrument and tied to an upper strut 
of the frame. Power for the LADCP was provided by a Deep Sea Power & 
Light sealed oil-filled marine battery (model SB-48V/18A, serial number 
01527). It was fastened with cord to the rosette frame. Figure 1 shows 
the arrangement of instruments in the rosette.

Between casts, a single power/communications cable connected the LADCP 
and battery to a computer and a DC power supply to initialize the LADCP, 
collect data after casts, and recharge the battery. Communication with 
the instrument was managed by a custom serial communication package.


Operating parameters

The LADCP used nominal 16m pulses and 8m receive intervals (assuming a 
standard 1500 m s1 speed of sound). The blanking interval (distance to 
first usable data) was 16 m.

A staggered pinging pattern was used, with alternating 1.2s and 1.6s 
periods between pings. This was to avoid a problem referred to as 
Previous Ping Interference (PPI), which happens when a strong echo off 
the bottom from a previous ping overwhelms the weak scattering signal 
from the water column. PPI occurs at a distance above the ocean floor of 
∆z = 1/2c∆t cos theta where ∆t is the period between pings, c is the 
speed of sound, and theta is the beam angle from vertical. With constant 
ping rates, the artifact hits a single depth, essentially invalidating 
all data at that depth. By alternating delays, we lose half the data at 
two depths, but have some data through the entire column.


Figure 1: Schematic plan view of instrument and bottle locations on the 
          rosette. Orange elements are parts of the rosette frame. 
          Bottle locations are indicated by dashed circles and numbers. 
          Instruments are identified by letters: A, ADCP; B, Battery for 
          ADCP power; C, CTD;E, Echosounder (120 kHz Benthos altimeter); 
          0, oxygen sensor (secondary); I, transmissometer; and F, 
          Fluorometer for chlorophyll-A. White numerals show ADCP beam 
          positions after the 900 clockwise twist on April 23.


The LADCP control file


Cal             # factory defaults
PS0             # Print system serial number and other info.
WM15            # sets LADCP mode; WB -> 1, WP -> 001, TP -> 000100, TE -> 
                  00000100
TC2             # 2 ensembles per burst
TB 00:00:02.80  ### also try old BB settings, 2.6 and 1.0
TE 00:00:01.20
TP 00:00.00
WN4O            # 40 cells, so blank + 320 m with 8-m cells
WS0800          # 8-rn cells
WT1600          # 16-rn pulse
WF1600          # Blank, 16-m
WV330           # 330 is max effective ambiguity velocity for WB1
EZOO111O1       # Soundspeed from EC (default, 1500)
EXOO100         # No transformation (middle 1 means tilts would be used 
                  otherwise)
CF111O1         # automatic binary, no serial
LZ3O,230        # for LADCP mode BT; slightly increased 220->230 from Dan 
                  Torres
CLO             # don't sleep between pings (CLO required for software 
                  break)



Data processing

Data were processed using version IX.8 of Andreas Thurnherr's 
implementation of Martin Visbeck's LADCP inversion method, developed at 
the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. The LDEO code 
is written in Matlab, and performs a long chain of calculations, including 
transforming the raw LADCP data to Earth coordinates; editing out suspect 
data; meshing with CTD data from the cast and simultaneous shipboard ADCP 
and GPS data; then running both an inverse method and a shear-based 
algorithm to obtain ocean currents throughout the profile. The shear-based 
calculation is used as a check on the inverse method-if they agree, 
confidence in the solution is enhanced. The LDEO code is available at 
ftp://ftp.ldeo.columbia.edu/pub/LADCP.

Only preliminary data processing was performed during the cruise; full 
processing takes more time than was available. The automatic data editing 
is not completely adequate, as ocean bottom reflections are not always 
edited out and the algorithms for detecting and discarding PPI require 
more work. When the data are fully processed, they will be made available 
on the UH ADCP website, http://currents.soest.hawaii.edu as part of the 
CLIVAR ADCP archive.


Data gathered

Data were successfully obtained in every cast at each station. Since the 
LADCP operated independently from the CTD data system, it was not affected 
by the noise problems that bedeviled the first 14 stations. Preliminary 
vertical profile plots of each station were made available on the ship's 
website within 12 hours of each cast.


Problems encountered

We had no major hardware or software problems during the cruise, but there 
were a few glitches. The ADCP twice slipped down in its collar and had to 
be lifted up and re-secured. We also experienced an odd noise problem. One 
of the beams (#4) appeared to be getting weak, with decreased signal:noise 
and reduced range. After some email discussion, Eric Firing opined that it 
was more likely an acoustic or electronic interference problem than a 
failing transducer. This was confirmed when we rotated the instrument 900. 
The suspect beam improved while its neighbor (#2) deteriorated. There was 
a net improvement, however, so we left the LADCP in its new position.

It is possible that the Benthos 120 kHz altimeter caused acoustic 
interference, but exactly the same altimeter and rosette were used during 
the CLIVAR A20/A22 cruises without the same symptoms. Another possibility 
is that some instrument on the rosette or along the cable introduced 
electrical noise. Noise from the winch caused major problems with the CTD 
system, but that was fixed with no obvious change in beam 4 performance. 
The secondary 02 sensor is grounded to the rosette, so could perhaps be at 
fault, but the beam weakness was visible in the data before that sensor 
was installed. We have not really resolved the problem, but are satisfied 
that the effects on the data are small.


Sample data plots

We made both vertical profiles of individual plots and contour plots along 
the cruise track available on the ship's network. A contour plot of data 
from the entire cruise may be the best capsule summary of the preliminary 
data. The Kuroshio current, with a maximum speed of about 1.4 ms1 is at 
the far left of Figure 2, together with a countercurrent, presumably an 
eddy, immediately to the east. Currents through the rest of the basin are 
much weaker, fading to the east. There are often local maxima between 3000 
and 5000 km depth, and currents near the bottom frequently exceed 10 cm 
s1.


Figure 2: Contour plot of P02W stations 1 to 82. Tick marks along the 
          bottom of each plot are station locations.


One unusual feature discovered by Mary Johnson while reviewing CTD data 
was a density inversion near the crest of the Izu-Ogasawa ridge (Figure 
3). Such inversions are unstable, so it must indicate that turbulent 
mixing was occurring. The LADCP shows considerable shear near the bottom 
and a peak in the current coincident with the middle of the inversion 
region. We are curious to see whether more careful examination of the 
LADCP data can reveal the turbulence that must be present.


Figure 3: Turbulence at the Izu-Ogasawa Ridge. On the left is data from 
          the CTD, showing relatively warm, fresh water interleaved with 
          cooler, saltier layers. On the right is the LADCP data. The red 
          and blue lines are east/west and north/south velocities, 
          respectively; the shaded regions are error estimates. The arrows 
          show current direction and speed at the depths of the arrow 
          bases.


Acknowledgements 

Many thanks are due to Jim Swift for leading the science effort with 
equanimity in the face of some rather difficult problems at the start of 
the cruise. Robert Palomares actually mounted the LADCP in the rosette and 
made sure it was safe. Mary Johnson and Frank Delahoyde made the CTD data 
available so quickly and easily that I hardly had to think about it.

More thanks to the entire crew and science complement of the Melville, who 
were unfailingly helpful and made the ship a clean and pleasant place to 
work. They strove hard, and successfully, to cope with the hardware 
breakdowns that plagued the first weeks of the cruise. The cooks, Mark and 
Jeremy, not only made good food, but in such variety that I often marveled 
at their inventiveness.




CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, and SF6
    PI:       David Ho, University of Hawaii
    Analysts: Eugene Gorman, Gabrielle Weiss, Benjamin Hickman


Sample Collection

CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, and SF6were measured for 77 stations (number of 
samples per station varied with depth and other extenuating 
circumstances). All samples were collected from depth using 10.4 liter 
Niskin bottles. All bottles in use remained inside the CTD hanger between 
casts. CFC/SF6 samples were the first samples to be collected from the 
Niskin bottles after each cast according to WOCE protocol. Water samples 
were collected in 300 ml BOD bottles. BOD bottles were filled from the 
Niskin bottles petcock using viton tubing. The viton tubing was flushed of 
air bubbles. The BOD bottle was placed in a plastic overflow container 
which was large enough so that when full, the BOD bottle could be caped 
while submerged. Water was allowed to fill BOD bottle from the bottom and 
overflow into the overflow container. Once water started overflow the 
overflow container the viton tubing was removed and the BOD bottle was 
stoppered (using a ground glass stopper) while under water in the overflow 
container. A plastic clamp was snapped on to hold the ground glass stopper 
in place. Duplicate samples were taken on some stations from random Niskin 
bottles. Air samples were collected, using a 100 mL glass syringe, when 
time permitted.

Sample Analysis

Analyses were performed on a Hewlett Packard 6890 gas chromatography 
system equipped with an electron capture detector (ECD). Samples were 
introduced into the GC-ECD via a duel purge and trap system. Water samples 
were purged with nitrogen and the purged compounds were trapped on either 
a Porapack N or Carboxen 1000 trap (trap material intended for CFCs and 
SF6 respectively) held at ~ -65°C via a CO2 cooling system. The traps were 
isolated and heated by resistive heating to ~450°C. The desorbed contents 
of the traps were back-flushed and transferred, with nitrogen gas, to a 
precolumn used to capture interfering compounds. After the precolumn the 
compounds flowed into the main column for separation and detection by the 
ECD. After running the samples for each station, measurements were 
followed by a blanks and a standard to monitor changers in the systems 
performance over time.

Calibration

Gas phase standards, 35060 and 72645, were used for calibration. 
Calibration loops filled with the standard gases of a known volume, 
temperature, and pressure where run at varying intervals during the 
curse. The GC-ECD response to each of the compounds of interest was 
recorded for each of the different size calibration loops. A calibration 
curve was generated via a nonlinear fit to the calibration data.

Results/Data

The preliminary data submitted to the onboard database should not be 
considered accurate until further data analysis and quality control can 
be performed.





HELIUM AND TRITIUM
    PI:      William Jenkins
    Sampler: Kevin Cahill


Helium and Tritium samples were collected roughly every four degrees on 
CLIVAR leg P02.

Helium Sampling 16 helium samples were drawn at 16 of the stations and 24 
Niskins were sampled at 2 stations. Although all 36 Niskins were not 
sampled, depths were chosen to obtain an accurate cross-section of the 
upper 2000m of the water column. On the two stations where 24 Niskins were 
sampled, the samples were taken to get a profile of the entire water 
column down to the bottom. A duplicate was taken roughly every third 
station. Helium samples were taken in custom-made stainless steel 
cylinders and sealed with rotating plug valves at either end. The sample 
cylinders were leak-checked and backfilled with N2 prior to the cruise. 
Samples were drawn using tygon tubing connected to the Niskin bottle at 
one end and the cylinder at the other. Cylinders are thumped with a bat 
while being flushed with water from the Niskin to remove bubbles from the 
sample. After flushing roughly 1 liter of water through them, the plug 
valves are closed. Due to the nature of the o-ring seals on the sample 
vessels, they must be extracted within 24 hours. Eight samples at a time 
were extracted using our At Sea Extraction line in the Helium Van on main 
deck. The stainless steel sample cylinders are attached to the vacuum 
manifold and pumped down to less than 2e-7 Torr using a diffusion pump for 
a minimum of 1 hour to check for leaks. The sections are then isolated 
from the vacuum manifold and introduced to the reservoir cans which are 
heated to >80C for roughly 10 minutes. Glass bulbs are attached to the 
sections and immersed in ice water during the extraction process. After 10 
minutes each bulb is flame sealed and packed for shipment back to WHOI. 
The extraction cans and sections are cleaned with distilled water and 
isopropanol, then dried between each extraction. Prior to the cruise, all 
vacuum components were cleaned, serviced and checked for leaks. The glass 
bulbs are baked to 640C for 6 hours and cooled slowly in an oven receiving 
a steady flow of nitrogen. 324 helium samples were taken on Leg 1. This 
includes 20 samples and their duplicates taken solely for sampling 
technique comparisons as well as 5 regular duplicates. Helium samples will 
be analyzed using a mass spectrometer at WHOI.

Vibrations due to waves crashing into the fantail created difficulties 
extracting helium samples during extremely bad weather. At times the 
shaking in the van was so intense that it cracked some glass sample bulbs 
on the extraction line. Once the weather cleared, all of our samples were 
extracted while still remaining within the prescribed 24 hour time 
window.

TRITIUM SAMPLING Tritium samples were drawn from the same stations and 
bottles as those sampled for helium. Since there was not a water shortage 
on this cruise, a duplicate was taken from the same Niskin as the helium 
duplicate. Tritium samples were taken using tygon tubing to fill 1 liter 
glass jugs. The jugs were baked in an oven, backfilled with argon, and the 
caps were taped shut prior to the cruise. While filling, the jugs are 
place on the deck and filled to about 2 inches from the top of the bottle, 
being careful not to spill the argon. Caps were replaced and taped shut 
with electrical tape before being packed for shipment back to WHOI. 304 
tritium samples were taken, including 5 duplicates. Tritium samples will 
be degassed in the lab at WHOI and stored for a minimum of 6 months before 
mass spectrometer analysis. No issues were encountered while taking 
tritium samples.




DISSOLVED INORGANIC CARBON (DIC)

The DIC analytical equipment (DICE) design was based upon the original 
SOMMA systems (Johnson, 1985,'87,'92,'93). This new design has improved on 
the original SOMMA by use of more modern National Instruments electronics 
and other available technology. These 2 DICE systems (PMEL-1 and PMEL-2) 
were set up in a seagoing container modified for use as a shipboard 
laboratory on the aft working deck of the R/V Melville. In the coulometric 
analysis of DIC, all carbonate species are converted to CO2 (gas) by 
addition of excess hydrogen to the seawater sample. The evolved CO2 gas is 
carried into the titration cell of the coulometer, where it reacts 
quantitatively with a proprietary reagent based on ethanolamine to 
generate hydrogen ions. These are subsequently titrated with 
coulometrically generated OH-. CO2 is thus measured by integrating the 
total charge required to achieve this. (Dickson, et al 2007).

Each coulometer was calibrated by injecting aliquots of pure CO2 (99.999%) 
by means of an 8-port valve outfitted with two calibrated sample loops of 
different sizes ('1ml and '2ml) (Wilke et al., 1993). The instruments are 
each separately calibrated at the beginning of each ctd station with a 
minimum of two sets of these gas loop injections.

Secondary standards were run throughout the cruise (at least one per 
station) on each analytical system. These standards are Certified 
Reference Materials (CRMs), consisting of poisoned, filtered, and UV 
irradiated seawater supplied by Dr. A. Dickson of Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography (SIO). Their accuracy is determined manometrically on land in 
San Diego. DIC data reported to the database have been corrected to the 
batch 124 CRM value. The CRM certified value for this batch is 2015.72 
µmol/kg. The average measured values (in µmol/kg during this cruise) were 
2015.87 for PMEL-1 and 2016.08 for PMEL-2.

The DIC water samples were drawn from Niskin-type bottles into cleaned, 
pre-combusted 300mL borosilicate glass bottles using silicon tubing. 
Bottles were rinsed once and filled from the bottom, overflowing by at 
least one-half volume. Care was taken not to entrain any bubbles. The tube 
was pinched off and withdrawn, creating a 5mL headspace, and 0.l2mL of 
50% saturated HgCl2 solution was added as a preservative. The sample 
bottles were sealed with glass stoppers lightly covered with Apiezon-L 
grease, and were stored in a 20°C water bath for a minimum of 20 minutes 
to bring them to temperature prior to analysis.

Over 2,000 samples were analyzed for discrete DIC. Greater than 10% of 
these samples were taken as replicates as a check of our precision. These 
replicate samples were typically taken near the surface, oxygen minimum, 
and bottom bottles. The replicate samples were interspersed throughout 
the station analysis for quality assurance and integrity of the 
coulometer cell solutions. Preliminary analysis of these replicates 
indicates that there was a slight drift during the course of some of the 
cells. Closing gas calibrations confirmed this drift and further 
shoreside analysis will determine the extent of this drift. However, 
before any correction for this drift, the absolute average difference 
from the mean of these replicates is 1.0 µmol/kg.

The DIC data reported at sea is to be considered preliminary until a 
further shoreside analysis is undertaken.



References:

Dickson, AG., Sabine, C.L. and Christian, JR. (Eds.), (2007): Guide to 
    Best Practices for Ocean CO2 Measurements. PICES Special Publication 
    3, 191 pp.

Feely, R.A., R. Wanninkhof, H.B. Milburn, C.E. Cosca, M. Stapp, and P.P. 
    Murphy (1998): "A new automated underway system for making high 
    precision pCO2 measurements aboard research ships." Anal. Chim. Acta, 
    377, 185-191.

Johnson, K.M., A.E. King, and J. McN. Sieburth (1985): "Coulometric DIC 
    analyses for marine studies: An introduction." Mar. Chem., 16, 61-82.

Johnson, KM., P.J. Williams, L. Brandstrom, and J. McN. Sieburth 
    (1987): "Coulometric total carbon analysis for marine studies: 
    Automation and calibration." Mar. Chem., 21, 117-133.

Johnson, KM. (1992): Operator's manual: "Single operator multiparameter 
    metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) for total carbon dioxide (CT) with 
    coulometric detection." Brookhaven National Laboratory, Brookhaven, 
    N.Y., 70 pp.

Johnson, KM., K.D. Wills, D.B. Butler, W.K. Johnson, and C.S. Wong 
    (1993): "Coulometric total carbon dioxide analysis for marine 
    studies: Maximizing the performance of an automated continuous gas 
    extraction system and coulometric detector." Mar. Chem., 44,167-189.

Lewis, E. and D. W. R. Wallace (1998) Program developed for CO2 
    system calculations. Oak Ridge, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 
    http://cdiac.ornl.gov/oceans/co2rprt.html

Wilke, R.J., D.W.R. Wallace, and K.M. Johnson (1993): "Water-based 
    gravimetric method for the determination of gas loop volume." Anal. 
    Chem. 65, 2403-2406.




Discrete pH Analyses 
    PI:               Dr. Andrew Dickson    
    Ship technicians: Kristin Jackson and Britain Richardson


Sampling

Samples were collected in 250 mL borosilicate glass bottles and sealed 
using grey butyl rubber stoppers held in place by aluminum crimp caps. 
Each bottle was rinsed a minimum of 2 times, then filled and allowed to 
overflow by approximately one full volume. A 1% headspace was then removed 
from the bottles using an Eppendorf pipette and poisoned with 60 µL of 
mercuric chloride (HgCl2) prior to sealing with the aluminum caps. Samples 
were collected from the same Niskin bottles as total alkalinity or 
dissolved inorganic carbon in order to completely characterize the carbon 
system, and 2 duplicate bottles were also taken on random Niskins for each 
station throughout the course of the cruise. All data should be considered 
preliminary.

Analysis

pH (µmol/kg H20) on the total scale was measured using an Agilent 8453 
spectrophotometer according to the methods outlined by Clayton and Byrne 
(1993). A Thermo NESLAB RTE-7 recirculating water bath was used to 
maintain spectrophotometric cell temperature at 25.0°C during the 
analyses. A custom 10cm flow through jacketed cell was filled autonomously 
with samples using a Kloehn V6 syringe pump. The sulfonephthalein 
indicator m-cresol purple (mCP) was used to measure the absorbance of 
light measured at two different wavelengths (434 nm, 578 nm) corresponding 
to the maximum absorbance peaks for the acidic and basic forms of the 
indicator dye. A baseline absorbance was also measured and subtracted from 
these wavelengths. The baseline absorbance was determined by averaging the 
absorbances from 730-735nm. The samples were run using the tungsten lamp 
only. The blank and absorbance spectrum were measured 6 times in rapid 
succession and then averaged. The ratios of absorbances at the different 
wavelengths were input and used to calculate pH on the total scales, 
incorporating temperature and salinity into the equations. The salinity 
data used was obtained from the conductivity sensor on the CTD. The 
salinity data was later corroborated by shipboard measurements. 
Temperature of the samples was measured immediately after 
spectrophotometric measurements using a Direct Temp USB surface 
temperature probe and a Direct Temp USB immersible probe.

Reagents

The mCP indicator dye was made to a concentration of 2.0 mM in l00ml 
batches as needed. A total of 3 batches were used during the cruise. The 
pHs of the batches were adjusted to approximately 7.6-7.7 using dilute 
solutions of HC1 and NaOH and a pH meter calibrated using NIBS buffers. 
The indicator was provided by Dr. Michael Degrandpre at the University of 
Montana, and was purified using the HPLC technique described by Liu et 
al., 2011.

Standardization/Results

The precision of the data can be accessed from measurements of duplicate 
analyses, certified reference material (CRM) Batch 124 (provided by Dr. 
Andrew Dickson, UCSD), and TRIS buffer Batch 11 (provided by Dr. Andrew 
Dickson, UCSD). CRMs were measured at least once every 12 hours, and 
bottles of TRIS buffer were measured once a week. The precision obtained 
from 172 duplicate analyses was found to be ±0.0004.

Data Processing

The addition of an indicator dye perturbs the pH of the sample, and the 
degree to which pH is affected is a function of the differences between 
the pH of the seawater and the pH of the indicator. Therefore, a 
correction is applied to all samples measured for a given batch of dye. To 
determine this correction samples of varying pH and water composition were 
randomly run with a single injection of dye and then again with a double 
injection of dye on a single bottle. To determine this correction the 
change in the measured absorbance ratio R where R = (A578-Abase)/ 
(A434-Abase) is divided by the change in the isosbestic absorbance (Aiso 
at 488nm) observed from two injections of dye to one. (R"-R') / 
(Aiso"-Aiso') is plotted against the measured R value for the single 
injection of dye and fitted with a linear regression. From this fit the 
slope and y-intercept (b and a respectively) are determined by:


                         ∆R/∆Aiso=bR'+a         (1)

From this the corrected ratio (R) corresponding to the measured 
absorbance ratio if no indicator dye were present can be determined by:

                         R=R'- Aiso' (bR' + a)   (2)

Preliminary data has not been corrected for the perturbation.

Problems

Very few problems occurred during the course of the cruise. The biggest 
problem that did occur was tiny bubbles forming inside the cell due to 
cold samples de-gassing as they were heated up rapidly. To combat this, 
the cell was instead flushed with air and then filled with DI water or 
occasionally 2-propanol and allowed to soak in-between stations. This 
proved the most effective method. Prior to running a given station, 3-4 
junk surface seawater pH measurements were made to ensure that the system 
was functioning as expected. Stations were additionally analyzed starting 
with the surface samples and finishing with the deep cold bottom samples to 
reduce the build-up of bubbles.

References

Clayton, T. D. and Byrne, R. H., "Spectrophotometric seawater pH 
    measurements: Total hydrogen ion concentration scale 
    calibration of m-cresol purple and at-sea results," Deep-Sea 
    Res., 40, pp. 2315-2329, 1993.

Liu, X., Patsvas, M.C., Byrne R.H., "Purification and Characterization 
    of meta Cresol Purple for Spectrophotometric Seawater pH 
    Measurements," Environmental Science and Technology, 2011.




P02 leg 1 Alkalinity 
    Laura Fantozzi and David Cervantes, 
    laboratory of Andrew G. Dickson, 
    Marine Physical Laboratory, 
    Scripps Institution of Oceanography)

Samples were taken at every station, depending on cast depth the number of 
Niskins sampled varied. Bottles were chosen to match DIC's sample choices. 
Samples were collected in 250 ml Pyrex bottles. A headspace of 
approximately 5 milliliters was removed and 0.06 milliliters of saturated 
mercuric chloride solution was added to each sample. The samples were 
capped with a glass stopper with a Teflon sleeve. All samples were 
equilibrated to 20 degrees Celsius using a Thermo Scientific RTE7 water 
bath.

Samples were dispensed using a volumetric pipette and a system of relay 
valves and air pumps controlled by a laptop using Lab VIEW 2011. The 
temperature of the samples at time of dispensing was taken automatically 
by a computer using a DirecTemp surface probe placed on the pipette to 
convert this volume to mass for analysis. During instrument set up it was 
discovered that the sample dispensing unit (SDU) was dispensing less than 
the calibrated volume. This was determined by running titrations using the 
calibrated manual pipette to dispense reference seawater of known 
alkalinity and getting correct alkalinity values while the SDU was giving 
incorrect alkalinity values with the same reference seawater of the same 
alkalinity. An adjustment ratio of 1.00087 was applied to the original 
calibrated volume of 92.258 ml. Therefore, the volume dispensed for 
stations 1-12 was 92.178 ml. Between station 12 and 13 one of the valves 
on the SDU failed and the manual pipette was used again to calculate an 
adjustment ratio for the volume dispensed. The ratio of 0.99983 was 
applied to the previous calculated volume. The new calibrated volume 
dispensed for stations 13-87 would then be 92.193 ml.

Samples were analyzed using an open beaker titration procedure using two 
thermostated 250m1 beakers; one sample being titrated while the second 
was being prepared and equilibrating to the system temperature close to 
20°C. After an initial aliquot of approximately 2.3-2.4 ml of 
standardized hydrochloric acid (0.1M HC1 in 0.6M NaC1 solution), the 
sample was stirred for 5 minutes to remove liberated carbon dioxide gas. 
The stir time was minimized by bubbling air into the sample at a rate of 
200 scc/m. After equilibration, 19 aliquots of 0.04 ml were added. The 
data within the pH range of 3.5 to 3.0 were processed using a non-linear 
least squares fit from which the alkalinity value of the sample was 
calculated (Dickson, et al., 2007). This procedure was performed 
automatically by a computer running Lab VIEW 2011.

Two duplicates were taken and analyzed for each station. Throughout the 
cruise, a total of 168 duplicates were analyzed and gave a pooled 
standard deviation of 0.77 µmol kg-1.

Dickson laboratory Certified Reference Materials (CRM) Batch 124 was 
used to determine the accuracy of the analysis. The certified value for 
Batch 124 is 2215.08 ± 0.49 µmol kg-1. The reference material was 
analyzed 184 times throughout the stations.

The data should be considered preliminary since the correction for the 
difference between the CRMs stated and measured values has yet to be 
finalized and applied. Additionally, the correction for the mercuric 
chloride addition has yet to be applied.


REFERENCE:

Dickson, Andrew G., Chris Sabine and James R. Christian, editors, "Guide to 
    Best Practices for Ocean CO2 Measurements", Pices Special Publication 
    3, IOCCP Report No. 8, October 2007, SOP 3b, "Determination of total 
    alkalinity in sea water using an open-cell titration"





13C/14C (Radiocarbon)
    PIs:        Ann McNichol, Al Gagnon WHOI
    Technician: Leg 1 - Maverick Carey, MSI, UC Santa Barbara


The goal of this sampling is to adequately measure the distribution of 
radiocarbon in order to estimate the penetration of bomb-produced 14C and 
quantify the 13C decrease due to the influx of anthropogenic CO2.

Samples were collected at 24 stations, roughly every 2-4, alternating 
between a full profile (32 samples) and shallow profiles (16 samples in 
the upper 1500-2000m of the water column). 24 stations were sampled, with 
a total of 560 bottles collected. Samples were collected in 500m1 glass 
bottles through silicone tubing. The bottles were rinsed 2x with seawater, 
allowed to fill and overflow about half the volume. Once collected, a 
small volume was poured out for headspace, and -100 µl of saturated 
mercuric chloride solution was added. The stoppers were carefully dried, 
greased (with M-Apiezon grease), sealed, and secured with a rubber band.

All samples will be shipped to WHOI from San Diego to be analyzed in the 
AMS lab.





Dissolved Organic Carbon and Total Dissolved Nitrogen
    PI:         Craig Carlson, MSI, UC Santa Barbara     
    Technician: Leg 1 - Maverick Carey, MSI, UC Santa Barbara


The goal of this group is to obtain Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and 
Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN) values along the P02 line in order to 
better understand the carbon cycle in the ocean on spatial and temporal 
scales.

DOC/TDN samples were collected at all odd-numbered stations (with the 
addition of Station 28 over the Izu-Ogasawara Trench). 30-36 Niskin 
bottles were sampled at most stations, with as few as 8 bottles sampled 
at shallow stations. A total of 1360 samples were collected.

All samples were collected in 60 ml high-density polyethylene (HDPE) 
bottles. Bottles were previously cleaned with 10% HC1 solution and rinsed 
3 times with Mili-Q water. Once collected, samples were frozen at -20° C in 
the onboard freezer. Samples in the top 500m of the water column were 
filtered using a glass fiber filter (GF/F) through an inline cartridge. 
Cartridges were previously cleaned with 10% HC1 solution and rinse with 
Mili-Q water. The filtering is done in order to avoid the inclusion of 
particulate matter in the samples.

All frozen samples will be shipped back to UC Santa Barbara for analysis. 
TDN will be determined from the same samples in the upper 300m of the 
water column.





137Cs, 134Cs and 90Sr sampling
    PI:          Ken Buesseler, Alison Macdonald, Woods Hole Oceanographic 
                 Institution
    Participant: Sachiko Yoshida, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution


137Cs, 134Cs and 9OSr surface samples were drawn routinely from the 
Rosette cast, approximately every 2.5 degrees of longitude. In total 19 
stations were sampled (19 samples). Surface samples were collected in 20L 
cubitainer from the Niskin bottles at about 65dbar depth. Tygon tube was 
used to fill the cubitainer. Two 1OL Niskin bottles were tripped at the 
same depths for Cs surface sampling.

Cs profile samples consisted four 20L cubitainers. Eight profile samples 
were collected approximately every 6 degrees of longitude. Depths were 
roughly surface100m, 100-200m, 250-350m, 400-600m, and filled from three or 
four Niskin bottles at that depth. Each of cubitainers was filled by the 
mixed volume from multiple Niskin bottles at close depth. After finishing 
one Niskin bottle, sample level was marked on the side of cubitainer 
using waterproof marker.

All the samples were secured in deck boxes placing 9 per layer with 
cardboard sheets between layers for stability. Three deck boxes will be 
shipping back to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution at the end of leg 2.


References:

Buesseler, K. 0., S. R. Jayne, N. S. Fisher, I. I. Rypina, H. Baumann, Z. 
    Baumann, C. F. Breier, E. M. Douglass, J. George, A. M. Macdonald, H. 
    Miyamoto, J. Nishikawa, S. M. Pike, and S. Yoshida (2012) 
    Fukushima-derived radionuclides in the ocean and biota off Japan. 
    Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 109, 5984-5988, doi:10.1073/pnas.11120794109. 

Casacuberta, N., P. Masque, J. Garcia-Orellana, R. Garcia-Tenorio, and K.O. 
    Buesseler (2013) 90Sr and 89Sr in seawater off Japan as a consequence 
    of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident. Biogeosciences Discuss., 
    10, 2039-2067. 

Pike, S. M., K. 0. Buesseler, C. F. Breier, H. Dulaiova, K. Stastna, and 
    F. Sebesta (2012) Extraction of cesium in seawater off Japan using 
    AMP-PAN resin and quantification via gamma spectroscopy and 
    inductively coupled mass spectrometry. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., doi: 
    10.1007/si 0967-012-2014-5.



          137Cs/134Cs/90Sr Cubitainer Contents (Niskins Sampled)

    Station  Cubitainer  Niskins          Station  Cubitainer  Niskins
     /Cast       ID      Sampled           /Cast       ID      Sampled
    -------  ----------  -------          -------  ----------  -------
      1/2       #20*       9-10             56/1       #49      32-33
      4/1       #21*      22-23             60/1       #50      33-34
      7/1       #22*      32-33             64/1       #51      21-24
     12/1       #23       33-34             64/1       #52      25-28
     16/1       #24       32-33             64/1       #53      29-32
     19/1       #25       32-33             64/1       #54      33-36
     24/1       #26       33-34             67/1       #55      31-32
     28/1       #27       32-33             70/1       #56      31-32
     32/1       #28       33-34             72/1       #57      23-25
     35/1       #29       24-26             72/1       #58      26-28
     35/1       #30       27-29             72/1       #59      29-31
     35/1       #31       30-32             72/1       #60      32-34,36
     35/1       #32       33-36             74/1       #61      33-34
     37/1       #33       32-33             78/1       #62      24-26
     39/1       #34       33-34             78/1       #63      27-29
     41/1       #35       24-26             78/1       #64      30-32
     41/1       #36       27-29             78/1       #65      33-36
     41/1       #37       30-32             80/1       #66      33-34
     41/1       #38       33-36             82/1       #67*     31-32
     44/1       #39       32-33             84/1       #68      32-33
     46/1       #40       22-25             86/1       #69      23-25
     46/1       #41       26-29             86/1       #70      26-28
     46/1       #42       30-32             86/1       #71      29-31
     46/1       #43       33-36             86/1       #72      32-34,36
     50/1       #44       33-34
     54/1       #45       24-26
     54/1       #46       27-29
     54/1       #47       30-32
     54/1       #48       33-34,36

    * Cubitainer ID on Sample Log matches Niskins Sampled. Probably 
      re-numbered as listed





129 Iodine sampling
    PI: Tom Guilderson, UC Santa Cruz & 
        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


The goal of 129I sampling is to track Fukushima derived 129I release and 
to describe general large-scale 129I gradient originated from the 
atmospheric nuclear weapons testing.

129I surface water samples were drawn routinely from Rosette casts, 
approximately every 2.5 degrees of longitude. In total, 27 stations were 
sampled (27 samples and one duplicate). Surface samples were collected in 
500m1 amber bottles at about 65dbar depth. Samples were taken from the 
same Niskins bottle for Cs samples (P1: Ken Buesseler, WHOI) since 
129I/134Cs and 129I/137Cs ratio can be used positively identify the 
presence of Fukushima origin radionuclide. Bottles were rinsed 2-3 times 
with sample before filling. Electrical tape was used to seal caps and all 
the samples were refrigerated.

One hydrocast profile was obtained at 160°E station 46 (72 samples). 
Samples were collected in 250m1 HDPE bottles and taken from 36 Niskin 
bottles. Duplicates were also taken form all 36 Niskins. Refrigerated 
samples will be shipping back to UC Santa Cruz at the end of leg 2.


References:

Tumey, S. J., T. P. Guilderson, T. A. Brown, T. Brock, and K.O. Buesseler 
    (2012) Input of I-129 into the western Pacific Ocean resulting from 
    the Fukushima nuclear event. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., doi: 
    10.1007/s10967-012-2217-9.





delta-15N-N03 / 18O-NO3 Sampling

752 delta-15N-NO3 / 18O-NO3 samples were collected during Leg 1 / P02W. 
Full profiles were sampled at 22 stations. Since no rack was sent with the 
sampling containers, a plastic bucket and packing Styrofoam were modified 
to secure the 25 ampoules during rosette sampling. 14 ml ampoules (Niskins 
1-25) or 60 ml bottles (Niskins 26-36) were minimally rinsed twice, then 
filled to ~85% of capacity with seawater. The samples were stored frozen 
in a standard commercial freezer on-board. Samples will be shipped frozen 
after the ship completes Leg 2 in San Diego, then analyzed at Princeton 
University (PI Dr. Daniel Sigman - sigman@princeton.edu).





Density Sampling

68 density samples were taken at Stations 25, 63, and 85 from the same 
depths as Alkalinity. Sample bottles and caps were rinsed 3 times with 
approximately 10 mL of water, then filled to the beginning of the neck to 
leave a headspace of 1-2 mL. Samples will be analyzed by Ryan Woosley (PI 
Dr. Frank Millero - fmillerorsmas.miami.edu at University of Miami at the 
end of the second leg of P02.





Calcium Sampling

Calcium samples were taken at Stations 55 and 84 from 18 depths with 2 
duplicates at each station. Sample bottles and caps were rinsed 3 times 
with approximately 10 mL of water, then filled to the beginning of the 
neck to leave a headspace of 1-2 mL. Samples will be analyzed by John 
Ballard (PI Dr. Todd Martz - trmartzucsd.edu at Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography at the end of the second leg of P02.





STUDENT REPORTS

Katinka Bellomo
University of Miami

As a graduate student in climate dynamics, I often used data retrieved by 
ships at sea, though I never had a clear understanding of how the data are 
collected. My duties onboard involved deployment and recovery of the 
rosette, preparing and fixing the Niskin bottles when they had problems, 
taking water samples, running the CTD console, and initialize and recovery 
of the LADCP. We also deployed one ARGO float. These activities helped me 
to understand how data are taken, how instruments work, and what are the 
problems and errors that occur when working at sea.

The biggest challenge in climate research is to have global-scale 
observations. During this cruise I learned that taking measurements of the 
ocean properties, especially the deep ocean, is even more challenging than 
measuring atmospheric variables, which can be more easily retrieved by 
satellites and land-based instrumentation. Knowing about the ocean, 
however, is extremely important to climate variability and change. The 
heat capacity of the ocean is much larger than the atmosphere, thus the 
oceans can store heat much more efficiently than the atmosphere and 
mitigate climate changes. Moreover, ocean carbon uptake reduces the amount 
of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The P02W cruise as the other oceanic 
campaigns provide us with valuable information about the ocean since our 
knowledge of the deep ocean is limited.

Therefore, being part of a team exploring the depths of the oceans, of 
which the entire scientific community knows so little about, has been an 
extremely rewarding experience. Moreover, participating in this cruise 
significantly improved my understanding of at-sea measurements.


Greg Ikeda
University of Washington

It's easy to take high quality data for granted. Seemingly endless 
collections of samples back on land make one feel as though they're swept 
up in a matter of seconds, and every CTD cast is always flawless. Setting 
out for sea reminds the young scientist that this is rarely the case. My 
time aboard the RN Melville was split between relentless troubleshooting, 
clumsy CTD deployment/recovery, and ultimately a heightened sense of 
awareness for the gritty footwork behind the scientific process.

During the cruise I was tasked with three primary jobs: maintain and take 
samples for an Underway Equilibrator Inlet Mass Spectrometer, monitor an 
underway pCO2 system, and act as a "CTD Watchstander". The two underway 
systems had the amicable quality of essentially running themselves, which 
translated to easy living peppered with massive spikes in stress and 
frustration when something went wrong. As a CTD watchstander, my basic 
responsibilities were to assist with everything CTD related, from tossing 
it over the side to dismantling the rosette, piece by piece. I worked 
alongside a cabal of scientists, other watchstanders, and technicians- all 
very experienced and competent at their work- and thus received a varied 
educational experience on board; where I would normally cast off an issue 
as somebody else's job, a wrench would be slapped in my hand to help with 
mechanical issues well beyond my skill set. From these unexpected 
responsibilities, and the subsequent triumphs over scientific hiccups, I 
gained a greater appreciation for the hundreds of unprocessed DIC samples 
sitting peacefully back home.


Cruz St.Peter '11
Texas A&M University

My experience as a CTD Watchstander on the RN Melville has been great. I 
have been on three previous research cruises through other programs, and I 
can say without hesitation that this has been my favorite cruise so far. I 
think anyone on board would agree that Jim Swift has done a superior job 
as Chief Scientist and that his many stories of past cruises and his 
genuinely positive attitude have made him a joy to sail with. The rest of 
the science team, as well as the ship's crew, are the best I have 
experienced - especially given our ten-day delay in science operations. I 
have worked with CTDs and Niskin water sampling on past cruises, but my 
time on the Melville has only served to increase my understanding of the 
technical aspects regarding CTD casts. As a recent graduate I have been 
exploring career options along with graduate school programs in the Earth 
sciences, and I know that the friends and professional connections that I 
have made on this cruise have furthered my interest in ocean research. 
Many thanks to the ship's Captain and crew as well as the entire science 
party of P02 - Leg 1!


Amanda Waite

The CLIVAR P02W cruise aboard the RN Melville proved to be an excellent 
opportunity for seagoing learning and also influential to my development 
as an early career (paleo)oceanographer. While my research has focused on 
the application of geochemical proxies to the skeletons of marine 
organisms for the reconstruction of oceanographic conditions through time, 
one of my primary goals is to integrate this paleo information with 
observational data in order to improve our interpretation of 
reconstructions from the past and future predictions of change in the 
world's oceans and climate. As such, P02W enabled me to participate in the 
collection of hydrographic data and samples and learn how these are 
processed, analyzed, QA/QCed, and compiled. With exceptional training and 
leadership from experienced (and patient) personnel, my fellow CTD watch 
standers and I were able to play an active role in nearly all parts of the 
process, from CTD/rosette assembly and preparation, to deck operations 
including CTD deployment and recovery, cast console operations, and the 
coordination and collection of water samples for a number of parameters.

I continue to be impressed and inspired by the unification of the 
science party and crew aboard Leg 1 of P02W in the face of numerous 
unfortunate equipment related challenges. The tireless efforts of the 
team yielded solutions to nearly all of these obstacles and allowed the 
science to continue uncompromised. For me, witnessing and partaking in 
troubleshooting many of these trials provided an invaluable platform for 
learning and a far deeper understanding of the technical aspects of the 
CTD/rosette, shipboard operations, cruise planning and adaptation than 
would have been achieved in a 'business as usual' scenario. My 
involvement with this program has given me a greater appreciation for 
the effort that goes in to large scale basin oriented hydrographic 
research and sparked numerous ideas for integrated studies which advance 
our understanding of water mass distribution and change in the Pacific 
and beyond. I see great potential for insight that may be gained from 
the comparison of CLIVAR data and paleo-records and feel much better 
equipped to effectively communicate and collaborate with the physical 
and chemical oceanographic communities in the future. On a personal 
level, this cruise has also reaffirmed my desire to continue to pursue 
hands on, field-based, applied research which improves our understanding 
of both the oceans and climate in a changing world.


Gabrielle Weiss
University of Hawaii

As we left Yokohama, Japan (for the first time) I was overjoyed at the 
prospect of finally getting underway and learning the various scientific 
procedures adopted by the technicians and scientists onboard the RN 
Melville. I had been on previous research cruises before, but none had 
included such a wide range of measurements and techniques to better 
understand the physical oceanography of the North Pacific. My role was to 
help run CFC and SF6 samples in addition to comparing underway versus 
rosette water samples. This work was also new to me but a subject that I 
had much interest in, especially for its role as a tracer of water masses 
and ages as well as its potential to help understand the fate of 
anthropogenic carbon in the oceans. Not only was this work immensely 
fulfilling but also proved to be an introduction to physical oceanography 
that I had only briefly considered. As we began our journey everyone 
worked to get onto their shift schedule and as soon as we had established 
an efficient routine our winches took a turn for the worst requiring us to 
return to Yokohama, Japan for repairs. It can best be summed as a 
limerick:

    There once was a ship named 
    Melville, It seemed she had 
    danced with the devil, While 
    trying to sample, Our backups 
    weren't ample, Now we long for 
    Revelle.

In spite of the troubles faced, everyone maintained a positive attitude 
and we left Japan for a second time. It took several days for the winches 
to finally operate correctly while at sea; however, the engineers worked 
continuously and we finally had two reliable winches. We were finally able 
to conduct CTD/rosette casts and really learn about the positions 
scientists had on the ship. Included in this were tag line and A-frame ops 
for equipment deployment; yet jobs ranged from sampling Niskins to analyze 
pH, TALK, DIC, CFCs, SF6, salts, nutrients to interpreting what the data 
meant. The technicians aboard were incredibly helpful, taking the time to 
explain the methods they employed for their specific analyses and why that 
process was chosen. Additionally, the STS P02 website was a great resource 
for studying the waters we had recently sampled and provided an exciting 
opportunity to look at data fresh off the press.

This trip has provided me with an incredible experience I will never 
forget and wish could continue longer. I could not imagine having better 
colleagues on a cruise and a more levelheaded, fun Pl. This cruise has 
greatly affirmed my excitement regarding oceanography and understanding 
climate variability through various proxies. I know that I will use my 
experiences from the cruise in the future and look forward to seeing the 
final results that will be interpreted from the data in the near future.





Shipboard ADCP measurements during CLIVAR P02W 2013
    Steven Howell


Personnel

UH LADCP group: Eric Firing (PT), Julia Hummon, and François Ascani
Shipboard operators: Frank Delahoyde, SIO and Steven Howell, UH

System description

The R/V Melville normally has two Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers 
(ADCPs) mounted in instrument wells in the hull. One, a 150 kHz Teledyne 
RD Instruments Ocean Surveyor, was at the manufacturer for repair so was 
unavailable for the cruise. The other, a 75 kHz Ocean Surveyor (OS75) was 
present and produced data through the entire cruise (except in Japan's 
EEZ).

An additional ADCP, a 300kHz Work Horse (WH300, also from Teledyne RD), 
was installed temporarily while the ship was in Yokohama before the 
cruise. it was mounted in the open instrument well on a pipe string. It 
was initially placed 2 feet below the hull, but two of the beams were 
compromised, presumably by the keel, so the assembly was lowered to 2.5 
feet for the remainder of the cruise on March 23rd. A minimal extension 
below the hull is desirable because the pipe string tends to vibrate while 
steaming.

Because ship speeds are much faster than typical ocean currents, precise 
knowledge of the speed and orientation of the ship is required to 
calculate currents from the raw data. To this end, the ADCP data 
acquisition system gathered data from 4 additional devices: a Furuno 
GP-150 GPS for position, a Sperry MK 37 gyro for reliable but coarse 
heading, and two GPS-assisted attitude sensors for high-precision heading, 
an Ashtech ADU and a CodaOctopus F185 motion reference unit. The Ashtech 
heading was inoperative for the entire cruise, so we had to rely on the 
CodaOctopus, which performed well most of the time.

Data acquisition from the ADCPs and the other devices was done using UHDAS 
(University of Hawaii Data Acquisition System), an open source software 
system developed by the ADCP group at UH. It automatically updates a 
website on the ship's network that presents near real time plots of 
current depth profiles, contoured sections for the previous few days, and 
provides a variety of data products ranging from raw data to near-final 
currents. For extensive documentation about UHDAS, visit the UH ADCP web 
page, http://currents.soest.hawaii.edu.

While the output of UHDAS is suitable for shipboard use, it is by no means 
a final product as some manual intervention is inevitably necessary to 
deal with issues that arise. The data produced during the cruise must be 
regarded as preliminary; fully processed data will be made available 
within 6 months at the UH website.

Operating parameters

Both the OS75 and WH300 were operated in their default UHDAS 
configurations through the entire cruise.

The OS75 (CPU firmware 23.16, beam angle 300) can operate in two modes. 
Narrow band pings provide greater range, while broadband pings have much 
better accuracy. These two ping types were alternated throughout the 
cruise. Bottom track mode was not used at all. Narrowband mode used 
nominal 16m pings and depth ranges below an 8 m blanking interval, while 
the broadband mode used 8 m cells and blanking intervals. Pings were 1.8s 
apart.

The WH300 (serial number 9806, firmware version 16.28, beam angle 20°) 
used 2 m cells and blanking intervals with 0.8 s between pings.

The following control files do not contain the entire set of commands sent 
to the instrument, but these are the ones most frequently changed.


OS75 control file

# Bottom tracking
  BPO         # BP0 is off, BP1 is on
  BX10000     # Max search range in decimeters; e.g. BX10000 for 1000 m.

# Narrowband watertrack
  NP1         # NP0 is off, NP1 is on
  NN60        # number of cells
  NS1600      # cell size in centimeters; e.g. NS2400 for 24-rn cells
  NF800       # blanking in centimeters; e.g. NF1600 for 16-m cells

# Broadband watertrack
  WP1         # WPO is off, WP1 is on
  WN8O        # number of cells
  WS800       # cell size in centimeters
  WF800       # blanking in centimeters

# Interval between pings
  TPOO:01.80  # e.g., TPOO:03.00 for 3seconds

# Triggering
  CX0,0       # in,out[,timeout]


WH300 control file

  BP0         # Bottom track on (BP1) or off (BP0)
  BX2000      # BT max search range in decimeters (BX02000 for 200 m)
  WN7O        # number of cells
  WS200       # cell size in centimeters
  WF200       # blanking in centimeters
  TPO0:00.80  # ping interval; TP00:00.80 is 0.8seconds


Data gathered

Both instruments ran continuously and produced data throughout the cruise. 
Aside from the aforementioned lowering of the WH300 on March 23rd, the 
only intervention required was to start and stop logging. On station, all 
of the instruments generally worked very well. The WH300 profiled to 100 m 
or so while the OS75 broadband and narrowband modes generally reached 650 
and 850m, respectively.

Problems encountered

Steaming increases acoustic noise and vibration, reducing ADCP range. That 
was particularly true during this cruise, where the ship steamed faster 
than usual to make up for time lost due to hardware failures early on. The 
WH300 was particularly affected, becoming nearly useless during transits 
between stations. It is not clear why it had such problems; an earlier 
Melville cruise enjoyed success with a nearly identical installation. 
Bubbles can cause problems, but the WH position well aft and 2.5 feet 
below the hull makes that seem unlikely. I looked down the instrument well 
several times, but there appeared to be few if any bubbles coming up. The 
most likely explanation is vibration, but we have no direct evidence of 
that. Poor data quality combined with only a preliminary calibration of 
installation angle meant that what little current data could be retrieved 
was obviously flawed, with large along-track biases. It may be possible to 
clean up some of the data during transits, but the WH300 data should 
probably only be used on station.

The OS75 suffered much less during transit. Narrowband mode still exceeded 
600 m while broadband sometimes had trouble below 200m but usually managed 
500m. I understand from the First Mate, David Cook, that the Melville is 
typically ballasted so the bow rides a bit low, reducing bubble noise 
during transit. We appreciate this attention to our needs, and it 
evidently works.

While the weather was fine for most of P02W, there were a couple of 
episodes with high winds (up to 23 m s1) and significant seas. Under those 
conditions the OS75 produced little useful data, as it was overwhelmed by 
bubbles at its forward location, even while hove to on station. Data are 
therefore missing for parts of April 5-6 and 18. The WH300 mounting 
location was much less vulnerable to bubbles so it has on-station data for most of those periods.

We were surprised to note occasional problems with the OS75 on station 
during very calm weather. There would be short periods, usually a minute 
or less, where the signal strength would drop to near zero. There was one 
extended period with this problem, from April 7-8 (UTC), when there was no 
signal for over 12 hours. Diagnostic tests failed to find the problem. At 
the moment, our best guess is that bubbles filled the instrument well, 
disrupting the instrument's contact with the water. The OS75 well is 
blind-there is no way for bubbles to exit out the top. The OS150 
installation on the Melville suffered badly from this in previous years, 
so a similar situation for the OS75 is plausible. If this is really the 
problem, it requires venting the top of the well. The weak beam problem 
resolved as soon as the ship started moving. It recurred frequently 
thereafter, but for very short periods that will not affect the data much.

As noted above, with the Ashtech ADU heading mode unusable, UHDAS relied 
exclusively on the CodaOctopus F185 for precision heading. There were two 
occasions when the F185 lost its heading and the preprocessed ADCP data 
were plainly unrealistic. The first was on March 22nd, and the second was 
on April 30th. Processing after the cruise will correct the wild data, 
albeit with higher uncertainty than surrounding time periods.

The F185 had numerous very short data dropouts that will have little 
effect on the fully processed data.

Despite this series of small problems, gaps in the shipboard ADCP data 
occurred over a small fraction of the cruise, so the processed data will 
cover nearly the entire period.





P02W Underway pCO2 report
     Greg Ikeda


The GO 8050 underway pCO2 system is capable of taking continuous pCO2 
measurements while the ship is underway. The system consists of several 
different components that prepare gas samples and standards to be sent to 
a detector, ultimately providing real time pCO2 data.

Three types of gases are run through the system, consisting of: gas 
standards for the correction of raw data, deck air taken from a diaphragm 
pump, and air samples equilibrated with seawater from the underway supply. 
A Licor 7000 infrared analyzer is used as a CO2 detector. It passes IR 
light through a reference gas cell, which is supplied with air stripped of 
CO2, and a sample gas cell, which is supplied with the gas being measured. 
CO2 concentrations are measured by the difference in absorption between 
the two cells. A linear fit between standards is used to calculate the CO2 
concentration of seawater and atmospheric samples.

For more information, contact Geoff Lebon at geoffrey.t.lebon@noaa.gov.





P02W Cruise report for EIMS system
     Greg Ikeda


Background

The Equilibrator Inlet Mass Spectrometer (EIMS) system allows for 
continuous sampling of ion currents of Nitrogen, Oxygen, Argon, and CO2 
dissolved in seawater. The resulting samples provide real-time on 02/Ar, 
N2/Ar, and CO2 data, which can be used to estimate net community 
production and pCO2.

Samples are collected continuously from the ship's underway seawater 
supply. Along the cruise track, water flowed from the seawater intake into 
a temperature controlled reservoir and then was subsampled through a small 
diameter tube that pumped underway seawater to an equilibrator cartridge. 
Within the graduated cylinder is a small diameter tube that pumps underway 
seawater to an equilibrator cartridge. The cartridge equilibrated the 
dissolved gases in the seawater with its headspace, which were then passed 
through a capillary into a mass spectrometer. Ion current measurements 
from the mass spectrometer reflect the partial pressure of the dissolved 
gases in the underway seawater intake. In addition to underway sampling, 
discrete 'O samples were collected daily in containers that have been pre
treated with HgCI2 and brought to a vacuum. The necks of these bottles are 
purged with N2 gas to prevent atmospheric contamination from entering the 
bottle. At roughly every 2 degrees of longitude, the discrete sample of 
surface water is collected via the underway seawater supply. Measures are 
taken to prevent air from the lab from entering the sample. These samples 
are sent back to Paul Quay's Stable Isotope Lab (University of Washington) 
to calibrate EIMS 02/Ar ratios and supplement the study of net community 
production.

For more information, contact Hilary Palevsky at palevsky@uw.edu





               CLIVAR P02W 2013 Ship's Underway Measurements

                              Frank Delahoyde
                      SIO Shipboard Technical Support


R/V Melville has a collection of permanently installed sensors and data 
acquisition systems, most of which were used during P02W 2013, MV1305. The 
collected data consist of GPS navigation, Multibeam echosounder tracks, 
ADCP sections, meteorological and sea surface measurements time series and 
gravity time series. A detailed description of these systems is included 
with the MV1305 data distribution.

GPS navigation data were collected from Furuno GP150, Ashtech ADU5 and 
CodaOctopus F185 GPS devices. The Furuno GP150 and Ashtech ADU5 data have 
a resolution of 1hz, and the F185 a resolution of 5 hz. The GP15O was the 
primary navigation device for P02W deployment positions, P02W 
hydrographic sections and track maps provided by the Melville bridge and 
by the shipboard CLIVAR website. The F185 was the primary navigation 
device for the EM122 multibeam and the shipboard ADCP systems.

The multibeam echosounder acoustic data were collected from a Kongsberg 
EM122 multibeam echosounder system running SIS 3.9.2. The EM122 was run 
continuously and the centerbeams used for all acoustic depth 
determinations on P02W. The multibeam data were corrected using sound 
speed profiles that were calculated from CTD deployments. Two of the 24 
36-channel transmitter cards in the EM122 failed in the first week of the 
leg and were relocated to the outermost beam positions. A third card 
failed in the third week. The card failures resulted in decreased 
resolution and increased noise levels but did not impact the accuracy of 
depth determinations. Bad weather during parts of the leg also 
contributed to less than optimal mapping.

ADCP data were collected from a hull-mounted RDI OS-75 ADCP and from an 
RDI WH300 ADCP deployed through the Melville's aft hanger pipe well. The 
Melville's hull-mounted NB15O ADCP was not operational and was not used. 
The ADCP data were acquired and processed using UHDAS from University of 
Hawaii.

Meteorological and sea surface measurement were made using the shipboard 
Met system. This system continuously makes measurements and generates a 
time series, which had a 15 second data period for P02W. Sea surface 
temperature measurements are made with two hull-mounted thermistors, 
(port and starboard). Other measurements, including salinity, dissolved 
oxygen and fluorometer, are determined by sensors located in the 
analytical lab. The salinity measurement is made with a SBE45 
thermosalinograph (TSG), which measures temperature and conductivity and 
calculates PSS78 salinity. Seawater supplied to these sensors is pumped 
from the bow intake to the lab through CA. 30m of pipe inside the ship.

This cruise presented a unique opportunity to examine the flow 
characteristics of this arrangement by comparing Met system bow and 
analytical lab measurements to CTD surface data. CTD data from each 
surface bottle trip on each cast were compared to Met system data matched 
by time. The results of these comparisons are presented in Figure 1. The X 
axis on this plot is "Normalized Day", where 0 is the time and date of the 
surface bottle trip on cast 1/1. The data from the first 12 stations are 
excluded for clarity because of the 2 week return trip to Yokohama but 
this doesn't significantly change the picture. The last two Y axis are 
differences between CTD temperature and the port and starboard 
hull-mounted temperature sensors. The Met sensors are in good agreement, 
and the major differences with CTD data occur during periods of bad 
weather. The first Y axis is the difference between CTD and TSG 
temperatures. Here, temperature differences are more extreme and 
distortion due to the interior ship temperature is evident. Finally, the 
second Y axis is the difference between CTD and TSG salinity.


Figure 1:  CTD and TSG T and S Comparisons
Figure 2:  TSG Salinity


Figure 2 shows the difference between CTD and TSG salinity from Figure 1 
on the first Y axis, and TSG salinity on the second Y axis. There are 
evidently some flow issues affecting TSG salinity perhaps as a result of 
air or bubbles becoming entrained in the seawater supply pipe.

Salinity check samples were collected to calibrate the TSG at the ends of 
stations 46-57 (12 check samples). The calculated calibration offset of 
-0.1108 PSU is consistent with the CTD differences in Figures 1 and 2

There were two additional Met system sensor problems on P02W. The air 
temperature sensor began to behave erratically on 4/19 and then returned 
to normal by 4/21. There have been no further problems with this sensor. 
The barometer sensor was reported by NOAA to have an offset of -12.0 
mbars on 5/1.

Earth's gravity field measurements were also collected from the 
Melville's BellAero BGM-3 gravimeter.




















                                Appendix A

 CLIVAR/Carbon P02W:  CTD Temperature and Conductivity Corrections Summary


          ITS-90 Temperature Coefficients                 Conductivity Coefficients
 Sta/   corT = tp2*corP**2 + tp1*corP + t0          corC = cp1*corP + c2*C**2 + c1*C + c0
 Cast       tp2          tp1         t0          cp1            c2            c1          c0

001/02  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001039  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027718
002/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001037  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027712
003/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001036  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027704
004/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001034  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027694
005/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001032  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027683
006/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001030  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027672
007/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001028  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027659
008/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001025  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027644
009/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001022  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027627
010/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001019  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027609

011/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001016  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027593
012/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001013  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.027576
013/05  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000885  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026769
014/04  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000865  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026609
015/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000863  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026595
016/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000862  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026581
017/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000860  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026565
018/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000858  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026547
019/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000856  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026534
020/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000855  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026521

021/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000854  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026511
022/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000853  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026501
023/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000852  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026491
024/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000851  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026481
025/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000850  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026469
026/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000849  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026458
027/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000847  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026445
028/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000846  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026432
029/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000845  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026418
030/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000843  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026403

031/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000842  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026390
032/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000841  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026373
033/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000839  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026357
034/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000838  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026339
035/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000837  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026322
036/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000835  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026304
037/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000834  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026286
038/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000833  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026268
039/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000831  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026249
040/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000830  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026231


041/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000829  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026213
042/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000828  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026196
043/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000827  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025979
044/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000826  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026160
045/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000826  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026144
046/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000825  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026125
047/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000825  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026113
048/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000824  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026101
049/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000824  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026089
050/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026075

051/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026061
052/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026048
053/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026035
054/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026023
055/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.026013
056/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025999
057/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025789
058/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025779





                                    -2-

          ITS-90 Temperature Coefficients                 Conductivity Coefficients
 Sta/   corT = tp2*corP**2 + tp1*corP + t0          corC = cp1*corP + c2*C**2 + c1*C + c0
 Cast       tp2          tp1         t0          cp1            c2            c1          c0

059/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025966
060/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025956

061/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000823  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025947
062/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000824  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025936
063/03  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000824  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025924
064/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000824  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025913
065/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000825  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025905
066/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000825  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025895
067/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000826  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025886
068/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000826  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025877
069/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000827  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025869
070/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000827  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025860

071/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000828  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025853
072/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000828  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025844
073/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000829  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025836
074/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000830  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025828
075/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000830  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025820
076/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000831  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025812
077/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000832  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025803
078/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000833  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025794
079/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000834  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025785
080/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000835  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025777


081/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000837  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025768
082/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000838  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025758
083/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000839  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025749
084/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000841  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025740
085/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000842  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025731
086/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000844  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025722
087/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000846  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025714


                                Appendix B

          Summary of CLIVAR/Carbon P02W CTD Oxygen Time Constants
                        (time constants in seconds)

+------------------+----------------------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+
|    Pressure      |        Temperature         |    Pressure     | O2 Gradient | Velocity |     Thermal       |
|Hysteresis (Tauh) | Long(TauTl) | Short(TauTs) | Gradient (Taup) |   (Tauog)   | (TaudP)  | Diffusion (TaudT) |
+------------------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+
|      50.0        |    300.0    |     4.0      |      0.50       |    8.00     |  200.00  |       300.0       |
+------------------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+


    CLIVAR/Carbon P02W: Conversion Equation Coefficients for CTD Oxygen
                        (refer to Equation 1.9.4.0)

 Sta/    OcSlope    Offset   Phcoeff   Tlcoeff     Tscoeff     Plcoeff    dOc/dtcoeff  dP/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)      (c3)     (c2)       (c4)        (c5)        (c6)        (c7)         (c8)        (c9)

001/02   3.996e-04  -0.0916   3.0818   3.843e-03   1.775e-02  -9.717e-04   2.758e-03   -9.717e-04   2.093e-02
002/01   6.089e-04  -0.1999  -0.6488  -5.380e-03   8.528e-03  -2.331e-02  -1.110e-02   -2.331e-02  -3.707e-03
003/01   9.103e-04  -0.3781   0.3963  -7.222e-03  -6.974e-03   1.699e-02   3.149e-04    1.699e-02   8.599e-03
004/01   6.868e-04  -0.3955   3.4994   2.785e-02  -2.164e-02  -3.325e-02  -6.473e-03   -3.325e-02  -6.618e-03
005/01   4.593e-04  -0.2076   1.4911   2.011e-02  -1.397e-03   2.473e-02   2.634e-03    2.473e-02  -1.249e-02
006/01   5.476e-04  -0.2308   0.5031   9.997e-03  -2.586e-04   2.679e-02   1.432e-03    2.679e-02  -1.478e-03
007/01   7.453e-04  -0.3202   0.1212  -3.928e-03   8.227e-04  -3.807e-03   3.102e-03   -3.807e-03  -2.531e-03
008/01   6.258e-04  -0.2279  -0.1260   8.566e-03  -6.235e-03  -1.658e-02  -1.853e-03   -1.658e-02   2.044e-02
009/01   6.510e-04  -0.2456  -0.1116   6.802e-04   1.368e-03  -3.216e-02   5.215e-03   -3.216e-02   5.609e-03
010/01   8.316e-04  -0.4215   0.3490  -3.928e-02   3.385e-02   3.512e-02  -8.662e-03    3.512e-02  -6.686e-02

011/01   6.067e-04  -0.2033  -0.1610   1.362e-02  -9.966e-03  -1.063e-02  -1.875e-03   -1.063e-02   4.057e-02
012/01   6.643e-04  -0.2479  -0.0190   5.832e-03  -5.373e-03  -4.298e-03  -8.636e-03   -4.298e-03   2.738e-02
013/05   7.846e-04  -0.3691   0.2891  -2.558e-02   2.093e-02   1.030e-02  -3.838e-03    1.030e-02  -3.922e-02
014/04   7.412e-04  -0.3171   0.0286  -9.149e-03   6.600e-03  -4.381e-03   1.269e-03   -4.381e-03  -5.543e-03
015/01   7.206e-04  -0.3033   0.3944   1.679e-02  -2.033e-02   3.016e-02   5.264e-03    3.016e-02   3.450e-02





                                    -3-

 Sta/    OcSlope    Offset   Phcoeff   Tlcoeff     Tscoeff     Plcoeff    dOc/dtcoeff  dP/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)      (c3)     (c2)       (c4)        (c5)        (c6)        (c7)         (c8)        (c9)

016/01   6.278e-04  -0.2268  -0.1997   8.951e-03  -6.284e-03  -7.943e-03   1.856e-03   -7.943e-03   2.666e-02
017/01   7.313e-04  -0.3188   0.2993  -4.633e-03   2.446e-03   2.552e-02  -2.331e-03    2.552e-02   1.712e-03
018/01   7.495e-04  -0.3905   0.8249  -1.369e-02   1.347e-02   3.132e-02  -6.008e-04    3.132e-02  -3.966e-02
019/01   7.966e-04  -0.3574   0.2733  -1.633e-02   1.010e-02   3.069e-02  -7.434e-03    3.069e-02  -6.563e-03
020/01   6.178e-04  -0.3238   0.7110  -4.254e-03   4.065e-03   3.428e-02   7.629e-04    3.428e-02  -1.802e-02

021/01   5.726e-04  -0.3286   1.0056  -3.896e-03   9.695e-03   6.057e-03   2.530e-03    6.057e-03  -5.314e-02
022/01   6.779e-04  -0.3303   0.4791  -3.294e-03  -2.568e-03   1.768e-02   3.411e-03    1.768e-02  -3.022e-03
023/01   5.861e-04  -0.2416   0.0251   5.947e-03  -6.694e-03   5.050e-03   2.462e-03    5.050e-03   2.145e-02
024/01   5.302e-04  -0.2558   0.8490   1.561e-02  -8.412e-03   1.124e-02   4.348e-04    1.124e-02   9.772e-03
025/01   5.629e-04  -0.2197  -0.1502   6.544e-03  -5.729e-03  -5.999e-03  -6.424e-03   -5.999e-03   3.321e-02
026/01   5.562e-04  -0.2303   0.1154   7.037e-03  -4.915e-03   6.293e-03  -5.348e-03    6.293e-03   2.085e-02
027/01   5.552e-04  -0.2223   0.0449   1.558e-03   2.893e-04   1.184e-02   8.508e-04    1.184e-02   2.445e-02
028/01   5.751e-04  -0.2387   0.0021  -2.355e-04   6.767e-04   8.108e-03  -3.700e-03    8.108e-03   8.630e-03
029/01   6.214e-04  -0.2782   0.2556  -5.460e-03   3.514e-03   2.936e-02  -2.056e-03    2.936e-02   3.099e-03
030/01   5.445e-04  -0.2074  -0.1635   1.163e-02  -8.566e-03  -3.644e-02  -6.262e-03   -3.644e-02   2.884e-02

031/01   6.339e-04  -0.2850   0.1302  -9.677e-03   6.261e-03   2.539e-02  -5.848e-04    2.539e-02  -1.017e-02
032/01   6.101e-04  -0.2841   0.4825   3.328e-03  -3.749e-03   3.515e-02  -2.150e-04    3.515e-02   1.044e-02
033/01   6.013e-04  -0.2445  -0.0030   9.047e-03  -1.029e-02   1.214e-03  -9.221e-04    1.214e-03   3.314e-02
034/01   5.940e-04  -0.2502  -0.0324  -9.896e-04   6.463e-04  -5.524e-03  -5.759e-03   -5.524e-03   6.818e-03
035/01   5.875e-04  -0.3018   0.8036  -1.118e-03   4.105e-03   4.894e-02  -2.166e-03    4.894e-02  -2.082e-02
036/01   5.929e-04  -0.2506  -0.0734  -2.806e-03   2.942e-03  -2.264e-02  -4.246e-03   -2.264e-02  -4.202e-03
037/01   6.263e-04  -0.3666   1.0382  -4.046e-02   4.313e-02   2.210e-02  -7.637e-03    2.210e-02  -1.082e-01
038/01   5.677e-04  -0.2273  -0.0685   5.473e-03  -3.834e-03   2.592e-03  -1.269e-03    2.592e-03   2.533e-02
039/01   5.730e-04  -0.2333  -0.0433   1.172e-02  -1.040e-02  -2.550e-03  -3.052e-03   -2.550e-03   2.938e-02
040/01   5.843e-04  -0.2435   0.0188   3.968e-03  -3.310e-03   1.260e-02  -8.967e-03    1.260e-02   1.280e-02

041/01   5.859e-04  -0.2397  -0.0699   6.289e-03  -5.929e-03  -8.747e-03  -5.336e-03   -8.747e-03   2.001e-02
042/01   5.944e-04  -0.2410   0.0535   2.103e-02  -2.197e-02   2.379e-03   1.883e-03    2.379e-03   4.981e-02
043/01   5.784e-04  -0.2361   0.0009   2.769e-03  -1.380e-03   9.303e-03   2.359e-04    9.303e-03   1.774e-02
044/01   6.205e-04  -0.2910   0.4881  -4.102e-03   3.267e-03   1.602e-02   3.112e-04    1.602e-02  -1.339e-02
045/01   5.942e-04  -0.2529   0.1088   1.584e-03  -1.279e-03   2.419e-02  -4.092e-03    2.419e-02   1.623e-02
046/01   5.833e-04  -0.2524   0.3557   8.073e-03  -6.946e-03   5.400e-02   2.745e-03    5.400e-02   3.165e-02
047/01   6.210e-04  -0.2843   0.2874  -3.408e-05  -1.017e-03   2.974e-02   7.227e-04    2.974e-02  -1.212e-03
048/01   5.894e-04  -0.2394  -0.0634   2.626e-03  -2.536e-03   6.738e-03   2.922e-03    6.738e-03   1.442e-02
049/01   5.841e-04  -0.2982   0.8232  -2.495e-03   6.214e-03   4.192e-02   7.850e-04    4.192e-02  -1.861e-02
050/01   6.228e-04  -0.3149   0.6370  -1.637e-02   1.665e-02   4.290e-02  -4.425e-03    4.290e-02  -2.954e-02

051/01   5.838e-04  -0.2654   0.4685   9.509e-03  -7.340e-03   4.337e-02  -2.089e-03    4.337e-02   2.820e-02
052/01   6.005e-04  -0.3051   0.7748   3.266e-03  -1.002e-03   4.055e-02  -1.741e-03    4.055e-02  -3.787e-03
053/01   6.366e-04  -0.2800   0.1280  -1.928e-02   1.685e-02   1.581e-02  -5.188e-03    1.581e-02  -1.131e-02
054/01   5.832e-04  -0.3235   1.1047  -4.642e-03   1.062e-02   2.483e-02  -4.068e-03    2.483e-02  -3.240e-02
055/01   6.578e-04  -0.3008   0.3101   1.003e-03  -4.869e-03   1.513e-02   4.551e-05    1.513e-02   6.339e-03
056/01   6.247e-04  -0.2845   0.3268  -5.848e-03   4.880e-03   3.260e-02   1.785e-03    3.260e-02   3.806e-03
057/01   6.165e-04  -0.2735   0.1877  -6.264e-03   5.560e-03   2.287e-02  -2.238e-03    2.287e-02  -2.740e-03
058/01   5.751e-04  -0.2302  -0.0168   1.596e-02  -1.502e-02   4.946e-02  -1.445e-02    4.946e-02   4.645e-02
059/01   6.323e-04  -0.2753   0.0778  -2.607e-03   5.854e-04  -1.533e-05  -3.738e-03   -1.533e-05   4.688e-03
060/01   6.390e-04  -0.2893   0.2769  -9.915e-03   7.719e-03   9.950e-03  -9.224e-03    9.950e-03  -7.566e-03

061/01   6.413e-04  -0.2868   0.2333  -6.654e-03   4.360e-03   1.020e-02   5.964e-05    1.020e-02   4.522e-04
062/01   6.050e-04  -0.2560   0.1227   1.350e-02  -1.447e-02   7.040e-03  -1.586e-02    7.040e-03   3.653e-02
063/03   5.829e-04  -0.2937   0.8174   5.469e-03  -1.541e-03   2.717e-02  -1.143e-03    2.717e-02  -6.912e-03
064/01   5.779e-04  -0.2380  -0.0772  -1.802e-03   3.160e-03  -3.077e-03   4.889e-03   -3.077e-03  -3.344e-03
065/01   5.876e-04  -0.2803   0.5682   3.505e-03  -1.399e-03   2.499e-02  -1.013e-02    2.499e-02  -9.879e-03
066/01   5.953e-04  -0.2905   0.7118   1.545e-02  -1.330e-02   3.514e-03   1.400e-03    3.514e-03   1.426e-02
067/01   6.113e-04  -0.2606   0.1077   1.546e-02  -1.665e-02   7.422e-03   1.370e-03    7.422e-03   3.728e-02
068/01   6.293e-04  -0.2739   0.0737  -8.830e-03   6.566e-03   9.234e-03   3.825e-03    9.234e-03  -8.396e-03
069/01   6.377e-04  -0.2846   0.2163  -2.972e-03   7.374e-05   1.383e-02   2.089e-03    1.383e-02   3.613e-03
070/01   6.070e-04  -0.2790   0.4471   1.241e-02  -1.197e-02   2.803e-03   2.230e-03    2.803e-03   2.186e-02

071/01   6.039e-04  -0.2583   0.1184   4.945e-03  -5.362e-03   1.693e-02  -4.905e-03    1.693e-02   1.967e-02
072/01   6.114e-04  -0.2814   0.2954  -9.042e-03   9.401e-03   2.397e-02   5.028e-04    2.397e-02  -1.733e-02
073/01   6.410e-04  -0.2747   0.0447  -4.529e-03   9.636e-04  -5.022e-03  -3.328e-03   -5.022e-03   1.223e-03
074/01   6.183e-04  -0.2600   0.0585   8.893e-03  -1.073e-02  -8.004e-04   9.954e-03   -8.004e-04   2.284e-02
075/01   6.126e-04  -0.2718   0.3918   4.226e-03  -4.854e-03   2.753e-02   3.333e-03    2.753e-02   2.711e-02
076/01   5.908e-04  -0.2486  -0.0722  -3.259e-02   3.372e-02   1.395e-02  -3.340e-03    1.395e-02  -2.539e-02
077/01   5.190e-04  -0.2912   1.3692   2.114e-02  -9.648e-03   6.228e-02   1.641e-02    6.228e-02  -5.215e-03
078/01   6.035e-04  -0.2710   0.2845   2.653e-04   7.646e-05   3.257e-02   6.393e-03    3.257e-02   3.035e-03
079/01   6.488e-04  -0.2853   0.1709   8.365e-03  -1.180e-02   8.172e-04   4.428e-03    8.172e-04   2.122e-02





                                    -4-

 Sta/    OcSlope    Offset   Phcoeff   Tlcoeff     Tscoeff     Plcoeff    dOc/dtcoeff  dP/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)      (c3)     (c2)       (c4)        (c5)        (c6)        (c7)         (c8)        (c9)

080/01   6.129e-04  -0.2631   0.1327   7.027e-03  -7.696e-03   8.747e-03   8.419e-04    8.747e-03   2.793e-02

081/01   6.147e-04  -0.2915   0.6658   1.043e-02  -1.035e-02   1.587e-02   2.237e-04    1.587e-02   1.369e-02
082/01   6.168e-04  -0.2723   0.1482  -3.248e-03   2.435e-03   1.855e-02  -1.480e-03    1.855e-02   2.982e-03
083/01   5.894e-04  -0.2455  -0.1023  -9.014e-03   9.982e-03  -2.225e-02  -7.703e-04   -2.225e-02  -1.636e-02
084/01   5.744e-04  -0.2411  -0.0316  -1.251e-02   1.444e-02   1.150e-02  -6.268e-03    1.150e-02  -2.533e-02
085/01   6.173e-04  -0.2602  -0.0313  -1.795e-04  -1.716e-03  -3.911e-03   5.345e-03   -3.911e-03   3.868e-03
086/01   6.162e-04  -0.2682   0.1876   3.656e-03  -4.691e-03   3.209e-02   1.942e-04    3.209e-02   1.942e-02
087/01   6.148e-04  -0.2685   0.2210   5.091e-03  -5.686e-03   1.645e-02  -1.903e-04    1.645e-02   2.203e-02




























                                Appendix C

               CLIVAR/Carbon P02W:  Bottle Quality Comments


Comments from the Sample Logs and the results of STS/ODF's data
investigations are included in this report.  Units stated in these comments
are degrees Celsius for temperature, Unless otherwise noted, milliliters
per liter for oxygen and micromoles per liter for Silicate, Nitrate,
Nitrite, and Phosphate.  The sample number is the cast number times 100
plus the bottle number.  Investigation of data may include comparison of
bottle salinity and oxygen data with CTD data, review of data plots of the
station profile and adjoining stations, and re-reading of charts (i.e.
nutrients).


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1/2     201     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     202     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.025/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 1/2     202     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     203     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     204     salt         3    Bottle salinity 0.011 high, no         |
|                                   problems noted by analyst              |
| 1/2     205     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     206     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     207     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 1/2     208     salt         2    Ending worm bad, 4 attempts for a      |
|                                   reading, first two appeared good and   |
|                                   were used.                             |
| 2/1     115     bottle       9    "empty, did not close (jammed)"        |
| 3/1     114     bottle       3    "slight leak O-ring on 14"             |
| 3/1     115     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.08/-0.06 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in gradient.  |
| 4/1     118     o2           2    Bottle O2 12 umol/kg high, matches     |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 5/1     115     bottle       4    O2 Draw temp high; O2, nutrients and   |
|                                   salt indicate bottle closed shallower  |
|                                   than expected; mistrip.                |
| 5/1     115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 5/1     115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -5-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 5/1     115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 does not fit        |
|                                   profile, o2 was 65.61 too high         |
| 5/1     115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 5/1     115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salt does not fit      |
|                                   profile, 0.493 high                    |
| 5/1     115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 6/1     124     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.04/+0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 7/1     115     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 7/1     115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 7/1     115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 7/1     115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 11 umol/kg too high |
|                                   and does not fit profile               |
| 7/1     115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 7/1     115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salt -0.07 vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2.                           |
| 7/1     115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip, nutrients do not fit   |
|                                   profile                                |
| 7/1     127     o2           2    Bottle O2 14 umol/kg high, matches     |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 8/1     133     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.075/-0.085 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   very unstable reading, in a gradient.  |
| 10/1    106     bottle       4    bottom lanyard disconnected, bottom    |
|                                   end cap may have been closed for       |
|                                   duration of cast, O2 and salinity      |
|                                   values off                             |
| 10/1    106     no2          4    Bottle did not close properly          |
| 10/1    106     no3          4    Bottle did not close properly          |
| 10/1    106     o2           3    Discrete value 2 umol/kg high. Likely  |
|                                   sampling error.                        |
| 10/1    106     po4          4    Bottle did not close properly          |
| 10/1    106     salt         4    Deep salinity 0.002 low, bottle issues |
|                                   noted                                  |
| 10/1    106     sio3         4    Bottle did not close properly          |
| 10/1    127     o2           2    bottle o2 19 umol/kg high vs CTDOXY;   |
|                                   agrees with upcast CTDO, data ok.      |
| 10/1    131     o2           2    bottle o2 11 umol/kg low vs CTDOXY;    |
|                                   agrees with upcast CTDO, data ok.      |
| 11/1    122     bottle       3    "vent open prior to sampling"          |
| 12/1    102     bottle       3    vents and spigots left open on niskins |
|                                   2 through 6, all streaming water       |
|                                   during rosette recovery.  None were    |
|                                   sampled.                               |
| 12/1    103     bottle       3    vents and spigots left open on niskins |
|                                   2 through 6, all streaming water       |
|                                   during rosette recovery.  None were    |
|                                   sampled.                               |
| 12/1    104     bottle       3    vents and spigots left open on niskins |
|                                   2 through 6, all streaming water       |
|                                   during rosette recovery.  None were    |
|                                   sampled.                               |
| 12/1    105     bottle       3    vents and spigots left open on niskins |
|                                   2 through 6, all streaming water       |
|                                   during rosette recovery.  None were    |
|                                   sampled.                               |
| 12/1    106     bottle       3    vents and spigots left open on niskins |
|                                   2 through 6, all streaming water       |
|                                   during rosette recovery.  None were    |
|                                   sampled.                               |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+






                                    -6-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 12/1    126     salt         2    Samples in wrong order in box, sample  |
|                                   bottle numbers appear to correspond to |
|                                   Niskin bottle number, sample numbers   |
|                                   changed and now fit CTDS profile       |
| 12/1    127     salt         2    Samples in wrong order in box, sample  |
|                                   bottle numbers appear to correspond to |
|                                   Niskin bottle number, sample numbers   |
|                                   changed and now fit CTDS profile       |
| 12/1    128     salt         2    Samples in wrong order in box, sample  |
|                                   bottle numbers appear to correspond to |
|                                   Niskin bottle number, sample numbers   |
|                                   changed and now fit CTDS profile       |
| 13/5    501     bottle       3    Leaking due to unset O-ring on valve   |
| 13/5    501     no2          4    Bottle leaking, nutrient analyst       |
|                                   reports that nutrients do not fit      |
|                                   profile                                |
| 13/5    501     no3          4    Bottle leaking, nutrient analyst       |
|                                   reports that nutrients do not fit      |
|                                   profile                                |
| 13/5    501     o2           4    Bottle leaking, bottle o2 does not fit |
|                                   profile, -23 umol/kg too low           |
| 13/5    501     po4          4    Bottle leaking, nutrient analyst       |
|                                   reports that nutrients do not fit      |
|                                   profile                                |
| 13/5    501     salt         4    Bottle leaking, bottle salinity -0.05  |
|                                   vs CTDS1/CTDS2.                        |
| 13/5    501     sio3         4    Bottle leaking, nutrient analyst       |
|                                   reports that nutrients do not fit      |
|                                   profile                                |
| 13/5    521     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.08/-0.09 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 13/5    529     o2           2    bottle o2 18 umol/kg low vs CTDOXY;    |
|                                   agrees with upcast CTDO, data ok.      |
| 13/5    531     o2           2    O2 matches a feature in CTD o2, data   |
|                                   ok.                                    |
| 13/5    536     bottle       2    surface bottle tripped on-the-fly.     |
| 14/4    404     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 14/4    404     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    404     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    404     o2           4    Oxygen 13 umol/kg low, bottle mistrip  |
| 14/4    404     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    404     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.014 low              |
| 14/4    404     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    405     bottle       3    Damage on bottle near O-ring seat,     |
|                                   bottle replaced with s/n 37 before     |
|                                   station 15                             |
| 14/4    405     no2          4    Bottle leaking                         |
| 14/4    405     no3          4    Bottle leaking                         |
| 14/4    405     o2           4    Oxygen 92 umol/kg low, bottle leaking  |
|                                   at o-ring.                             |
| 14/4    405     po4          4    Bottle leaking                         |
| 14/4    405     salt         4    Bottle leaking, 0.275 low              |
| 14/4    405     sio3         4    Bottle leaking                         |
| 14/4    406     bottle       4    O2 Draw temp high, O2 and Nutrients    |
|                                   indicate bottle closed shallower than  |
|                                   expected; mistrip.                     |
| 14/4    406     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    406     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    406     o2           4    Oxygen 54 umol/kg high, mistrip        |
| 14/4    406     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    406     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.061 low              |
| 14/4    406     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    408     salt         3    Deep bottle salinity  +0.003 compared  |
|                                   to CTDS1/CTDS2.                        |
| 14/4    411     salt         3    Deep bottle salinity  +0.004 compared  |
|                                   to CTDS1/CTDS2.                        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -7-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 14/4    413     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 14/4    413     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    413     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    413     o2           4    Oxygen 25 umol/kg low, bottle mistrip  |
| 14/4    413     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    413     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.199 low              |
| 14/4    413     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    414     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 14/4    414     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    414     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    414     o2           4    Oxygen 8 umol/kg low, bottle mistrip   |
| 14/4    414     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    414     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.051 low              |
| 14/4    414     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 14/4    425     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.03/-0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 15/1    102     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 15/1    102     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    102     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    102     o2           4    Discrete o2 is approx. 15 umol/kg low, |
|                                   consistent with a mistrip              |
| 15/1    102     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    102     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.020 low              |
| 15/1    102     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    114     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 15/1    114     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    114     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    114     o2           4    Discrete o2 is approx. 20 umol/kg low, |
|                                   consistent with a mistrip              |
| 15/1    114     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    114     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.101 low              |
| 15/1    114     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    117     bottle       9    Sample Log: "Bottle 17 did not trip".  |
| 15/1    124     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 15/1    124     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    124     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    124     o2           4    Discrete o2 is approx. 20 umol/kg      |
|                                   high, consistent with a mistrip        |
| 15/1    124     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    124     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.087 high             |
| 15/1    124     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 15/1    128     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 16/1    130     o2           2    O2 matches feature in CTD data, ok.    |
| 17/1    106     salt         3    Deep bottle salinity 0.0025 high vs    |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 17/1    123     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.03/-0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 17/1    125     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.03/+0.01 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 18/1    113     bottle       4    O2 and Nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 18/1    113     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 18/1    113     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -8-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 18/1    113     o2           4    O2 8 umol/kg high, consistent with a   |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 18/1    113     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 18/1    113     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.241 low              |
| 18/1    113     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 18/1    136     bottle       3    "leakage due to no o-ring on top cap"  |
| 19/1    115     bottle       4    O2 draw Temp, O2, nutrients and        |
|                                   salinity indicate bottle closed        |
|                                   shallower than expected: mistrip.      |
| 19/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 19/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 19/1    115     o2           4    O2 127 umol/kg high, mistrip           |
| 19/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 19/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.092 low              |
| 19/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 19/1    120     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.03/-0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 20/1    131     bottle       4    O2, PO4, and salts indicate bottle     |
|                                   closed near surface, shallower than    |
|                                   expected; mistrip.                     |
| 20/1    131     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 20/1    131     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 20/1    131     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 approx 3 umol/kg    |
|                                   low                                    |
| 20/1    131     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 20/1    131     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.068 low              |
| 20/1    131     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 21/1    115     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed 75m shallower than expected:    |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 21/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 21/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 21/1    115     o2           4    O2 13 umol/kg high.  Likely mistrip.   |
| 21/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 21/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.005 low              |
| 21/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 21/1    122     salt         4    Bottle salinity 0.010 high, analyst    |
|                                   notes that "thimble loose when cap     |
|                                   removed, very wet. Possible            |
|                                   contamination"                         |
| 22/1    102     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.01/-0.01 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   deep gradient.                         |
| 22/1    105     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 22/1    105     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 22/1    105     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 22/1    105     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 8 umol/kg low       |
| 22/1    105     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 22/1    105     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.028 low              |
| 22/1    105     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 22/1    122     bottle       4    Leaking, lower O-ring fouled           |
| 23/1    105     bottle       9    Niskin did not close.                  |
| 23/1    106     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 23/1    106     no2          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    106     no3          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    106     o2           4    Bottle mistrip. O2 30 umol/kg low      |
| 23/1    106     po4          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    106     salt         4    Bottle mistrip. 0.079 low              |
| 23/1    106     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    107     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 23/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -9-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 23/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip. O2 6 umol/kg low       |
| 23/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip. 0.011 low              |
| 23/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    115     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 23/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip. 02 8 umol/kg high      |
| 23/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 23/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip. 0.060 low              |
| 23/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 24/1    126     salt         5    analyst reports that sample bottle was |
|                                   empty                                  |
| 26/1    107     bottle       4    O2 low, po4 high, indicate bottle      |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 26/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 26/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 26/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 26/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 26/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip. 0.008 low              |
| 26/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip.                        |
| 26/1    115     bottle       4    Salt and nutrients indicate bottle     |
|                                   closed shallower than expected (near   |
|                                   bottle 16 depth): mistrip              |
| 26/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 26/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 26/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 26/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 26/1    115     salt         4    Salt -0.055 vs CTDS1/CTDS2.            |
| 26/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 26/1    130     o2           2    Bottle O2 12 umol/kg high, matches     |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 26/1    131     o2           2    Bottle O2 15 umol/kg high, matches     |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 26/1    132     o2           2    Bottle O2 8 umol/kg high, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 27/1    101     salt         4    Salinity 0.008 high at bottom, analyst |
|                                   notes that "thimble popped"            |
| 27/1    104     bottle       2    Bottle 4 tripped on-the-fly slightly   |
|                                   shallower than bottle 3; operator      |
|                                   error.                                 |
| 27/1    105     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected;        |
|                                   mistrip.                               |
| 27/1    105     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 27/1    105     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 27/1    105     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 9 umol/kg low       |
| 27/1    105     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 27/1    105     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.007 low              |
| 27/1    105     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 27/1    111     salt         3    Salinity 0.008 low in low gradient, no |
|                                   issues noted by analyst                |
| 27/1    115     bottle       9    Bottle did not close                   |
| 27/1    122     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; in a    |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 27/1    125     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.095/-0.07 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 27/1    125     salt         2    Samples were in wrong order in case,   |
|                                   run in reverse order, fixed in data    |
|                                   file                                   |
| 27/1    126     salt         2    Samples were in wrong order in case,   |
|                                   run in reverse order, fixed in data    |
|                                   file                                   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+






                                    -10-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 27/1    127     salt         2    Samples were in wrong order in case,   |
|                                   run in reverse order, fixed in data    |
|                                   file                                   |
| 27/1    128     salt         2    Samples were in wrong order in case,   |
|                                   run in reverse order, fixed in data    |
|                                   file                                   |
| 27/1    129     salt         2    Samples were in wrong order in case,   |
|                                   run in reverse order, fixed in data    |
|                                   file                                   |
| 27/1    136     bottle       2    No soak at surface trip.               |
| 28/1    115     bottle       4    O2 Draw Temp about 1 degree elevated;  |
|                                   O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected         |
|                                   (750-800m): mistrip                    |
| 28/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 approx 74 umol/kg   |
|                                   high                                   |
| 28/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.309 low              |
| 28/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    126     o2           2    bottle o2 24 umol/kg low vs CTDOXY:    |
|                                   agrees with upcast, data ok.           |
| 28/1    127     o2           2    bottle o2 19 umol/kg low vs CTDOXY:    |
|                                   agrees with upcast, data ok.           |
| 28/1    136     bottle       4    O2 Draw Temp, O2 and nutrients         |
|                                   indicate bottle closed deeper than     |
|                                   expected (650-700m): mistrip. (Top o-  |
|                                   ring was found unseated/fixed; but     |
|                                   that would not cause a pre-trip.)      |
| 28/1    136     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    136     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    136     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 approx 87 umol/kg   |
|                                   low                                    |
| 28/1    136     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 28/1    136     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.067 low              |
| 28/1    136     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 29/1    115     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 29/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 29/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 29/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, o2 approx 10 umol/kg   |
|                                   high                                   |
| 29/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 29/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.319 low              |
| 29/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 29/1    128     o2           5    Operator error. Sample lost.           |
| 29/1    129     o2           5    Operator error. Sample lost.           |
| 29/1    130     o2           2    Bottle O2 10 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 30/1    101     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 30/1    101     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    101     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    101     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 28 umol/kg low  |
| 30/1    101     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    101     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.020 low              |
| 30/1    101     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    104     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 30/1    104     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    104     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    104     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 48 umol/kg low  |
| 30/1    104     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    104     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.040 low              |
| 30/1    104     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -11-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 30/1    105     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 30/1    105     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    105     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    105     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 117 umol/kg low |
| 30/1    105     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    105     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.314 low              |
| 30/1    105     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    107     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 30/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 102 umol/kg low |
| 30/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.303 low              |
| 30/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 30/1    113     bottle       9    Bottle did not close.                  |
| 30/1    115     bottle       2    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 31/1    101     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 31/1    101     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    101     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    101     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 112 umol/kg     |
|                                   low.                                   |
| 31/1    101     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    101     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.467 low              |
| 31/1    101     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    106     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 31/1    106     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    106     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    106     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 82 umol/kg      |
|                                   high.                                  |
| 31/1    106     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    106     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.052 high             |
| 31/1    106     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    107     bottle       4    O2, nutrients and salt indicate bottle |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 31/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 88 umol/kg low. |
| 31/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.146 low              |
| 31/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    115     bottle       4    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check. O2, nutrients and     |
|                                   salt indicate bottle closed shallower  |
|                                   than expected: mistrip                 |
| 31/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, Oxygen 129 umol/kg     |
|                                   high.                                  |
| 31/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.079 high             |
| 31/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 31/1    123     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.035/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 32/1    102     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 32/1    102     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    102     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -12-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 32/1    102     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 79 umol/kg low.     |
| 32/1    102     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    102     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.096 low              |
| 32/1    102     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    105     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 32/1    105     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    105     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    105     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 43 umol/kg low.     |
| 32/1    105     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    105     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.056 low              |
| 32/1    105     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    107     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 32/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 64 umol/kg low.     |
| 32/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.093 low              |
| 32/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    115     bottle       2    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 32/1    122     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed shallower than expected:        |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 32/1    122     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    122     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    122     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 40 umol/kg low.     |
| 32/1    122     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    122     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.018 low              |
| 32/1    122     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 32/1    132     o2           2    O2 draw temp typo (entered as 175 not  |
|                                   17.5), fixed.                          |
| 33/1    105     bottle       9    Bottle did not close                   |
| 33/1    111     bottle       4    O2 draw temp high, O2 value high;      |
|                                   indicate bottle closed shallower than  |
|                                   expected (near bottle 30 depth):       |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 33/1    111     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 33/1    111     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 33/1    111     o2           4    o2 approx 70 umol/kg too high          |
| 33/1    111     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 33/1    111     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.070 high             |
| 33/1    111     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 33/1    115     bottle       2    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 33/1    133     o2           2    Bottle O2 9 umol/kg low, matches       |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 33/1    134     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.04/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 34/1    103     salt         3    Salinity does not appear to fit        |
|                                   profile, code questionable as per      |
|                                   chief scientist                        |
| 34/1    122     bottle       4    "Bad O-ring on bottle 22"              |
| 36/1    101     o2           2    O2 appears slightly high, but raw CTDO |
|                                   and transmissometer show a small       |
|                                   feature at cast bottom.                |
| 36/1    107     bottle       4    O2 indicate bottle closed shallower    |
|                                   than expected (same as 108 depth):     |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 36/1    107     o2           4    O2 low, similar to data at bottle 108. |
|                                   Probable mistrip.                      |
| 36/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salinity 0.005 low     |
| 36/1    113     bottle       4    O2 indicate bottle closed shallower    |
|                                   than expected (same as 114 depth):     |
|                                   mistrip                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -13-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 36/1    113     o2           4    O2 low, similar to data at bottle 114. |
|                                   Probable mistrip.                      |
| 36/1    113     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salinity 0.035 low     |
| 36/1    115     bottle       4    O2 indicate bottle closed shallower    |
|                                   than expected (same as 116 depth):     |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 36/1    115     o2           4    O2 low, similar to data at bottle 116. |
|                                   Probable mistrip.                      |
| 36/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salinity 0.062 low     |
| 36/1    128     o2           2    Bottle O2 13 umol/kg low, fits upcast  |
| 37/1    113     bottle       4    O2 indicate bottle closed shallower    |
|                                   than expected (near bottle 14 depth):  |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 37/1    113     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    113     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    113     o2           4    O2 7 umol/kg low.  Bottle mistrip.     |
| 37/1    113     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    113     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.053 low              |
| 37/1    113     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    115     bottle       4    O2 and salinity indicate bottle closed |
|                                   shallower than expected: mistrip       |
| 37/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    115     o2           4    O2 7 umol/kg high.  Bottle mistrip.    |
| 37/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.148 low              |
| 37/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 37/1    122     salt         3    High gradient salinity 0.009 high      |
| 37/1    126     o2           2    Bottle O2 6 umol/kg low, matches       |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 37/1    127     o2           2    Bottle O2 12 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 37/1    128     o2           2    Bottle O2 6 umol/kg low, matches       |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 38/1    104     bottle       4    O2 and nutrients indicate bottle       |
|                                   closed deeper than expected (near      |
|                                   bottle 3 depth): mistrip               |
| 38/1    104     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    104     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    104     o2           4    O2 high, bottle mistrip, O2 2 umol/kg  |
|                                   high                                   |
| 38/1    104     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    104     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.003 low, deep        |
| 38/1    104     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    113     bottle       4    O2 draw temp, o2, nutrients and        |
|                                   salinity indicate bottle closed        |
|                                   shallower than expected: mistrip       |
| 38/1    113     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    113     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    113     o2           4    O2 high, bottle mistrip, O2 114        |
|                                   umol/kg high                           |
| 38/1    113     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    113     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.331 low              |
| 38/1    113     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    115     bottle       4    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check. Salinity indicates    |
|                                   bottle closed shallower than expected: |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 38/1    115     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    115     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    115     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 3 umol/kg low       |
| 38/1    115     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    115     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salinity 0.013 low     |
| 38/1    115     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 38/1    134     d15n         5    "d15N-NO3/d18O-NO3 A0197 from number   |
|                                   34 is empty"                           |
| 38/1    134     d18o         5    "d15N-NO3/d18O-NO3 A0197 from number   |
|                                   34 is empty"                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -14-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 39/1    101     salt         4    Deep salinity 0.006 high, analyst      |
|                                   notes that "thimble came off with cap" |
| 39/1    115     bottle       2    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 39/1    122     bottle       3    Bottle leak, vent not tight            |
| 39/1    122     o2           4    o2 4 umol/kg high, sample log reports  |
|                                   bottle leak                            |
| 39/1    123     salt         2    Salinity 0.008 high, high gradient     |
| 40/1    115     bottle       2    trip 14/15 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 40/1    122     o2           2    o2 6 umol/kg high, in high gradient    |
| 40/1    131     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 40/1    133     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 41/1    108     salt         3    deep salt 0.006 high, analyst notes    |
|                                   that thimble came off with cap         |
| 41/1    115     bottle       2    trip 15/16 at same depth for bottle 15 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 41/1    122     o2           2    o2 5 umol/kg low, in high gradient     |
| 41/1    130     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 42/1    102     salt         3    Salinity does not appear to fit trend  |
|                                   of bottle salinity                     |
| 42/1    123     salt         3    salinity 0.010 high, in gradient       |
| 42/1    129     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 42/1    133     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 43/1    101     salt         3    Salt 0.003 high, deep                  |
| 43/1    103     salt         3    Salt 0.003 high, deep                  |
| 43/1    126     o2           2    in region of high variability          |
| 44/1    121     o2           2    O2 on high gradient, consistent with   |
|                                   CTD data                               |
| 44/1    126     o2           3    O2 9.6 umol/kg low, gradient           |
| 45/1    106     o2           3    Bad endpoint, however data seems       |
|                                   acceptable. Coded questionable.        |
| 45/1    133     o2           2    o2 in region of large gradients, 12    |
|                                   umol/kg high, matches upcast           |
| 45/1    135     bottle       9    Bottle did not close                   |
| 46/1    133     o2           2    o2 10 umol/kg high, in highly variable |
|                                   region, matches upcast                 |
| 46/1    133     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.05/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable reading, in a gradient.  |
| 47/1    130     o2           2    o2 5 umol/kg high, in highly variable  |
|                                   region                                 |
| 48/1    107     bottle       4    Salinity, o2 indicate bottle closed    |
|                                   shallower than expected (near bottle 8 |
|                                   depth): mistrip                        |
| 48/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, O2 4 umol/kg low       |
| 48/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.003 low, deep        |
| 48/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    120     bottle       4    O2, salt, and nutrients indicate       |
|                                   bottle closed shallower than expected: |
|                                   mistrip                                |
| 48/1    120     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    120     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    120     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, oxygen 5 umol/kg low.  |
| 48/1    120     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    120     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, salinity 0.05 low      |
| 48/1    120     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 48/1    123     o2           2    o2 8 umol/kg low, on high gradient     |
| 48/1    134     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.05 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; very     |
|                                   unstable reading, in a gradient.       |
| 51/1    132     o2           2    Bottle O2 10 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 51/1    133     o2           2    Bottle O2 15 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 53/1    112     salt         3    Deep salinity is -0.0025 vs            |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2.                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -15-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 53/1    127     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.05 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; unstable |
|                                   reading, in a gradient.                |
| 53/1    134     bottle       2    winch to 35m, back down to 40m for     |
|                                   bottle 34 trip.                        |
| 53/1    135     bottle       9    Bottle did not close                   |
| 54/1    125     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.04/+0.065 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable reading, in a gradient.  |
| 54/1    125     salt         3    Bottle salt 0.011 high, no problems    |
|                                   noted by analyst                       |
| 54/1    135     bottle       9    Bottle did not close                   |
| 55/1    134     bottle       2    bottle 34 triggered 100m shallower     |
|                                   than planned - op.error.               |
| 56/1    107     salt         3    Bottle salt 0.005 high, deep           |
| 56/1    122     salt         3    Bottle salt 0.008 high, in a gradient  |
| 56/1    135     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.14 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; very     |
|                                   unstable reading, in a gradient.       |
| 56/1    135     salt         3    Salinity 0.04 vs CTDS1/CTDS2; in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 57/1    134     o2           2    O2 redrawn due to sampling error       |
| 57/1    136     bottle       3    Bottle had bad leak                    |
| 58/1    101     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    102     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    103     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    104     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    105     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    106     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    107     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    108     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    109     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    110     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    111     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    112     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    113     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    114     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    115     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    116     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    117     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    118     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    119     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    120     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    121     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    122     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    123     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    124     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    125     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    126     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    127     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    128     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    129     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    130     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    131     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    132     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    133     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    134     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    135     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 58/1    136     bottle       9    No bottles closed                      |
| 59/1    106     salt         3    salt 0.003 high, deep                  |
| 59/1    119     salt         3    salt 0.006 high, on gradient           |
| 59/1    125     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.035/+0.015 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   unstable reading, in a gradient.       |
| 59/1    128     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.02/-0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable reading, in a gradient.       |
| 59/1    132     salt         2    salt 0.009 high, highly variable       |
|                                   region                                 |
| 59/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 60/1    106     salt         3    salt 0.004 high, deep                  |
| 60/1    124     salt         2    Salt 0.006 high, in highly variable    |
|                                   region                                 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -16-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 60/1    125     salt         2    Salt 0.008 high, in highly variable    |
|                                   region                                 |
| 60/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 61/1    127     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.011/+0.009 vs. CTDT1/CTDT2, |
|                                   unstable reading in a gradient         |
| 61/1    129     salt         4    Bottle salinity 0.010 high, analyst    |
|                                   notes "bottle overfilled, thimble      |
|                                   loose, came off with cap"              |
| 61/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 62/1    126     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.022/+0.029 vs CTDT1/CTDT2,  |
|                                   unstable reading in gradient           |
| 62/1    128     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.028/+0.026 vs CTDT1/CTDT2,  |
|                                   unstable reading                       |
| 62/1    131     o2           2    Bottle O2 5 umol/kg high, matches      |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 62/1    133     o2           2    Bottle O2 5 umol/kg low, matches       |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 62/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 63/3    324     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.017/-0.014 vs CTD1/CTD2,    |
|                                   unstable reading in a gradient         |
| 63/3    334     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.017/-0.018 vs CTD1/CTD2,    |
|                                   unstable reading                       |
| 63/3    335     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 64/1    135     bottle       9    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface). Bottle 35 did |
|                                   not close.                             |
| 64/1    135     no2          9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 64/1    135     no3          9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 64/1    135     o2           9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 64/1    135     po4          9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 64/1    135     salt         9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 64/1    135     sio3         9    Bottle 35 did not close                |
| 65/1    125     bottle       9    bottom cap did not close: lanyard      |
|                                   hangup, re-routed.                     |
| 65/1    132     o2           3    Bottle O2, 10 umol/kg low, does not    |
|                                   appear to fit up or down cast          |
| 65/1    133     bottle       2    bottle 33 taken just below strong      |
|                                   gradient (big down/up difference).     |
| 65/1    133     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable reading, in a gradient.  |
| 65/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 66/1    101     bottle       2    Leaking carousel solenoid coated with  |
|                                   Scotchkote prior to cast.              |
| 66/1    106     salt         3    Salt 0.003 high, deep                  |
| 66/1    112     bottle       2    Leaking carousel solenoid coated with  |
|                                   Scotchkote prior to cast.              |
| 66/1    112     salt         3    Salinity 0.01 high vs CTDS1/CTDS2,     |
|                                   deep.                                  |
| 66/1    135     bottle       9    Leaking carousel solenoid coated with  |
|                                   Scotchkote prior to cast. Bottle 35    |
|                                   intentionally tripped out of order     |
|                                   (last/at surface); did not close       |
|                                   despite 3 attempts to trigger it.      |
| 67/1    112     bottle       9    bottle 12 did not trip                 |
| 67/1    135     bottle       9    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface). 7 attempts to |
|                                   trigger it failed to close it.         |
| 68/1    112     bottle       2    trip 11/12 at same depth for bottle 12 |
|                                   integrity check. Niskin 12 did not     |
|                                   trip; bottle 12 removed for subsequent |
|                                   casts.                                 |
| 68/1    126     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.045/-0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   in a gradient.                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -17-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 68/1    129     o2           2    Bottle O2 matches up cast, highly      |
|                                   variable region                        |
| 68/1    135     bottle       2    trip 36/35 at same depth (surface) for |
|                                   bottle 35 integrity check. bottle 35   |
|                                   intentionally tripped out of order     |
|                                   (last/at surface).                     |
| 69/1    125     salt         3    Salinity 0.008 high compared to CTD    |
|                                   Salinity, in a gradient                |
| 69/1    129     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.055 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   in a gradient.                         |
| 69/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 70/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 71/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 72/1    117     no2          5    nutrient sample bottle was empty -     |
|                                   sampling error, lost.                  |
| 72/1    117     no3          5    nutrient sample bottle was empty -     |
|                                   sampling error, lost.                  |
| 72/1    117     po4          5    nutrient sample bottle was empty -     |
|                                   sampling error, lost.                  |
| 72/1    117     sio3         5    nutrient sample bottle was empty -     |
|                                   sampling error, lost.                  |
| 72/1    132     o2           3    Bottle O2 15 umol/kg high, in highly   |
|                                   variable region                        |
| 72/1    133     salt         3    Bottle salinity 0.009 high, in         |
|                                   gradient                               |
| 72/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface). Trip 36/35 at |
|                                   same depth (surface) for bottle 35     |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 73/1    129     bottle       9    lanyard hooked on recovery, bottle     |
|                                   empty                                  |
| 73/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 74/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 75/1    110     salt         4    Salinity 0.016 low vs CTD Salinity, no |
|                                   problems noted by analyst, other       |
|                                   bottle parameters OK                   |
| 75/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 76/1    101     bottle       9    Niskin 1 did not close                 |
| 76/1    129     o2           2    Bottle o2 11 umol/kg high, matches     |
|                                   upcast                                 |
| 76/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 77/1    101     bottle       9    bottle 1 triggered twice "just in      |
|                                   case", but Niskin 1 did not close;     |
|                                   bottle 1 removed for subsequent casts. |
| 77/1    133     salt         3    Salinity 0.018 low, high gradient      |
| 77/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 78/1    122     salt         4    Bottle salinity 0.032 high, analyst    |
|                                   notes "Thimble popped, probable water  |
|                                   intrusion"                             |
| 78/1    131     o2           3    Bottle Oxygen 22 umol/kg high, in      |
|                                   highly variable region                 |
| 78/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 79/1    102     salt         3    bottle salinity 0.004 high, deep       |
| 79/1    118     bottle       3    "NB 18 has decent leak"                |
| 79/1    133     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.19/-0.18 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   extremely unstable reading, in a       |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 79/1    133     salt         3    Bottle salinity 0.007 high, in a       |
|                                   gradient                               |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -18-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.     Property   Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 79/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 80/1    118     bottle       2    new O-rings on bottoms of niskins 18   |
|                                   and 19 prior to cast.                  |
| 80/1    119     bottle       2    new O-rings on bottoms of niskins 18   |
|                                   and 19 prior to cast.                  |
| 80/1    130     salt         3    Salinity 0.008 high, in gradient       |
| 80/1    135     bottle       2    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface).               |
| 81/1    115     salt         3    Bottle salt 0.014 high, no problems    |
|                                   noted by analyst, CTD salinity         |
|                                   channels in agreement and stable,      |
|                                   other parameters ok                    |
| 81/1    120     bottle       2    bottle 20 fired at 960m instead of     |
|                                   1035m; op. error.                      |
| 81/1    126     reft         3    SBE35RT +0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;         |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   mild gradient.                         |
| 81/1    127     salt         3    Bottle salt 0.010 high, no problems    |
|                                   noted by analyst                       |
| 81/1    128     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.025/-0.030 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 81/1    129     reft         3    SBE35RT -0.020/-0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 81/1    135     bottle       9    bottle 35 intentionally tripped out of |
|                                   order (last/at surface); did not       |
|                                   close, despite 3 attempts to trigger   |
|                                   it. Bottle 35 removed for rest of leg  |
|                                   1.                                     |
| 82/1    102     salt         3    Salinity 0.004 high, deep              |
| 82/1    104     salt         4    Deep salinity 0.004 high, analyst      |
|                                   notes "Severe bubble sticking, used    |
|                                   approx 50 percent of sample"           |
| 82/1    105     salt         4    Deep salinity 0.005 high, analyst      |
|                                   notes "Thimble came out with cap.      |
|                                   Severe bubble sticking, used approx 50 |
|                                   percent of sample"                     |
| 82/1    106     salt         3    Salinity 0.007 high, deep              |
| 82/1    121     o2           2    Bottle matches up cast, value appears  |
|                                   to be ok                               |
| 83/1    132     o2           2    Bottle O2 15 umol/kg high, matches up  |
|                                   cast                                   |
| 84/1    101     bottle       2    trip 1/2 at same depth (bottom) for    |
|                                   bottle 1 integrity check.              |
| 84/1    112     bottle       2    trip 11/12 at same depth for bottle 12 |
|                                   integrity check.                       |
| 84/1    120     bottle       2    bottle 20 fired at 960m instead of     |
|                                   1035m; op. error.                      |
| 84/1    136     bottle       2    Sudden rain squall a few minutes       |
|                                   before top bottle trip.                |
| 85/1    124     o2           2    Bottle O2 4 umol/kg low, matches up    |
|                                   cast, on gradient                      |
| 85/1    130     o2           3    Bottle O2 8 umol/kg high, matches up   |
|                                   cast, in region of high variability    |
| 87/1    107     bottle       4    O2 draw temp high, O2 Value high,      |
|                                   indicate bottle closed shallower than  |
|                                   expected: mistrip                      |
| 87/1    107     no2          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 87/1    107     no3          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 87/1    107     o2           4    Bottle mistrip, bottle O2 75 umol/kg   |
|                                   high                                   |
| 87/1    107     po4          4    Bottle mistrip                         |
| 87/1    107     salt         4    Bottle mistrip, 0.422 low              |
| 87/1    107     sio3         4    Bottle mistrip                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+


                                Appendix D




                                    -19-

      CLIVAR/Carbon P02W:  Pre-Cruise Sensor Laboratory Calibrations



+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                       Table of Contents                                        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Instrument/              Manufacturer     Serial        Station  Calib          Appendix D Page |
|Sensor                   and Model No.    Number        Range    Date            (Un-Numbered)  |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                         Paroscientific                                                         |
|PRESS (Pressure)         Digiquartz       796-98627     1-13/4   18-Dec-2012           1        |
|                         401K-105                                                               |
|                         Paroscientific                                                         |
|PRESS (Pressure)         Digiquartz       914-110547    13/5-87  14-Jun-2012           4        |
|                         401K-105                                                               |
|                                                                                                |
|T1 (Primary Temp.)       SBE3plus         03P-4138      1-87     24-Jan-2013           7        |
|T2 (Secondary Temp.)     SBE3plus         03P-4226      1-87     24-Jan-2013           8        |
|                                                                                                |
|REFT (Reference Temp.)   SBE35            3528706-0035  1-87     7-Dec-2012            9        |
|REFT Post-Cruise                                                 18-Jun-2013          10        |
|                                                                                                |
|C1 (Primary Cond.)       SBE4C            04-2569       1-87     16-Jan-2013          11        |
|C1 Post-Cruise                                                   26-Jun-2013          12        |
|                                                                                                |
|C2a (Secondary Cond.)    SBE4C            04-2112       1-62     24-Jan-2013          13        |
|C2a Post-Cruise                                                  26-Jun-2013          14        |
|                                                                                                |
|C2b (Secondary Cond.)    SBE4C            04-3058       63-87    2-Nov-2012           15        |
|C2b Post-Cruise                                                  26-Jun-2013          16        |
|                                                                                                |
|O2 (Dissolved Oxygen)    SBE43            43-0275       1-19     12-Jul-2012          17        |
|O2 (Dissolved Oxygen)    SBE43            43-1071       20-87    12-Jul-2012          18        |
|                                                                                                |
|RINKO Optical O2 (+ T)   Rinko III        105           25-87    7-Aug-2012           19        |
|                         ARO-CAV                                                                |
|                                                                                                |
|TRANS (Transmissometer)  WET Labs C-Star  CST-327DR     1-87     19-Jul-2012          21        |
|                                                                 Ship Air Cals        22        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+








                        Pressure Calibration Report
                        STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0796
CALIBRATION DATE:     18-DEC-2012
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   09P CTD Prs s/n: 98627

C1= -4.967155E+4
C2=  7.752805E-1
C3=  1.116556E-2
DI = 3.856757E-2
D2=  0.000000E+0
T1=  2.989470E+1
T2= -1.433939E-4
T3=  4.730200E-6
T4= -1.357591E-8
T5=  0.000000E+0
AD590M=  1.28520E-2
AD590B= -8.71454E+0
Slope =  1.00000000E+0
Offset = 0.00000000E+0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: RUSKA Model: 2400 s/n: 34336 
t0=t1+t2*td+t3*td*td+t4*td*td*td 
w = 1 -t0*t0*f*f 
Pressure = (0.6894759*((c1+c2*td+c3*td*td)*w*(1-(d1+d2*td)*w)-14.7)

                                Standard-   Standard-
  Sensor               Sensor     Sensor      Sensor   Sensor   Bath
  Output   Standard  New Coefs  Prev Coefs  NEW Coefs   _Temp  _Temp
---------  --------  ---------  ----------  ---------  ------  ------
33455.672     0.16       0.37      -0.11      -0.21    -1.22   -1.479
33633.110   364.95     364.88       0.16       0.07    -1.21   -1.479
33799.673   709.13     709.08       0.13       0.04    -1.21   -1.479
33965.288  1053.30    1053.28       0.11       0.02    -1.21   -1.479
34130.002  1397.55    1397.53       0.11       0.02    -1.20   -1.479
34456.687  2086.03    2086.03       0.07      -0.00    -1.20   -1.479
34779.839  2774.56    2774.60       0.05      -0.03    -1.20   -1.479
35099.547  3463.19    3463.20       0.06      -0.01    -1.20   -1.479
35415.915  4151.88    4151.86       0.09       0.01    -1.20   -1.479
35729.045  4840.62    4840.61       0.10       0.01    -1.20   -1.479
36039.021  5529.43    5529.43       0.10      -0.00    -1.18   -1.479
36345.902  6218.31    6218.28       0.14       0.03    -1.17   -1.479
36649.793  6907.24    6907.21       0.16       0.03    -1.17   -1.479
36345.924  6218.31    6218.33       0.10      -0.01    -1.17   -1.479
36039.021  5529.43    5529.42       0.10       0.01    -1.17   -1.479
35729.060  4840.62    4840.63       0.08      -0.01    -1.17   -1.479
35415.942  4151.87    4151.91       0.05      -0.03    -1.17   -1.479
35099.572  3463.18    3463.24       0.02      -0.05    -1.17   -1.479
34779.855  2774.56    2774.61       0.02      -0.05    -1.17   -1.479
34456.706  2086.02    2086.06       0.04      -0.03    -1.17   -1.479
34130.016  1397.55    1397.55       0.09       0.01    -1.17   -1.478
33965.287  1053.30    1053.26       0.12       0.04    -1.17   -1.478
33799.672   709.13     709.06       0.15       0.06    -1.17   -1.478
33633.103   364.95     364.85       0.19       0.10    -1.17   -1.478
33456.738     0.16       0.39      -0.35      -0.23     6.81    6.529
33634.195   364.95     364.88      -0.05       0.07     6.83    6.529
33800.777   709.13     709.06      -0.06       0.06     6.83    6.530
33966.420  1053.30    1053.26      -0.09       0.04     6.84    6.529
34131.180  1397.55    1397.55      -0.13      -0.00     6.84    6.529
34457.912  2086.02    2086.04      -0.15      -0.02     6.84    6.529
34781.118  2774.56    2774.60      -0.17      -0.05     6.85    6.529
35100.866  3463.18    3463.18      -0.13      -0.00     6.86    6.530
35417.299  4151.87    4151.88      -0.12      -0.01     6.86    6.529
35730.459  4840.61    4840.58      -0.07       0.03     6.86    6.529
36040.487  5529.42    5529.42      -0.09      -0.00     6.86    6.530
35730.458  4840.61    4840.58      -0.07       0.03     6.86    6.529
35417.284  4151.87    4151.84      -0.09       0.02     6.86    6.530
35100.888  3463.18    3463.23      -0.17      -0.05     6.86    6.529
34781.132  2774.56    2774.63      -0.20      -0.07     6.86    6.529
34457.922  2086.02    2086.05      -0.16      -0.03     6.86    6.529
34131.180  1397.55    1397.55      -0.13       0.00     6.86    6.529
33966.422  1053.30    1053.26      -0.09       0.04     6.86    6.530
33800.776   709.13     709.05      -0.06       0.07     6.86    6.529
33634.188   364.95     364.86      -0.03       0.09     6.86    6.530
33457.163     0.16       0.39      -0.34      -0.24    16.50   16.169
33634.656   364.95     364.88      -0.04       0.07    16.50   16.169
33801.275   709.13     709.07      -0.05       0.06    16.51   16.169
33966.957  1053.30    1053.27      -0.08       0.02    16.51   16.169
34131.747  1397.55    1397.56      -0.11      -0.01    16.53   16.169
34458.546  2086.02    2086.04      -0.11      -0.02    16.53   16.169
34781.799  2774.56    2774.57      -0.09      -0.01    16.53   16.169
35101.634  3463.18    3463.19      -0.08      -0.01    16.54   16.169
35418.113  4151.87    4151.85      -0.03       0.02    16.54   16.169
35101.638  3463.18    3463.20      -0.09      -0.02    16.54   16.169
34781.797  2774.56    2774.56      -0.08      -0.00    16.54   16.169
34458.552  2086.02    2086.05      -0.12      -0.03    16.54   16.169
34131.746  1397.55    1397.55      -0.10      -0.00    16.55   16.169
33966.957  1053.30    1053.27      -0.08       0.02    16.54   16.169
33801.280   709.13     709.08      -0.06       0.05    16.55   16.169
33634.645   364.95     364.86      -0.01       0.09    16.55   16.169
33456.555     0.16       0.36      -0.27      -0.20    27.93   27.386
33634.102   364.95     364.86       0.02       0.09    27.94   27.386
33800.770   709.13     709.05       0.01       0.08    27.94   27.386
33966.495  1053.30    1053.25      -0.02       0.05    27.94   27.386
34131.325  1397.55    1397.53      -0.03       0.03    27.94   27.386
34458.221  2086.02    2086.03      -0.05      -0.01    27.94   27.386
34781.571  2774.56    2774.58      -0.05      -0.02    27.94   27.386
35101.491  3463.18    3463.21      -0.04      -0.03    27.94   27.386
34781.576  2774.56    2774.59      -0.06      -0.03    27.94   27.386
34458.227  2086.02    2086.04      -0.06      -0.02    27.94   27.386
34131.329  1397.55    1397.53      -0.04       0.02    27.93   27.386
33966.502  1053.30    1053.26      -0.03       0.03    27.93   27.386
33800.779   709.13     709.07      -0.01       0.06    27.93   27.386
33634.088   364.95     364.83       0.05       0.12    27.93   27.386
33456.538     0.16       0.32      -0.24      -0.16    27.93   27.386





                        Pressure Calibration Report
                        STS/ODF Calibration Facility

SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0914
CALIBRATION DATE:     14-JUN-2012
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   09P CTD Prs s/n: 110547

C1= -4.348919E+4
C2=  1.845929E-2
C3=  1.285114E-2
D1=  3.610893E-2
D2=  0.000000E+0
T1=  3.006810E+1
T2= -2.604375E-4
T3=  3.050306E-6
T4=  3.013015E-8
T5=  0.000000E+0
AD59OM=  1.28789E-2
AD59OB= -8.81353E+0
Slope =  1.00000000E+0
Offset = 0.00000000E+0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: RUSKA Model: 2400 s/n: 34336 
t0=tl+t2*td+t3*td*td+t4*td*td*td 
w = 1-t0*t0*f*f
Pressure = (0.6894759*((c1+c2*td+c3*td*td)*w*(1-(d1+d2*td)*w)-14.7)

                                Standard-   Standard-
  Sensor               Sensor     Sensor      Sensor   Sensor   Bath
  Output   Standard  New Coefs  Prev Coefs  NEW Coefs   _Temp  _Temp
---------  --------  ---------  ----------  ---------  ------  ------
33268.311     0.17       0.33      0.30       -0.16     27.13  27.334
33469.730   364.96     364.72      0.70        0.24     27.17  27.334
33658.765   709.13     708.99      0.59        0.14     27.20  27.334
33846.469  1053.30    1053.05      0.68        0.25     27.22  27.334
34033.137  1397.55    1397.39      0.58        0.16     27.25  27.334
34402.840  2086.02    2085.81      0.58        0.22     27.27  27.334
34768.150  2774.56    2774.48      0.39        0.08     27.30  27.334
35129.097  3463.18    3463.19      0.22       -0.01     27.32  27.335
34768.251  2774.55    2774.66      0.20       -0.11     27.34  27.334
34403.060  2086.03    2086.21      0.19       -0.19     27.34  27.334
34033.328  1397.56    1397.73      0.25       -0.18     27.38  27.334
33846.696  1053.30    1053.46      0.29       -0.15     27.39  27.334
33658.930   709.13     709.28      0.31       -0.15     27.40  27.334
33469.936   364.96     365.08      0.36       -0.12     27.43  27.334
33267.305     0.17       0.36      0.01       -0.20     16.22  16.201
33468.719   364.96     364.80      0.37        0.16     16.24  16.201
33657.662   709.13     708.97      0.38        0.16     16.25  16.201
33845.400  1053.30    1053.15      0.37        0.15     16.26  16.201
34031.996  1397.56    1397.42      0.36        0.14     16.26  16.201
34401.640  2086.03    2085.83      0.40        0.20     16.30  16.201
34766.833  2774.56    2774.40      0.33        0.16     16.30  16.201
35127.694  3463.19    3463.07      0.25        0.12     16.31  16.201
35484.333  4151.88    4151.78      0.18        0.09     16.33  16.201
35836.896  4840.62    4840.59      0.06        0.03     16.34  16.201
35484.449  4151.87    4152.00     -0.05       -0.14     16.35  16.201
35127.844  3463.19    3463.34     -0.02       -0.16     16.35  16.201
34767.039  2774.57    2774.78     -0.04       -0.21     16.35  16.201
34401.847  2086.03    2086.20      0.03       -0.17     16.36  16.201
34032.184  1397.56    1397.73      0.04       -0.18     16.36  16.201
33845.563  1053.30    1053.42      0.10       -0.12     16.36  16.201
33657.801   709.13     709.19      0.16       -0.05     16.39  16.201
33468.843   364.96     364.98      0.19       -0.03     16.40  16.201
33265.457     0.17       0.44      0.08       -0.27      6.65   6.224
33466.819   364.95     364.83      0.48        0.12      6.65   6.224
33655.717   709.12     708.97      0.53        0.16      6.65   6.224
33843.418  1053.29    1053.11      0.56        0.18      6.67   6.224
34030.002  1397.54    1397.41      0.51        0.13      6.65   6.224
34399.609  2086.00    2085.84      0.55        0.16      6.68   6.224
34764.734  2774.52    2774.37      0.54        0.15      6.68   6.224
35125.528  3463.14    3462.99      0.50        0.15      6.68   6.224
35482.106  4151.83    4151.68      0.47        0.15      6.68   6.224
35834.600  4840.55    4840.44      0.40        0.12      6.68   6.224
36183.152  5529.36    5529.30      0.28        0.06      6.68   6.224
35834.723  4840.56    4840.68      0.17       -0.11      6.68   6.224
35482.277  4151.83    4152.01      0.14       -0.19      6.68   6.224
35125.723  3463.15    3463.37      0.14       -0.22      6.68   6.224
34764.918  2774.54    2774.71      0.21       -0.18      6.68   6.224
34399.772  2086.01    2086.14      0.26       -0.13      6.68   6.224
34030.154  1397.55    1397.68      0.26       -0.13      6.68   6.224
33843.570  1053.29    1053.39      0.29       -0.09      6.68   6.224
33655.838   709.13     709.17      0.33       -0.04      6.68   6.224
33466.887   364.96     364.94      0.37        0.01      6.68   6.224
33263.296     0.17       0.34      0.00       -0.18     -1.21  -1.724
33464.641   364.96     364.74      0.41        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
33653.544   709.13     708.91      0.42        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
33841.219  1053.30    1053.04      0.45        0.25     -1.21  -1.724
34027.781  1397.55    1397.32      0.43        0.23     -1.21  -1.724
34397.362  2086.02    2085.76      0.44        0.25     -1.21  -1.724
34762.473  2774.55    2774.32      0.40        0.23     -1.21  -1.724
35123.237  3463.15    3462.94      0.35        0.21     -1.21  -1.724
35479.792  4151.84    4151.64      0.30        0.20     -1.21  -1.724
35832.258  4840.59    4840.39      0.24        0.19     -1.21  -1.724
36180.738  5529.38    5529.17      0.19        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
36525.423  6218.24    6218.11      0.03        0.13     -1.21  -1.725
36866.316  6907.18    6907.01     -0.02        0.17     -1.21  -1.724
36525.566  6218.26    6218.40     -0.24       -0.14     -1.21  -1.725
36180.980  5529.38    5529.65     -0.29       -0.26     -1.21  -1.724
35832.516  4840.59    4840.90     -0.27       -0.31     -1.21  -1.725
35480.090  4151.85    4152.22     -0.26       -0.36     -1.21  -1.724
35123.522  3463.17    3463.49     -0.18       -0.32     -1.21  -1.724
34762.705  2774.55    2774.76     -0.03       -0.21     -1.21  -1.724
34397.597  2086.02    2086.20      0.01       -0.18     -1.21  -1.724
34027.987  1397.56    1397.70      0.06       -0.14     -1.21  -1.724
33841.409  1053.30    1053.39      0.11       -0.09     -1.21  -1.725
33653.691   709.13     709.18      0.15       -0.04     -1.21  -1.724
33464.760   364.96     364.95      0.19        0.00     -1.21  -1.724
33263.359     0.17       0.46     -0.11       -0.29     -1.21  -1.724





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 4138
CALIBRATION DATE:     24-Jan-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   03
Previous cal:         21-Jun-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

  ITS-90_COEFFICIENTS       IPTS-68_COEFFICIENTS
                          ITS-T90
-------------------       --------------------
g = 4.401 92731 E-3        a = 4.40214027E-3
h = 6.50694840E-4          b = 6.50911856E-4
i = 2.33977600E-5          c = 2.34309522E-5
j = 2.04988124E-6          d = 2.05142804E-6
f0 = 1000.0                Slope = 1.0                Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90  = 1/{g+h[ln(f0/f)]+i[1n2(f0/f)]+j[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1/{a+b[ln(f0/f)]+c[1n2(f0/f)]+d[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
T68                 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

  SBE3      SPRT     SBE3    SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
  Freg     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs  NEW Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3159.0572  -1.5059  -1.5060  -0.00002    0.00008
3339.5971   0.9941   0.9943  -0.00017   -0.00013
3604.7395   4.4949   4.4949  -0.00001   -0.00001
3884.7240   7.9964   7.9963   0.00005    0.00007
4179.9450  11.4983  11.4983  -0.00005    0.00003
4489.8693  14.9906  14.9906  -0.00022   -0.00005
4816.6766  18.4936  18.4936  -0.00026    0.00000
5159.4338  21.9930  21.9930  -0.00034    0.00003
5518.8820  25.4929  25.4929  -0.00048   -0.00001
5895.1896  28.9917  28.9918  -0.00059   -0.00003
6288.9059  32.4918  32.4917  -0.00060    0.00002





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 4226
CALIBRATION DATE:     24-Jan-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   03
Previous cal:         30-Aug-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

  ITS_90 COEFFICIENTS   IPTS-68_COEFFICIENTS
                      ITS-T90
-------------------   --------------------
g = 4.38186818E-3     a = 4.38207455E-3
h = 6.46712520E-4     b = 6.46926865E-4
i = 2.24590277E-5     c = 2.24918559E-5
j = 1.80204389E-6     d = 1.80355746E-6
f0 = 1000.0           Slope = 1.0           Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1/{g+h[ln(f0/f)]+i[1n2(f0/f)]+j[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1I{a+b[ln(f0/f)]+c[1n2(f0/f)]+d[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
T68 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

  SBE3      SPRT     SBE3    SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
  Freg     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs  NEW Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3074.5391  -1.5059  -1.5060   0.00005    0.00004
3250.8215   0.9941   0.9942  -0.00020   -0.00008
3509.7895   4.4949   4.4949  -0.00020    0.00001
3783.3395   7.9964   7.9963  -0.00017    0.00006
4071.8662  11.4983  11.4983  -0.00015    0.00004
4374.8712  14.9906  14.9906  -0.00022   -0.00010
4694.4865  18.4936  18.4936  -0.00006   -0.00000
5029.8229  21.9930  21.9930   0.00007    0.00006
5381.6290  25.4929  25.4929   0.00001   -0.00003
5750.0697  28.9917  28.9917   0.00002   -0.00001
6135.7193  32.4918  32.4917  -0.00005    0.00000





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0035
CALIBRATION DATE:     07-Dec-2012
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   35
Previous cal:         16-Feb-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90_COEFFICIENTS
--------------------
a0 =  4.000167576E-3
al = -1.059556581E-3
a2 =  1.660155451E-4
a3 = -9.317019546E-6
a4 =  2.012171620E-7
Slope = 1.000000 Offset = 0.000000

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 sIn: 245-5149
Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1/{a0+al[ln(f)]+a2[1n2(f)]+a3[1n3(f)]+a4[1n4(f)} - 273.15 (°C)

   SBE35      SPRT     SBE35   SPRT-SBE35  SPRT-SBE35
   Count     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs   NEW Coefs
-----------  -------  -------  ----------  ----------
659026.9626  -1.5061  -1.5061   -0.00017     0.00002
590645.0049   0.9940   0.9940   -0.00017    -0.00002
507826.0283   4.4948   4.4948   -0.00018    -0.00001
437800.2467   7.9959   7.9959   -0.00022    -0.00001
378447.0872  11.4975  11.4974   -0.00020     0.00005
328138.6418  14.9902  14.9902   -0.00027    -0.00001
285167.6485  18.4922  18.4922   -0.00026    -0.00002
248489.8620  21.9930  21.9930   -0.00023    -0.00001
217083.1315  25.4946  25.4947   -0.00026    -0.00005
190153.3418  28.9931  28.9930   -0.00017     0.00008
166967.0072  32.4934  32.4934   -0.00044    -0.00003





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0035
CALIBRATION DATE:     18-Jun-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   35
Previous cal:         07-Dec-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90_COEFFICIENTS
--------------------
aO =  3.891166934E-3
al = -1.025343400E-3
a2 =  1.619908097E-4
a3 = -9.106715094E-6
a4 =  1.970986285E-7
Slope = 1.000000 Offset = 0.000000

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1/{a0+al[ln(f)]+a2[1n2(f)]+a3[1n3(f)]+a4[1n4(f)} - 273.15 (°C)

   SBE35      SPRT     SBE35   SPRT-SBE35  SPRT-SBE35
   Count     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs   NEW Coefs
-----------  -------  -------  ----------  ----------
658922.3875  -1.5025  -1.5025    0.00002     0.00001
590549.0466   0.9977   0.9977   -0.00003    -0.00003
507746.8714   4.4985   4.4985    0.00000    -0.00000
437739.1860   7.9993   7.9992    0.00004     0.00003
378386.6850  11.5013  11.5013    0.00001    -0.00001
328059.0624  14.9962  14.9962   -0.00001    -0.00003
285109.7253  18.4974  18.4974    0.00004     0.00003
248451.9833  21.9969  21.9969   -0.00001    -0.00001
217070.6508  25.4961  25.4962   -0.00004    -0.00002
190139.8707  28.9949  28.9949    0.00001     0.00003
166964.4934  32.4938  32.4938   -0.00000    -0.00001





                        Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc.
            13431 NE 20th Street, Bellevue, WA 98005-2010 USA
Phone: (+1) 425-643-9866  Fax (+1) 425-643-9954  Email: seabird@seabird.com

SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2569         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 16-Jan-13        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.04780154e+001               a =  1.51027111e-004
h =  1.58729908e+000               b =  1.58729073e+000
i =  8.38055330e-005               c = -1.04779766e+001
j =  9.23998766e-005               d = -8.43958712e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  3.8
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.56860      0.00000       0.00000
 -0.9999    34.8204    2.80488      4.92253      2.80487      -0.00001
  1.0001    34.8203    2.97628      5.03070      2.97630       0.00002
 15.0001    34.8201    4.27204      5.78283      4.27205       0.00001
 18.5001    34.8200    4.61882      5.96794      4.61880      -0.00002
 29.0001    34.8176    5.70252      6.51239      5.70253       0.00002
 32.5001    34.8087    6.07483      6.68912      6.07482      -0.00001

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) / 10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2569         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 26-Jun-13        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.04789607e+001               a =  1.26022700e-004
h =  1.58771515e+000               b =  1.58740731e+000
i = -6.94755467e-005               c = -1.04782939e+001
j =  1.09916171e-004               d = -8.29428062e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  3.9
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.56861      0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.7933    2.80290      4.92120      2.80290       0.00000
  1.0000    34.7936    2.97421      5.02932      2.97421       0.00000
 15.0000    34.7943    4.26920      5.78113      4.26920       0.00000
 18.5000    34.7942    4.61575      5.96615      4.61574      -0.00001
 29.0000    34.7933    5.69898      6.51041      5.69900       0.00003
 32.5000    34.7892    6.07180      6.68737      6.07178      -0.00002

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) / 10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2112         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 24-Jan-13        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01532895e+001               a =  1.56489138e-007
h =  1.46969882e+000               b =  1.46309451e+000
i = -2.39585191e-003               c = -1.01391372e+001
j =  2.51170488e-004               d = -8.31878451e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  6.8
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.63248      0.00000       0.00000
 -0.9999    34.8556    2.80746      5.10993      2.80742      -0.00003
  1.0000    34.8554    2.97899      5.22333      2.97901       0.00003
 15.0001    34.8557    4.27594      6.01125      4.27599       0.00004
 18.5001    34.8562    4.62310      6.20502      4.62306      -0.00004
 29.0001    34.8539    5.70779      6.77461      5.70778      -0.00001
 32.5000    34.8454    6.08049      6.95944      6.08050       0.00001

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) / 10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2112         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 26-Jun-13        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01604596e+001               a =  4.69528311e-008
h =  1.47208707e+000               b =  1.46322073e+000
i = -3.07497725e-003               c = -1.01401284e+001
j =  3.03406167e-004               d = -7.54295391e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  7.4
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------   
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.63254      0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.7933    2.80290      5.10689      2.80289      -0.00001
  1.0000    34.7936    2.97421      5.22019      2.97422       0.00001
 15.0000    34.7943    4.26920      6.00741      4.26920       0.00000
 18.5000    34.7942    4.61575      6.20100      4.61574      -0.00002
 29.0000    34.7933    5.69898      6.77013      5.69900       0.00002
 32.5000    34.7892    6.07180      6.95507      6.07179      -0.00001

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) / 10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 + Ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3058         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 02-Nov-12        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01005228e+001               a =  2.29519565e-004
h =  1.43975781e+000               b =  1.43971195e+000
i =  2.43997621e-004               c = -1.00999619e+001
j =  5.27890498e-005               d = -8.13316861e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  3.5
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------   
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.64773      0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.6226    2.79042      5.13305      2.79043       0.00001
  1.0000    34.6231    2.96102      5.24684      2.96102       0.00000
 15.0000    34.6240    4.25051      6.03764      4.25048      -0.00003
 18.5000    34.6236    4.59556      6.23217      4.59556      -0.00000
 29.0000    34.6223    5.67411      6.80424      5.67417       0.00006
 32.5000    34.6186    6.04540      6.99022      6.04536      -0.00004

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) / 10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature ['C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3058         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 27-Jun-13        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01015993e+001               a =  1.14409422e-004
h =  1.44026434e+000               b =  1.44029202e+000
i =  7.16368682e-005               c = -1.01017161e+001
j =  6.93263690e-005               d = -8.46230813e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  3.8
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor  = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND    INST FREO   INST COND      RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ------------  ---------  ------------  ------------  
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000      2.64772      0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.5637    2.78612      5.13013      2.78614       0.00003
  1.0000    34.5649    2.95652      5.24381      2.95649      -0.00003
 15.0000    34.5654    4.24408      6.03389      4.24408      -0.00000
 18.5000    34.5652    4.58864      6.22823      4.58864       0.00000
 29.0001    34.5647    5.66574      6.79979      5.66574       0.00001
 32.5001    34.5602    6.03637      6.98556      6.03637      -0.00000

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if +jf4) /10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter

Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter

t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;

Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0275         SBE 43 OXYGEN CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 21-Jul-12

COEFFICIENTS       A = -2.1850e-003     NOMINAL DYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS
Soc =      0.5465  B =  6.0447e-005     Dl =  1.92634e-4    H1 = -3.30000e-2
Voffset = -0.4908  C = -i.1869e-006     D2 = -4.64803e-2    H2 =  5.00000e+3
Tau20 =    2.09    E nominal =  0.036                       H3 =  1.45000e+3

    BATH OX  BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   INSTRUMENT     INSTRUMENT   RESIDUAL
    (ml/l)    ITS-90      PSU     OUTPUT(VOLTS)  OXYGEN(ml/l)   (ml/l)
    -------  ---------  --------  -------------  ------------  --------
     1.24       2.00      0.05        0.726          1.24       -0.00
     1.25       6.00      0.05        0.756          1.25       -0.00
     1.26      12.00      0.04        0.801          1.25       -0.00
     1.27      20.00      0.04        0.866          1.26       -0.00
     1.27      26.00      0.04        0.916          1.27       -0.00
     1.27      30.00      0.04        0.952          1.28        0.00
     4.20       2.00      0.05        1.290          4.21        0.00
     4.21       6.00      0.05        1.386          4.21        0.00
     4.22      20.00      0.04        1.742          4.22        0.00
     4.23      30.00      0.04        2.021          4.23        0.00
     4.23      12.00      0.04        1.539          4.23        0.00
     4.24      26.00      0.04        1.911          4.24        0.00
     6.77      12.00      0.04        2.168          6.77       -0.00
     6.79      20.00      0.04        2.502          6.79       -0.00
     6.80       6.00      0.05        1.936          6.80       -0.00
     6.81       2.00      0.05        1.783          6.80       -0.00
     6.85      30.00      0.04        2.969          6.85       -0.00
     6.86      26.00      0.04        2.785          6.85       -0.00

Oxygen (ml/l) = Soc*(V+Voffset)*(1.0+A*T+B*T2+C*T3)*OxSol(T,S)*exp(E*P/K)
V = voltage output from 5BE43, T = temperature [deg C], S = salinity [PSU], K = temperature [Kelvin]
OxSol(T,S) = oxygen saturation [ml/l], P = pressure [dbar], 
Residual = instrument oxygen - bath oxygen





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 1071  SBE 43 OXYGEN CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 21-Jul-12

COEFFICIENTS       A  = -1.6343e-003    NOMINAL DYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS
Soc =      0.4611  B =  3.9125e-005     Dl =  1.92634e-4    H1 = -3.30000e-2
Voffset = -0.5086  c  = -8.4413e-007    D2 = -4.64803e-2    H2 =  5.00000e+3
Tau2O =    1.25    E nominal =  0.036                       H3 =  1.45000e+3

    BATH OX  BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   INSTRUMENT     INSTRUMENT   RESIDUAL
    (ml/l)    ITS-90      PSU     OUTPUT(VOLTS)  OXYGEN(ml/l)   (ml/l)
    -------  ---------  --------  -------------  ------------  --------
     1.24       2.00      0.05        0.787          1.24       -0.00
     1.25       6.00      0.05        0.822          1.25       -0.00
     1.26      12.00      0.04        0.875          1.26       -0.00
     1.27      20.00      0.04        0.950          1.26       -0.00
     1.27      26.00      0.04        1.009          1.27        0.00
     1.27      30.00      0.04        1.052          1.28        0.00
     4.20       2.00      0.05        1.455          4.21        0.01
     4.21       6.00      0.05        1.568          4.22        0.00
     4.22      20.00      0.04        1.983          4.22        0.00
     4.23      30.00      0.04        2.311          4.23        0.00
     4.23      12.00      0.04        1.745          4.23        0.00
     4.24      26.00      0.04        2.181          4.24        0.00
     6.77      12.00      0.04        2.486          6.77       -0.00
     6.79      20.00      0.04        2.880          6.79        0.00
     6.80       6.00      0.05        2.217          6.80        0.00
     6.81       2.00      0.05        2.038          6.80       -0.00
     6.85      30.00      0.04        3.424          6.85       -0.00
     6.86      26.00      0.04        3.211          6.85       -0.00

Oxygen (ml/l) = Soc*(V+Voffset)*(1.0+A*T+B*T2+C*T3)*OxSol(T,S)*exp(E*P/K)
V = voltage output from SBE43, T = temperature [deg C], S = salinity [PSU], K = temperature [Kelvin]
OxSol(T,S) = oxygen saturation [ml/l], P = pressure [dbar], 
Residual = instrument oxygen - bath oxygen





Dissolved Oxygen

MODEL:     ARO-CAV
SERIAL:    105
DATE:      August 7, 2012

Location:  Calibration office of manfacture department at Kobe
Method:    2 points calibration of span and zero is carried out with 100% 
           saturation water and nigrogen gas. Calibration should be done 
           after making the instruments accustomed in the water and keeping 
           saturation with air-bubbling. Outputs in saturated water and nitr

           Film No =   16008A

                 A =   -40.0057     E =  0.0045
                 B =   130.010      F =  0.00
                 C =    -0.42837    G =  0.00
                 D =     0.0112     H =  1.00

Results:   Temperature at calibration[°C]     25
           Air pressure at calibration[hPa]  992.2
           Air saturation at calibration[%]   97.9

                Span output  zero output  Span Error  Zero Error
                    [%]          [%]          [%]        [%]
                -----------  -----------  ----------  ----------
           1st     97.3          0.0         -0.6        0.0
           2nd     97.3          0.0         -0.6        0.0
           3rd     97.3          0.0         -0.6        0.0


Judgement: Good
                   Calibration group,

                   Manufacture department at Kobe

                   JFE Advantech Co., LTD






Temperature

MODEL:         ARO-CAV
SERIAL:        105
DATE:          August 7, 2012

Location:      Calibration office of manfacture department at Kobe

Method:        The instrument is calibrated in a constant temperature water 
               tank.  5 outputs in n-value corresponding to 5 water temperature  
               ranging from 3 to 31 degrees C are computed by least square 
               method. (To make the tank temperature constant, water is 
               stirred. The reference temperature is measured by a thermometer)
 
Reference:     JFE Advantech self-made temperature probe calibrated by 'HART 
device         SCIENTIFIC' 1575A Super Thermometer (Platinum Thermo Resistance 
               Probe NSR 160)
               (certified by JCSS and ITS90)

Temperature:   Temperature(°C) =  A+BxN+CxN2+DxN3
                             A = -5.455093E+00
                             B =  1.6693247E+01
                             C = -2.144412E+00
                             D =  4.5669980E-01

               Reference  Output   Calculated   Error
                 [°C]       [V]       [°C]      [°C]
               ---------  -------  ----------  ------
                 3.564    0.57794     3.564     0.000
                10.433    1.06415    10.431    -0.002
                17.167    1.56513    17.170     0.003
                24.220    2.08868    24.218    -0.002
                31.285    2.58698    31.286     0.001

Criteria for:  1. The errors in above form must be within ±0.02C°
acceptability  2. After writing the calibration coefficients into 
                  instrument, one point check at any temperature must agree 
                  with the accuracy declared by the instrument.

Output Check:  Reference  Calculated  Error
                 [°C]        [°C]     [°C]
               ---------  ----------  -----
                 23.251     23.256    0005


Judgement: Good
                   Calibration group,

                   Manufacture department at Kobe

                   JFE Advantech Co., LTD







PO Box 518                                              (541) 929-5650
620 Applegate St.                 WET Labs          Fax (541) 929-5277
Philomath, OR 97370                                    www.wetlabs.com

                             C-Star Calibration


Date  July 19, 2012            S/N#  CST-327DR          Pathlength  25

                                Analog output
Vd                                 0.059 V
Vair                               4.613 V
Vref                               4.523 V

Temperature of calibration water                               20.1 °C
Ambient temperature during calibration                         22.0 °C




Relationship of transmittance (Tr) to beam attenuation coefficient (c), 
and pathlength (x, in meters): Tr = e(^-cx)

To determine beam transmittance: Tr = (V(sig) - V(dark)) / (V(ref) - V(dark))

To determine beam attenuation coefficient: c = -l/x * In (Tr)


V(d)    Meter output with the beam blocked. This is the offset.
V(air)  Meter output in air with a clear beam path.
V(ref)  Meter output with clean water in the path.
Temperature of calibration water:  temperature of clean water used to obtain V(ref).
Ambient temperature:  meter temperature in air during the calibration.
V(sig)  Measured signal output of meter.


                                Revision M                     7/26/11





                              CLIVAR P2 - 2013

LEG 1

              Transmissometer Air Calibration M&B Calculator
                                CST-327-DR

23-Mar-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.546
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.06
  Reading

Air Temp.    17.096    17.100    17.081    17.068    17.063    17.048

    M        20.512                         Air Temp. Average  17.076
    B        -1.231


22-Apr-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.554
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    20.277    20.767    20.305    20.281    20.275    20.270

    M        20.471                         Air Temp. Average  20.363
    B        -1.208


2-May-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.513
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    20.624    20.618    20.613    20.626    20.647    20.653

    M        20.660                         Air Temp. Average  20.630
    B        -1.219








                            CLIVAR/Carbon P02E
                            R/V Melville MV1305

                         8 May 2013 - 1 June 2013
                       Honolulu, HI - San Diego, CA

                   Chief Scientist:  Dr. Sabine Mecking
                         University of Washington

                    Co-Chief Scientist: Dr. Gunnar Voet
                         University of Washington



                               Cruise Report
                                1 June 2013
                             Rev. 23 July 2013



Summary

A hydrographic survey (P02, leg 2) was conducted in the eastern North
Pacific Ocean aboard the UNOLS vessel R/V Melville from 8 May 2013 - 1 June
2013.  A total of 72 rosette/CTD/LADCP stations were occupied on a transect
running roughly along latitude 30 deg.N.  CTD casts extended to within 10
meters of the seafloor, and up to 35 water samples were collected
throughout the water column on all casts.  CTDO (conductivity, temperature,
pressure, oxygen), transmissometer, fluorometer, and LADCP (lowered
acoustic Doppler current profiler) electronic data; rosette water samples;
and underway shipboard ADCP and carbon dioxide (CO2) measurements were
collected during the survey.  In addition, 3 Argo floats were deployed
during this leg for NOAA/PMEL.

Salinity and dissolved oxygen samples, drawn from most bottles on every
full cast, were analyzed and used to calibrate the CTD conductivity and
oxygen sensors.  Water samples were also analyzed on board the ship for
nutrients (silicate, phosphate, nitrate, nitrite), total CO2/TCO2 (aka
dissolved inorganic Carbon/DIC), pH, total alkalinity, and transient
tracers (CFCs and SF6).

Additional water samples were collected and stored for analysis onshore:
3Helium / Tritium, 13C / 14C, dissolved organic Carbon and total dissolved
Nitrogen (DOC / TDN), d15N-NO3 / d18O-NO3, 137Cs / 134Cs / 90Sr, 129I,
density and Calcium.

Underway measurements included GPS navigation, multibeam bathymetry, ADCP,
meteorological parameters, sea surface measurements (including temperature,
conductivity/salinity, dissolved oxygen, fluorescence), and gravity.  In
addition to the permanently installed R/V Melville systems, there was a
Univ. of Washington Equilibrator Inlet Mass Spectrometer (EIMS) system,
(which, however, ended up non-functional due to a broken filament when
turning it back on in port), and a NOAA GO 8050 underway pCO2 system
running throughout the leg.


P02 Leg 2 Narrative - S. Mecking, Chief Scientist

Leg 2 of the 2013 P02 cruise was the continuation of a repeat hydrography
section that runs the through the center of the North Pacific subtropical
gyre along nominally 30 deg.N. Leg 1 went from Yokohama, Japan to Honolulu,
HI, and leg 2 from Honolulu, HI to San Diego, CA. Earlier occupations of
the P02 section were conducted in 1993/1994 as part of the Japanese WOCE
program and in 2004 as part of the NSF- and NOAA-sponsored U.S. Global
Ocean Carbon and Repeat Hydrography Program that supports the objectives of
the U.S. CLIVAR and U.S. Carbon Cycle Programs.


The 2013 re-occupation of P02 is also part of the U.S. Global Ocean Carbon
and Repeat Hydrography Program and in support of CLIVAR/CO2. Goals of the
reoccupation are to monitor oceanic inventories of CO2, heat, and
freshwater and to examine changes in transports and ventilation fluxes.

The start of leg 2 of 2013 P02, originally planned for 28 April, was
delayed by 10 days to 8 May due to mechanical problems with both the main
aft winch (DESH-6) and the back-up forward winch (DESH-5) on leg 1 of the
cruise. Fortunately, these problems could all be resolved during leg 1
(fixing the winches included a return to Yokohama for several days), and
the main winch was used throughout leg 2.

However, the fate of leg 2 was up in the air for a while due to the delays.
Postponing leg 2 to August 2013 or until 2014 was being discussed. Thanks
to the efforts of ship scheduling, the funding agencies and others as well
as to significant rearrangement of the cruise that followed P02, leg 1 and
leg 2 of 2013 P02 could be conducted back-to-back as planned.

During the port stop between leg 1 and 2 at the University of Hawaii Marine
Center (May 5-8, 2103), the leg 1 CFC equipment was unloaded, and the CFC
system of Dr. Dong-Ha Min at the University of Texas was loaded and
installed instead. All other measurement systems remained the same for leg
1 and 2 .

Many of the "leg 1&2" science party members (14 out of 28) could enjoy a
couple of well-deserved days off in Honolulu after their extended leg 1
journey. 14 "new leg 2" members moved on-board, and R/V Melville departed
from UHMC at 1000 on May 8, 2103 for the start of leg 2.

Leg 2 began with a 2.5 steam northwest toward 30 deg.N, 167.45 deg.W to
repeat station 087, the last station occupied on leg 1. One mid-depth test
cast (1500m) was performed on day 2 of the steam. Both the test cast and
the following regular leg 2 stations were carried out without much problem
since procedures were already in place thanks to leg 1. Station numbering
is consecutive between leg 1 and 2 with the leg 2 station numbers ranging
from 088 at the leg 1/2 repeat location to 159.

Station spacing was 60nm at first as outlined in a revised science plan
("March-29 science plan") that was provided by Dr. Jim Swift, chief
scientist on leg 1, for leg 1 and 2 during the wait period for winch
repairs in Yokohama to accommodate at-sea days lost. Shorter station
spacing followed at a deep ocean trench at 150 deg.W (Murray Fracture
Zone), dropping to 45nm after station 100 and to 30nm after station 102.

After the trench (onward from station 109), we continued at 40nm spacing
(down from 60 nm in the revised science plan, but still larger than the
30nm spacing in the original P02 proposal) since the station timing in the
revised plan had been estimated conservatively and this is approximately
the same spacing as done along this portion of P02 in 2004. Two stations
before the northeastward jog from 30 deg.N to San Diego, the spacing was
further reduced to 30nm (at station 139) The last 19 stations of leg 2
(141-159) along the northeastward stretch were an exact repeat of P02
stations occupied in 2004 on and before the shelf with station spacing
ranging from 3nm (shelf break) to 30nm.

During leg 2, we continued to operate with the primary SIO pylon that had
been used and repaired on leg 1. At the start of leg 2, this resulted in
effectively a 35-place rosette with bottle 35 dismounted due to a
defective, but sealed solenoid. A 36-place pylon had been borrowed from
NOAA/PMEL and shipped to Honolulu as a spare (the original back-up pylon
had failed on leg 1). Since 35 bottles still were sufficient to resolve the
vertical structure of the water column, the primary SIO pylon was left on
the rosette and the NOAA/PMEL pylon was kept as a true spare.

During the initial steam from Honolulu to 30 deg.N, it was also discussed
whether to replace and rewire the damaged solenoid plus other suspicious
ones on the primary SIO pylon. However since this is not a standard repair
done at sea, but usually would require shipping the pylon back to the
manufacturer (Seabird Electronics), a decision was made by the chief
scientist not to take the risk involved with the repair despite the
excellent skills of the SIO STS electronics engineer on-board, but to
continue with the pylon as is.

As leg 2 went on, the solenoids of bottle 1 (as of station 095) and 28 (as
of station 115) failed as well, and the bottles were dismounted. Since
bottom depths were already getting shallower by station 115, we decided to
continue with just 33 bottles rather than putting in the spare pylon, and
the rosette held up in that condition until the end of the cruise.
Communication to shore was maintained regarding all pylon decisions made on
leg 2, and the "going with the problems we know rather than the ones we
don't know"-approach (i.e. keeping the current pylon) confirmed.

Other than the uncertainties regarding the pylon, there were little
technical problems on leg 2. At some point (after station 108), an exchange
of the block on the A-frame of the aft winch became necessary due to
increasingly loud noises coming from a broken bearing. The Captain and crew
dealt with this in a very professional manner and replaced the block
against the one of the forward winch while staying on station.

The weather on leg 2 also provided little problem. We encountered somewhat
rougher weather when heading into stronger trade winds around station 111,
and then again toward the end of the cruise (station 144-149) in the
California Current region. In the latter case wind speeds peaked at >35
knots, and the ships rolls were heavy enough so that winch speeds could not
exceed 30m/min for the duration of at least one entire station. But
operations could still continue throughout.

Leg 2 of 2013 P02 arrived at SIO's Nimitz Marine Facility at 1130 on 1 June
after a quick stop at the fuel dock. This was two days ahead of a 3 June
arrival day published in the most recent UNOLS schedule because the two
contingency days that had been added by NSF to the leg 2 timing were not
needed (two extra days added to compensate for bad weather encountered on
leg 1, however, were used). The total duration of leg 2 was 25 UNOLS day.

Preliminary results indicate a freshening trend of the waters above the
salinity minimum associated with North Pacific Intermediate Water from 2004
to 2013. An increase in salinity is observed below. In addition, the oxygen
data (mostly decrease) and nutrient data (mostly increase) exhibit obvious
signs of decadal-scale variability in the thermocline. These will need to
be brought into context with earlier observations of North Pacific
ventilation changes in a more detailed investigation of the new data set.

We would like to extend our thanks from Jim Swift, the Captain, and the leg
1 and 2 science parties and crew, to ship scheduling, NSF, NOAA, and the
Navy, and everyone involved in making a back-to-back occupation of leg 1
and 2 of 2013 P02 possible despite the delays and timing difficulties
encountered. We are very grateful for these efforts and the support
received from all involved.



Principal Programs of CLIVAR/Carbon P02E


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Program                        Affiliation*   Principal Investigator   email                      |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CTDO/Rosette, Nutrients, O2,   UCSD/SIO       James H. Swift           jswift@ucsd.edu            |
|Salinity, Data Management                                                                         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Transmissometer                TAMU           Wilf Gardner             wgardner@ocean.tamu.edu    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|ADCP , LADCP                   UHawaii        Eric Firing              efiring@soest.hawaii.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CFCs , SF6                     UT-Austin      Dong-Ha Min              dongha@austin.utexas.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|3He , 3H                       WHOI           William Jenkins          wjenkins@whoi.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|DIC (Total CO2)                NOAA/PMEL      Richard Feely            Richard.A.Feely@noaa.gov   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|pH , Total Alkalinity          UCSD/SIO       Andrew Dickson           adickson@ucsd.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|DOC , TDN                      UCSB           Craig Carlson            carlson@lifesci.ucsb.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Radiocarbons (13C , 14C)       WHOI           Ann McNichol             amcnichol@whoi.edu         |
|                               Princeton      Robert Key               key@princeton.edu          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|d15N-NO3 , d18O-NO3            Princeton      Daniel Sigman            sigman@princeton.edu       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|137Cs , 134Cs , 90Sr           WHOI           Ken Buesseler            kbuesseler@whoi.edu        |
|                                              Alison Macdonald         amacdonald@whoi.edu        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|129I , 127I                    LLNL           Tom Guilderson           guilderson1@llnl.gov       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Density                        UMiami/RSMAS   Frank Millero            fmillero@rsmas.miami.edu   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dissolved Calcium              UCSD/SIO       Todd Martz               trmartz@ucsd.edu           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Argo Floats                    NOAA/PMEL      Gregory C. Johnson       Gregory.C.Johnson@noaa.gov |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|pCO2 Underway Data             NOAA           Geoffrey Lebon           Geoffrey.T.Lebon@noaa.gov  |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|EIMS Underway Data             UWash          Paul D. Quay             pdquay@uw.edu              |
|(N2, O2, Ar and CO2)                          Hilary Palevsky          palevsky@uw.edu            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Ship's Underway Data           UCSD/SIO       Frank Delahoyde          fdelahoyde@ucsd.edu        |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  * Affiliation abbreviations listed on page 4













Shipboard Personnel on CLIVAR/Carbon P02E


+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Name               Affiliation* Shipboard Duties                     Shore Email                 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Julie Arrington    NOAA/PMEL    DIC                                  julie.seahorse@gmail.com    |
|Robert Ball        SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                            |
|John Ballard       SIO/MPL      pH                                   jballar@ucsd.edu            |
|Andrew Barna       SIO/CCHDO    Data Processing / Deck               abarna@ucsd.edu             |
|Jonathan Barnes    SIO/SOMTS    3rd Officer                                                      |
|Eddie Bautista     SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                            |
|Susan Becker       SIO/STS/ODF  Nutrients / ODF Supervisor           sbecker@ucsd.edu            |
|Tom Brown          SIO/SOMTS    Wiper                                                            |
|David Cervantes    SIO/MPL      Total Alkalinity                     d1cervantes@ucsd.edu        |
|Blake Clark        UCSB         C13/C14 + DOC/TDN Sampling           jbclark01@gmail.com         |
|John Clifford      SIO/SOMTS    3rd Asst. Engineer                                               |
|Drew Cole          SIO/STS/RT   Resident Technician / Deck           dcole@ucsd.edu              |
|David Cook         SIO/SOMTS    1st Officer                                                      |
|David Cooper       U.Texas      CFCs                                 davidcooper59@gmail.com     |
|Frank Delahoyde    SIO/STS/CR   Ship's Computer Systems              fdelahoyde@ucsd.edu         |
|Meghan Donohue     SIO/STS/RT   O2 / Deck                            mkdonohue@ucsd.edu          |
|Manuel Elliott     SIO/SOMTS    Electrician                                                      |
|Laura Fantozzi     SIO/MPL      Total Alkalinity                     lfantozzi@ucsd.edu          |
|Randy Flannigan    SIO/SOMTS    1st Asst. Engineer                                               |
|Jeremy Fox         SIO/SOMTS    Cook                                                             |
|Heather Galiher    SIO/SOMTS    2nd Officer                                                      |
|Angelica Gilroy    SIO/CASPO    Deck / Console                       agilroy@ucsd.edu            |
|Derek Haddon       SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                      |
|Brett Hembrough    SIO/STS/RT   Salinity                             bhembrough@ucsd.edu         |
|Phillip Hogan      SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                            |
|Steven Howell      U.Hawaii     LADCP / ADCP                         sghowell@hawaii.edu         |
|Kristin Jackson    UCSD         pH                                   kdjackson@ucsd.edu          |
|Mary Carol Johnson SIO/STS/ODF  Data Processing / Website            mcj@ucsd.edu                |
|Bob Juhasz         SIO/SOMTS    Oiler                                                            |
|Edward Keenan      SIO/SOMTS    Boatswain                                                        |
|Sam Lindenberger   SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                      |
|Georgy Manucharyan Yale U.      Deck / Console                       georgy.manucharyan@yale.edu |
|Joe Martino        SIO/SOMTS    Ordinary Seaman                                                  |
|Patrick Mears      U.Texas      CFCs                                 patrickamears@gmail.com     |
|Sabine Mecking     U.Washington Chief Scientist                      smecking@apl.washington.edu |
|Melissa Miller     SIO/STS/ODF  Nutrients                            melissa-miller@ucsd.edu     |
|Dave Murline       SIO/SOMTS    Master                                                           |
|Robert Palomares   SIO/STS/RT   Elect. Tech. / Res. Tech. / Salinity rpalomares@ucsd.edu         |
|Cynthia Peacock    NOAA/PMEL    DIC                                  Dana.Greeley@noaa.gov       |
|Matthew Peer       SIO/SOMTS    2nd Asst. Engineer                                               |
|Alejandro Quintero SIO/STS/ODF  O2 / Data Processing / Deck          a1quintero@ucsd.edu         |
|Alex Rodriguiz     SIO/SOMTS    Chief Engineer                                                   |
|Zoe Sandwith       WHOI         3He/Tritium                          zsandwith@whoi.edu          |
|Andrew Shao        U.Washington CFCs / Underway pCO2 / EIMS          ashao@apl.washington.edu    |
|Mark Smith         SIO/SOMTS    Senior Cook                                                      |
|Yongming Sun       LDEO         Deck / Console                       sunymouc@gmail.com          |
|Sandor Vinkovits   SIO/SOMTS    Able Seaman                                                      |
|Gunnar Voet        WHOI         Co-Chief Scientist                   voet@apl.washington.edu     |
|Yeping Yuan        U.Washington Deck / Console                       yyping@u.washington.edu     |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  * Affiliation abbreviations are listed on page 4



                                    -4-

  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                  KEY to Institution Abbreviations                    |
  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
  |CR             Computing Resources (SIO/STS)                          |
  |LDEO           Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (Columbia University) |
  |MPL            Marine Physical Laboratory (SIO)                       |
  |NOAA           National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration        |
  |ODF            Oceanographic Data Facility (SIO/STS)                  |
  |PMEL           Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (NOAA)         |
  |RT             Research Technicians (SIO/STS)                         |
  |SIO            Scripps Institution of Oceanography (UCSD)             |
  |SOMTS          Ship Operations and Marine Technical Support (SIO)     |
  |STS            Shipboard Technical Support (SIO)                      |
  |UCSD           University of California, San Diego                    |
  |UCSB           University of California, Santa Barbara                |
  |U.Hawaii       University of Hawaii                                   |
  |U.Texas        University of Texas                                    |
  |U.Washington   University of Washington                               |
  |WHOI           Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution                   |
  |Yale U.        Yale University                                        |
  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+



Core Hydrographic Measurements: CTD Data, Salinity, Oxygen and Nutrients


Oceanographic Data Facility and Research Technicians
Shipboard Technical Support
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
UC San Diego
La Jolla, CA 92093-0214


The CLIVAR/Carbon P02E repeat hydrographic line was reoccupied from 8 May
2013 - 1 June 2013 aboard R/V Melville during a survey consisting of
rosette/CTD/LADCP stations and a variety of underway measurements.  The
ship departed Honolulu, HI on 8 May 2013 and arrived San Diego, CA on 1
June 2013 (UTC dates).

A sea-going science team gathered from 9 oceanographic institutions
participated on the cruise.  The programs and PIs, and the shipboard
science team and their responsibilities, are listed in the Narrative
section.


Description of Measurement Techniques

1.  CTD/Hydrographic Measurements Program

A total of 72 stations were occupied with one rosette/CTD/LADCP cast
completed at each.  1 test cast(s) and 4 aborted cast(s) were not reported.
CTDO data and water samples were collected on each rosette/CTD/LADCP cast,
usually to within 10 meters of the bottom.  Water samples measured on board
or stored for shore analysis are tabulated in the Bottle Sampling section.

Pressure, temperature, conductivity/salinity, dissolved oxygen, fluorometer
and transmissometer data were recorded from CTD profiles.  Current
velocities were measured by the RDI workhorse LADCP.  Core hydrographic
measurements consisted of salinity, dissolved oxygen and nutrient water
samples taken from each rosette cast.  The distribution of samples is shown
in the following figures.


Figure 1.0: P02E Sample Distribution, Stations 88-117
Figure 1.1: P02E Sample Distribution, Stations 117-159


1.1.  Water Sampling Package

Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts were performed with a package consisting of a
36-bottle rosette frame (SIO/STS), a 36-place carousel (SBE32) and 10.0L
Bullister-style bottles (SIO/STS) with an absolute volume of 10.4L.
Underwater electronic components consisted of a Sea-Bird Electronics
SBE9plus CTD with dual pumps (SBE5), dual temperature sensors (SBE3plus),
dual conductivity sensors (SBE4C), dissolved oxygen (SBE43), chlorophyll
fluorometer (Seapoint), transmissometer (WET Labs), altimeter (Simrad),
reference temperature (SBE35RT) and LADCP (RDI).

The CTD was mounted vertically in an SBE CTD cage attached to the bottom of
the rosette frame and located to one side of the carousel.  The SBE4C
conductivity, SBE3plus temperature and SBE43 Dissolved oxygen sensors and
their respective pumps and tubing were mounted vertically in the CTD cage,
as recommended by SBE.  Pump exhausts were attached to the CTD cage on the
side opposite from the sensors and directed downward. The transmissometer
was mounted horizontally, and the fluorometer was mounted vertically near
the bottom of the rosette frame. The altimeter was mounted on the inside of
the bottom frame ring.  The 150 KHz downward-looking Broadband LADCP (RDI)
was mounted vertically on one side of the frame between the bottles and the
CTD. Its battery pack was located on the opposite side of the frame,
mounted on the bottom of the frame.  Table 1.1.0 shows height of the
sensors referenced to the bottom of the frame:


Table 1.1.0: Heights referenced to bottom of rosette frame

      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
      |Instrument                                       Height in cm |
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
      |Pressure Sensor, inlet to capillary tube                   27 |
      |Temperature (probe tip at TC duct inlet)                   15 |
      |SBE35RT (centered between T1/T2 on same plane)             15 |
      |Rinko DO                                                   11 |
      |Transmissometer                                            12 |
      |Fluorometer                                                12 |
      |Altimeter                                                   2 |
      |LADCP (paddle center)                                       7 |
      |Outer-ring (odd #s) bottle centerline                     124 |
      |Inner-ring (even #s) bottle centerline                    111 |
      |Reference (Surface Zero tape on wire)                     280 |
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+


The rosette system was suspended from a UNOLS-standard three-conductor
0.322" electro-mechanical sea cable.  The sea cable was terminated at the
beginning of P02E.  The R/V Melville's DESH-6 winch was used for all casts.

The deck watch prepared the rosette 20-30 minutes prior to each cast.  The
bottles were cocked and all valves, vents and lanyards were checked for
proper orientation.  Once stopped on station, the rosette was moved out
from the aft hangar to the deployment location under the A-frame using an
air-powered cart and tracks.  The CTD was powered-up and the data
acquisition system started from the computer lab.  The rosette was
unstrapped from the cart.  Tag lines were threaded through the rosette
frame and syringes were removed from CTD intake ports.  The winch operator
was directed by the deck watch leader to raise the package.

The A-frame and rosette were extended outboard and the package was quickly
lowered into the water. Tag lines were removed and the package was lowered
to 10 meters, until the console operator determined that the sensor pumps
had turned on and the sensors were stable. The winch operator was then
directed to bring the package back to the surface, at which time the wire-
out reading was re-zeroed before descent.

Most rosette casts were lowered to within 10 meters of the bottom, using
the CTD depth and multibeam echosounder depth to estimate the distance, and
the altimeter and wire-out to direct the final approach.

For each up cast, the winch operator was directed to stop the winch at up
to 35 pre-determined sampling depths.  These standard depths were staggered
every station using 3 sampling schemes. To ensure package shed wake had
dissipated, the CTD console operator waited 30 seconds prior to tripping
sample bottles.  An additional 10 seconds elapsed before moving to the next
consecutive trip depth, to allow the SBE35RT time to take its readings.
The deck watch leader directed the package to the surface for the last
bottle trip.

Recovering the package at the end of the deployment was essentially the
reverse of launching, with the additional use of poles and snap-hooks
attached to tag lines for controlled recovery.  The rosette was secured on
the cart and moved into the aft hangar for sampling.  The bottles and
rosette were examined before samples were taken, and anything unusual was
noted on the sample log.

Each bottle on the rosette had a unique serial number, independent of the
bottle position on the rosette.  Sampling for specific programs was
outlined on sample log sheets prior to cast recovery or at the time of
collection.

Routine CTD maintenance included soaking the conductivity and oxygen
sensors with 1% Triton-X solution between casts to maintain sensor
stability and eliminate accumulated bio-films.  Rosette maintenance was
performed on a regular basis. Valves and o-rings were inspected for leaks.
The rosette, CTD and carousel were rinsed with fresh water as part of the
routine maintenance.


1.2.  Navigation and Bathymetry Data Acquisition

Navigation data were acquired at 1-second intervals from the ship's Furuno
GP150 GPS receiver by a Linux system beginning 8 May 2013 at 0350z, as the
R/V Melville left the dock in Honolulu, HI.

Center-beam bathymetric and hull-depth correction data from the Kongsberg
EM-122 multibeam echosounder system were acquired by the ship, and fed into
the ODF Linux systems through a serial data feed.  A minor change in
STS/ODF software was required to read in the depth feed with the
correction.  Bathymetry and navigation data were merged and stored on the
ODF systems, and data were made available as displays on the ODF
acquisition system during casts.  Bottom depths associated with rosette
casts were recorded on the Console Logs during deployments.

Corrected multibeam center depths are reported for each cast event in the
WOCE and Exchange format files.


1.3.  CTD Data Acquisition and Rosette Operation

The CTD data acquisition system consisted of an SBE-11plus (V2) deck unit
and three networked generic PC workstations running CentOS-5.8 or -5.9
Linux. Each PC workstation was configured with a color graphics display,
keyboard and trackball. The systems each had a Comtrol Rocketport PCI
multiple port serial controller providing 8 additional RS-232 ports. The
systems were interconnected through the ship's network.  These systems were
available for real-time operational and CTD data displays, and provided for
CTD and hydrographic data management.

One of the workstations was designated the CTD console and was connected to
the CTD deck unit via RS-232. The CTD console provided an interface and
operational displays for controlling and monitoring a CTD deployment and
closing bottles on the rosette. Another of the workstations was designated
the website and database server and maintained the hydrographic database
for P02E. Redundant backups were managed automatically.

The SBE9plus CTD supplied a standard SBE-format data stream at a data rate
of 24 frames/second. The sensors and instruments used during CLIVAR/Carbon
P02E, along with pre-cruise laboratory calibration information, are listed
below in Table 1.3.0. Copies of the pre-cruise calibration sheets for
various sensors are included in Appendix D.


Table 1.3.0: CLIVAR/Carbon P02E Rosette Underwater Electronics.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                            Serial        CTD     Stations Pre-Cruise Calibration |
|Instrument/Sensor*      Mfr.**/Model        Number        Channel   Used      Date     Facility** |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carousel Water Sampler  SBE32 (36-place)    3213290-0113  n/a      88-72       n/a        n/a     |
|Reference Temperature   SBE35               3528706-0035  n/a      88-72   7-Dec-2012   SIO/STS   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|CTD                     SBE9plus SIO        09P52161-0914          88-72                          |
|Pressure                Paroscientific      914-110547    Freq.2   88-72   14-Jun-2012  SIO/STS   |
|                        Digiquartz 401K-105                                                       |
|                                                                                                  |
|Primary Pump Circuit                                                                              |
|    Temperature (T1)    SBE3plus            03P-4138      Freq.0   88-72   24-Jan-2013  SIO/STS   |
|    Conductivity (C1)   SBE4C               04-2569       Freq.1   88-72   16-Jan-2013    SBE     |
|    Dissolved Oxygen    SBE43               43-1071       Aux2/V2  88-72   12-Jul-2012    SBE     |
|    Pump                SBE5T               05-4890                88-72                          |
|                                                                                                  |
|Secondary Pump Circuit                                                                            |
|    Temperature (T2)    SBE3plus            03P-4226      Freq.3   88-72   24-Jan-2013  SIO/STS   |
|    Conductivity (C2b)  SBE4C               04-3058       Freq.4   88-72   2-Nov-2012     SBE     |
|    Pump                SBE5T               05-4377                88-72                          |
|                                                                                                  |
|Optical Diss. Oxygen+   Rinko III ARO-CAV   105           Aux3/V4  88-72   7-Aug-2012     JFE     |
|Rinko O2 Temperature+                                     Aux3/V5                      Advantech  |
|                                                                                                  |
|Chlorophyll Fluorometer Seapoint            SCF2748       Aux1/V1  88-72                          |
|                                                                                                  |
|Transmissometer (TAMU)  WET Labs C-Star     CST-327DR     Aux2/V3  88-72   19-Jul-2012  WET Labs  |
|                                                                                                  |
|Altimeter (500m range)  Simrad 807          9711091       Aux1/V0  88-72                          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Deck Unit (in lab)      SBE11plus V2        11P9852-0366           88-72                          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   * All sensors belong to SIO/STS, unless otherwise noted.
   ** SBE = Sea-Bird Electronics
   + Optical oxygen sensor, new to SIO/STS; installed for evaluation purposes



An SBE35RT reference temperature sensor was connected to the SBE32 carousel
and recorded a temperature for each bottle closure. These temperatures were
used as additional CTD calibration checks. The SBE35RT was utilized using
Sea-Bird Electronics' recommendations (http://www.seabird.com).

The SBE9plus CTD was connected to the SBE32 36-place carousel, providing
for sea cable operation. Power to the SBE9plus CTD and sensors, SBE32
carousel and Simrad altimeter was provided through the sea cable from the
SIO/STS SBE11plus deck unit in the main lab.

CTD deployments were initiated by the console watch after the ship stopped
on station. The acquisition program was started and the deck unit turned on
at least 3 minutes prior to package deployment. The watch maintained a
console operations log containing a description of each deployment, a
record of every attempt to close a bottle and any relevant comments. The
deployment and acquisition software presented a short dialog instructing
the operator to turn on the deck unit, to examine the on-screen CTD data
displays and to notify the deck watch that this was accomplished.

Once the deck watch had deployed the rosette, the winch operator lowered it
to 10 meters, or deeper in heavier seas. The CTD sensor pumps were
configured with a 5-second start-up delay after detecting seawater
conductivities. The console operator checked the CTD data for proper sensor
operation and waited for sensors to stabilize, then instructed the winch
operator to bring the package to the surface and descend to a specified
target depth, based on CTD pressure available on the winch display.

The CTD profiling rate was at most 30m/min to 100m and up to 60m/min deeper
than 100m, depending on sea cable tension and sea state. As the package
descended toward the target depth, the rate was reduced to 30m/min at 100m
from the bottom.

The progress of the deployment and CTD data quality were monitored through
interactive graphics and operational displays. Bottle trip locations were
transcribed onto the console and sample logs. The sample log was used later
as an inventory of samples drawn from the bottles. The altimeter channel,
CTD depth, winch wire-out and bathymetric depth were all monitored to
determine the distance of the package from the bottom, allowing a safe
approach to 8-10 meters.

Bottles were closed on the up-cast by operating an on-screen control.  The
expected CTD pressure was reported to the winch operator for every bottle
trip. Bottles were tripped 30-40 seconds after the package stopped to allow
the rosette wake to dissipate and the bottles to flush. The winch operator
was instructed to proceed to the next bottle stop no sooner than 10 seconds
after closing bottles to ensure that stable CTD data were associated with
the trip and to allow the SBE35RT temperature sensor to measure bottle trip
temperature.

It can be necessary at some stations in higher sea states to close
shallower bottles (normally only the shallowest bottle) on the fly due to
the need to keep tension on the CTD cable. At such closures - always noted
on the CTD Console Log Sheet - the SBE35RT temperature is typically not
usable.

The package was directed to the surface by the deck for the last bottle
closure, then the package was brought on deck. The console operator
terminated the data acquisition, turned off the deck unit and assisted with
rosette sampling.

The R/V Melville's Markey DESH-6 (aft) winch was used for all reported
casts.  One conductor in the DESH-6 UNOLS-standard three-conductor 0.322"
electro-mechanical sea cable was used for power and signal; the sea cable
armor was used for ground.  A full (electrical and mechanical) re-
termination was done on the DESH-6 sea cable before P02E started.  The
Markey DESH-5 (forward) winch was available as a spare but was never
needed.


1.4.  CTD Cable Tension on Deep Casts

As CLIVAR/Carbon P02E progressed into deeper and deeper water, significant
science operations issues hinged on actual CTD cable tension and cast time
performance on very deep CTD casts (maximum cast depths deeper than 5000
meters).  Although all the U.S. work for this program since it began in
2003 had transpired without CTD cable parting or functionality loss, new
UNOLS/NSF cable tension rules went into effect shortly before this cruise.
It was thought pre-cruise by some at the operator and agency level that the
maximum CTD cable tensions on deep casts on this cruise would exceed the
new rules. Two questions in particular loomed in planning: (1) under what
conditions would CTD cable tensions exceed 5000 lbs., and (2) what would be
the impacts on P02 station times and operations due to efforts to keep
maximum observed CTD cable tension less than 5000 lbs.? The cruise had a
waiver permitting CTD operations to continue under some conditions if
higher CTD cable tensions were observed, but there was general concurrence
that sustained P02 CTD operations with cable tensions above 5000 lbs.
should be avoided if possible.

The ship was equipped with a new 20Hz recording tensiometer, which provided
the real-time data for cast operations and the recorded data for further
study.

On the previous leg, experiments with step-wise increasing winch haul speed
at early stations in waters 4000-5000 meters deep, in good weather, showed
that maximum CTD cable tensions stayed near or less than ca. 4000 lbs. with
any haul speeds to the maximum desired haul speed of 60 meters/minute.

It is important to note that most 5000-6000 meter casts during P02E took
place in good weather (winds 10-20 knots; low swell). During slightly more
than one day of winds in the 20-25 knot range (with periods of 25-30 knots)
seas rose somewhat.  Associated with the higher level of ship motion there
were several casts that day where cable tensions rose to nearer but still
under 5000 lbs., with maximum cable deployed, even with lowered winch haul-
up speeds.


1.5.  CTD Data Processing

Shipboard CTD data processing was performed automatically during and after
each deployment using SIO/STS CTD processing software v.5.1.6-1.

During acquisition, the raw CTD data were converted to engineering units,
filtered, response-corrected, calibrated and decimated to a more manageable
0.5-second time series. Pre-cruise laboratory calibrations for pressure,
temperature and conductivity were also applied at this time.  The
0.5-second time series data were used for real-time graphics during
deployments, and were the source for CTD pressure and temperature data
associated with each rosette bottle.  Both the raw 24 Hz data and the
0.5-second time series were stored for subsequent processing. During the
deployment, the raw data were backed up to another Linux workstation every
5 minutes.

At the completion of a deployment a sequence of processing steps were
performed automatically. The 0.5-second time series data were checked for
consistency, clean sensor response and calibration shifts. A 2-decibar
pressure series was generated from the down cast data.  The pressure-series
data were used by the web service for interactive plots, sections and CTD
data distribution.  Time-series data were also available for distribution
through the website.

CTD data were routinely examined for sensor problems, calibration shifts
and deployment or operational problems.  On-deck pressure values were
monitored at the start and end of each cast for potential drift.  Alignment
of temperature and conductivity sensor data (in addition to the default
0.073-second conductivity "advance" applied by the SBE11plus deck unit) was
optimized for each pump/sensor combination to minimize salinity spiking,
using data from multiple casts of various depths after acquisition.  If the
pressure offset or conductivity "advance" values were altered after data
acquisition, the CTD data were re-averaged from the 24Hz stored data.

The primary and secondary temperature sensors (SBE3plus) were compared to
each other and to the SBE35 temperature sensor.  CTD conductivity sensors
(SBE4C) were compared to each other, then calibrated by examining
differences between CTD and check-sample conductivity values.  CTD
dissolved oxygen sensor data were calibrated to check-sample data.

As bottle salinity and oxygen results became available, they were used to
refine shipboard conductivity and oxygen sensor calibrations.  Theta-
Salinity and theta-O2 comparisons were made between down and up casts as
well as between groups of adjacent deployments.

A total of 72 full casts were made using the 36-place CTD/LADCP rosette.
Further elaboration of CTD procedures specific to this cruise are found in
the next section.


1.6.  CTD Acquisition and Data Processing Details

Adjustments to the conductivity "advance" time (default: 0.073 seconds)
were examined during Leg 1 by re-averaging data from the stored 24 Hz data
at various time intervals, then evaluating salinity spiking and noise
levels in sharp gradients and in deep water for multiple casts.  An
additional 0.08-second "advance" was applied to the primary conductivity
sensor, and a 0.06-second "advance" was used for the secondary.  The new
"advance" times were applied real-time for all of P02E.

Primary T/C sensors were used for all but two casts of reported CTD data
because the same sensor pair was used through-out the cruise. Secondary TS
data were used for stations 149 and 151, where primary data were distinctly
noisier than secondary for most of both casts.  The deck noted a large
amount of kelp in the water at station 151.  There was also a primary pump
circuit flow obstruction during the up-cast of station 93; the down-cast
primary data were fine and used for reporting CTD data, but up-cast
secondary data had to be used for CTD trip data in the bottle reports.

The following table identifies problems or comments noted during specific
casts (NOTE: mwo = meters of wire out on winch):


Sta/Cast         Comment

start            Using Markey DESH-6/aft winch for rosette casts; full
                 (electrical + mechanical) retermination of wire prior to
                 start of Leg 2/P02E.
999/2            Not reported: Test cast, trip 12 bottles each at 1500m,
                 1000m and 500m to test carousel and bottle integrity.
88/1             Same position as station 87 on Leg 1/P02W.
91/1             Ship was 1100m East of desired station position: bridge
                 error.
92/1             Next to seamount, slow approach to bottom to be careful.
93/1             CTDS/CTDO2 noise/offsets 1220-700dbar upcast: major sea
                 slime; still noisy until about 150dbar.  Primary values
                 returned at trips to within 0.01 (S1-S2); used T2/S2 for
                 all CTD trip data and for time-series CTD report for
                 LADCP.  Deck/post-cast: Primary side: detached/TC sensors
                 rinsed with fresh water/re-attached.  Secondary side:
                 cleaned the clogged air release valve, and flushed valve
                 and sensors with fresh water.
96/1             Not reported: Cast aborted at 2m due to caught tag line.
96/2             Prior to station: carousel inspection/repair: removed all
                 latches, inspected all positions, resealed position 1.
                 Tested position 1: satisfactory. Re-assembled all latches.
105/1            Mixed layer temperature/density had structure with lots of
                 small steps.
108/1            Multibeam frozen at cast start.
113/1            Stopped at 4942 mwo before updating final cast target
                 depth to 14m deeper.
114/1            Deck Unit found "on" (with SBE pumps running) several
                 hours after cast completed.
125/1            Deck Unit found "on" (with SBE pumps off) 2.5 hours after
                 cast finished.
128/1            Not reported: Cast aborted near surface due to large
                 conductivity offset at surface soak: C1/C2 flushed.
136/1            Double yo-yo to 10m at cast start: rosette pulled out a
                 little too far re-surfacing.
145/1            Not reported: Cast aborted near surface due to 0.20
                 conductivity offset at surface soak: C1/C2 flushed.
147/1            Rough seas, no yo-yo at surface start, but did soak at
                 13m. Ship-roll went back to 2db for good TS data; CTDO
                 fairly well equilibrated, even before soak.
148/1            Rough seas, no yo-yo at surface start, but did soak at
                 13m.  Ship-roll back to 4db for good TS data, but CTDOXY
                 low until 16dbar (after surface soak), CTDOXY quality-
                 coded 4 (bad) for 0-14dbar.  Stopped winch at 100mwo
                 downcast: wire rubbing against the hull; resumed cast
                 after several minutes of re-positioning.  Speeds low top
                 2500+m due to low tension on downcast.
149/1            Rough seas, no yo-yo at surface start, but did soak at
                 13m.  Ship-roll back to 2-3dbar for good TS data, but
                 CTDOXY low until 14dbar (after surface soak), CTDOXY
                 quality-coded 4 (bad) for 0-12dbar.  winch speeds 36-48
                 m/min down to 1500m.  Primary data noisy, secondary data
                 cleaner: use T2/S2 for all reported CTD data, including
                 trips.
151/1            Noise in primary C sensor starting 22dbar downcast, and
                 higher noise level through-out cast. Apparently lots of
                 kelp in the water.  Use T2/S2 for all reported CTD data,
                 including trips.  Deck flushed sensors several times
                 before next deployment.
152/1            Yo-yo back only to 6db vs surface after surface soak due
                 to large swell.
156/1            Not reported: Cast aborted at 400m: rosette down to 10m,
                 20m, 40m until sensors finally agreed.  Offsets again
                 later on downcast.  Salp found in pump tube, removed;
                 sensors flushed.



1.7.  CTD Sensor Laboratory Calibrations

Laboratory calibrations of the CTD pressure, temperature, conductivity and
dissolved oxygen sensors were performed prior to CLIVAR/Carbon P02E.  The
sensors and calibration dates are listed in Table 1.3.0.  Copies of the
calibration sheets for Pressure, Temperature, Conductivity, and Dissolved
Oxygen sensors, as well as factory and deck calibrations for the TAMU
Transmissometer, are in Appendix D.


1.8.  CTD Shipboard Calibration Procedures

A single SBE9plus CTD (S/N 914) was used for all rosette/CTD/LADCP casts
during CLIVAR/Carbon P02E.  The CTD was deployed with all sensors and pumps
aligned vertically, as recommended by SBE.

An SBE35RT Digital Reversing Thermometer (S/N 3528706-0035) served as an
independent calibration check for T1 and T2 sensors.  In situ salinity and
dissolved O2 check samples collected during each cast were used to
calibrate the conductivity and dissolved O2 sensors.

1.8.1.  CTD Pressure

The Paroscientific Digiquartz pressure transducer (S/N 914-110547) was
calibrated in June 2012 at the SIO/STS Calibration Facility.  The
calibration coefficients provided on the report were used to convert
frequencies to pressure.  The SIO/STS pressure calibration coefficients
already incorporate the slope and offset term usually provided by
Paroscientific.

During Leg 1/P02W, the initial deck readings for pressure indicated a
pressure offset was required, typically because CTDs are calibrated
horizontally but deployed vertically.  An offset of -0.9 decibars was
applied to all casts during acquisition on Leg 2/P02E.

Residual pressure offsets (the difference between the first and last
submerged pressures, after the offset corrections) varied from -0.1 to +0.2
decibars.  Pre- and post-cast on-deck/out-of-water pressure offsets varied
from -0.1 to +0.2 decibars before the casts, and -0.2 to +0.2 decibars
after the casts.  The in/out pressures within a cast were very consistent.

1.8.2.  CTD Temperature

The same SBE3plus primary temperature sensor (T1: 03P-4138) and secondary
temperature sensor (T2: 03P-4226) were used during both legs of P02.
Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations, plus
shipboard temperature corrections determined during the cruise, were
applied to raw primary and secondary sensor data during each cast.

A single SBE35RT (3528706-0035) was used as a tertiary temperature check.
It was located equidistant between T1 and T2 with the sensing element
aligned in a plane with the T1 and T2 sensing elements.  The SBE35RT
Digital Reversing Thermometer is an internally-recording temperature sensor
that operates independently of the CTD. It is triggered by the SBE32
carousel in response to a bottle closure.  The SBE35RT on P02E was set to
internally average over 4 sampling cycles (a total of 4.4 seconds).

According to the manufacturer's specifications, the typical stability for
an SBE35RT sensor is 0.001 deg.C/year.  A post-cruise calibration for this
sensor (18-Jun-2013) showed essentially no change (at most 0.0001 deg.C)
over the 6 months since the pre-cruise calibration.

Two independent metrics of calibration accuracy were examined. At each
bottle closure, the primary and secondary temperature were compared with
each other and with the SBE35RT temperature.  CTD temperature calibrations
for P02E were re-evaluated during Leg 2/P02E, with the added benefit of
seeing data from more stations.

Both temperature sensors were examined for drift with time, using the more
stable SBE35RT at a smaller range of deeper trip levels (4000-5000
decibars).  Even in this small pressure range, the time drift was impacted
by the pressure effect on the sensors.  In order to better align deeper and
shallower data, a second-order pressure correction was first applied to
each temperature sensor, using all bottles where the T1-T2 difference was
less than +/-0.005 (to omit high-gradient bottles that might skew the
results),

Neither of the sensors exhibited a temperature-dependent slope.  But both
T1 and T2 had a residual time dependence (offset drift) that flattened out
after the first half of Leg 1/P02W.  T2 differences shifted slightly around
day 35, after the C2 sensor was replaced.

All casts together were used for the T1 drift corrections, but stations
1-62 and 63-159 were fit separately for the T2 drift.  Data deeper than
1800 decibars were used to determine second-order corrections to pull
deeper T2 differences in line with shallower differences.

Pressure-dependent corrections were then re-checked, and no further
adjustments were warranted.


The final corrections for T1 temperature data reported on P02E are
summarized in Appendix A.  Corrections made to both temperature sensors had
the form:

                        T(ITS90)=T+tp2*P2+tp1*P+t0


Residual temperature differences after correction are shown in figures
1.8.2.0 through 1.8.2.8.


Figure 1.8.2.0: P02E SBE35RT-T1 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.2.1: P02E Deep SBE35RT-T1 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.8.2.2: P02E SBE35RT-T2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.2.3: P02E Deep SBE35RT-T2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.8.2.4: P02E T1-T2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.2.5: P02E Deep T1-T2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.8.2.6: P02E SBE35RT-T1 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.2.7: P02E SBE35RT-T2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.2.8: P02E T1-T2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).


The 95% confidence limits for the P02E mean low-gradient differences are
+/-0.00686 deg.C for SBE35RT-T1 and +/-0.00416 deg.C for T1-T2.  The 95%
confidence limit for deep temperature residuals (where pressure > 1800
dbars) is +/-0.00079 deg.C for SBE35RT-T1 and +/-0.00057 deg.C for T1-T2.

1.8.3.  CTD Conductivity

The same SBE4C primary (C1/04-2569) and secondary (C2b/04-3058)
conductivity sensors were used for all of Leg 2/P02E.  Sensor C1 was used
for all stations of P02, and C2b was first used at station 63 on Leg
1/P02W.  Primary TC sensor data were used to report final CTD data for all
but two casts because the same sensor pair was used throughout both legs.
Secondary TC sensor data were used for stations 149 and 151 due to
excessive noise in the primaries, likely caused by organic matter (kelp?)
in the pump circuit.

Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations were
applied to convert raw frequencies to conductivity. Shipboard conductivity
corrections, determined during the cruise, were applied to primary and
secondary conductivity data for each cast.  Conductivity corrections for
both P02 legs were re-evaluated at the end of Leg 2/P02E, and included
stations from both legs in order to determine more consistent corrections.

Corrections for both CTD temperature sensors were finalized before
analyzing conductivity differences.  Two independent metrics of calibration
accuracy were examined. At each bottle closure, the primary and secondary
conductivity were compared with each other.  Each sensor was also compared
to conductivity calculated from check sample salinities using CTD pressure
and temperature.

There was some shifting back-and-forth of bottle-CTD differences throughout
the cruise. An investigation indicated it was typically the result of
bottle salinity differences of 0.001-0.002 from run-to-run.  Starting
with station 126, it was found that using a small space heater to bring 
the samples close to the bath temperature greatly reduced this oscillation. 
This suggests that this shifting was due to a relatively large difference 
between the water sample temperature and the salinometer bath temperature.
Theta-Salinity comparisons showed that cast-to-cast deep CTD data were well-
aligned before applying any offsets.  Differences from all stations were 
included in the fits for conductivity corrections.

The differences between primary and secondary temperature sensors were used
as filtering criteria for all conductivity fits to reduce the contamination
of conductivity comparisons by package wake.  The coherence of this
relationship is shown in figure 1.8.3.0.


Figure 1.8.3.0: P02E Coherence of conductivity differences as a function of
                temperature differences.


Uncorrected conductivity comparisons are shown in figures 1.8.3.1 through
1.8.3.3.


Figure 1.8.3.1: P02E Uncorrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (-0.01
                deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.2: P02E Uncorrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (-0.01
                deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.3: P02E Uncorrected C1-C2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).


Offsets for each C sensor were evaluated for drift with time using
C(Bottle)-C(CTD) differences from a smaller range of deeper pressures
(2800-4800 decibars), in order to exclude most of the pressure effect on
the sensors.  A second-order fit of differences vs time was determined for
each sensor, accounting for a slower rate of change partway through Leg
1/P02W.

C(Bottle)-C(CTD) differences were then evaluated for response to pressure
and/or conductivity, which typically shifts between pre- and post-cruise
SBE laboratory calibrations.  A comparison of the residual differences
indicated that a parabolic conductivity-dependent correction was required
for each sensor.  Small adjustments to the time-dependent corrections for
C1 were re-calculated using stations 1-159.

After applying time- and conductivity-dependent corrections, the pressure-
dependent coefficients for conductivity were calculated.  The correction
was linear for C1, and parabolic for C2b, in order to pull in the
differences from very deep data (below 5800 decibars) on P02E casts.

A few small offset adjustments, based on Theta-Salinity comparisons with
adjacent casts, were applied as follows:

     +0.0002 mS/cm was applied to C2b/stations 88-92
     +0.0003 mS/cm was applied to C2b/station 93
     -0.0001 mS/cm was applied to C2b/stations 110-127
     +0.0005 mS/cm was applied to C2b/stations 153-154,156-158
     +0.001  mS/cm was applied to C2b/stations 155

After adjustments, deep Theta-Salinity profiles of adjacent casts agreed
well for both sensor pairs.

The residual conductivity differences after correction are shown in figures
1.8.3.4 through 1.8.3.15.


Figure 1.8.3.4:  P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.5:  P02E Deep Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by station (Pressure >=
                 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.8.3.6:  P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.7:  P02E Deep Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by station (Pressure >=
                 1800 dbars).
Figure 1.8.3.8:  P02E Corrected C1-C2 by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.9:  P02E Deep Corrected C1-C2 by station (Pressure >= 1800 
                 dbars).
Figure 1.8.3.10: P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by pressure (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.11: P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by pressure (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.12: P02E Corrected C1-C2 by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.13: P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C1 by conductivity (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.14: P02E Corrected C(Bottle)-C2 by conductivity (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.15: P02E Corrected C1-C2 by conductivity (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).


The final corrections for the sensors used on P02E are summarized in
Appendix A.  Corrections made to the primary conductivity sensor had the
form:

                       corC=C+cp1*P+c2*C**2+c1*C+c0

Corrections made to the secondary conductivity sensor had the form:

                   corC=C+cp2*P**2+cp1*P+c2*C**2+c1*C+c0

Salinity residuals after applying shipboard P/T/C corrections are
summarized in figures 1.8.3.16 through 1.8.3.18.  Only CTD and bottle
salinity data with "acceptable" quality codes are included in the
differences.


Figure 1.8.3.16: P02E Salinity residuals by station (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.17: P02E Salinity residuals by pressure (-0.01
                 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.8.3.18: P02E Deep Salinity residuals by station (Pressure >= 1800 
                 dbars).


Figures 1.8.3.17 and 1.8.3.18 represent estimates of the salinity accuracy
of P02E.  The 95% confidence limits are +/-0.00435 relative to bottle
salinities for all salinities, where T1-T2 is within +/-0.01 deg.C; and
+/-0.00166 relative to bottle salinities for deep salinities, where
pressure is more than 1800 decibars.

Post-Cruise Conductivity Laboratory Calibrations

Post-cruise laboratory calibrations for all 3 conductivity sensors were
done and available before finishing this cruise report.

Sensor C1 appears to have had a large change: more than 0.007 mS/cm at 60
mS/cm.  The maximum conductivity measured during Leg 1/P02W was 50.5 mS/cm,
and only 45 mS/cm by the end of Leg 2/P02E.  The post-cruise shift in the
conductivity residual (SBE4C-Standard on SBE Lab.Cal. plots) was
approximately +0.0045/+0.003 (C1/C2b) at 50 mS/cm, and +0.003/+0.0015
(C1/C2b) at 45 mS/cm.  This is consistent with what was seen in uncorrected
near-surface conductivities at the end of leg 2.

Note that pressure effects on SBE4C sensors have never been evaluated in a
laboratory, so far as we know.  All calibrations are done at atmospheric
pressure, plus the pressure caused by a meter or so of water.

1.8.4.  CTD Dissolved Oxygen

A single SBE43 dissolved O2 sensor (DO/43-0275) was used during P02E.  This
dissolved O2 sensor was plumbed into the primary T1/C1 pump circuit after C1.

The SBE43 DO sensor was calibrated to dissolved O2 bottle samples taken at
bottle stops by matching the down cast CTD data to the up cast trip
locations on isopycnal surfaces, then calculating CTD dissolved O2 using a
DO sensor response model and minimizing the residual differences from the
bottle samples. A non-linear least-squares fitting procedure was used to
minimize the residuals and to determine sensor model coefficients, and was
accomplished in three stages.

The time constants for the lagged terms in the model were first determined
for the sensor.  These time constants are sensor-specific but applicable to
an entire cruise.  Next, casts were fit individually to bottle sample data.
Bottle oxygens from nearby casts with similar deep TS structure were used
to help fit CTD O2 data for casts with one or more mis-tripped bottles.
Furthermore, consecutive casts were compared on plots of Theta vs O2 to
verify consistency over the course of P02E.

At the end of the cruise, standard and blank values for bottle oxygen data
were smoothed, and the bottle oxygen values were recalculated.  The changes
to bottle oxygen values were less than 0.01 ml/l for most stations.  CTD O2
data were re-calibrated to the smoothed bottle values after the leg.

Final CTD dissolved O2 residuals are shown in figures 1.8.4.0-1.8.4.2.


Figure 1.8.4.0: P02E O2 residuals by station (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.4.1: P02E O2 residuals by pressure (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 
                deg.C).
Figure 1.8.4.2: P02E Deep O2 residuals by station (Pressure >= 1800 dbars).


The standard deviations of 1.855 umol/kg for all oxygens and 0.697 umol/kg
for deep oxygens are only presented as general indicators of goodness of
fit.  SIO/STS makes no claims regarding the precision or accuracy of CTD
dissolved O2 data.

The general form of the SIO/STS DO sensor response model equation for
Clark-style cells follows Brown and Morrison [Brow78], Millard [Mill82] and
Owens & Millard  [Owen85].  SIO/STS models DO sensor responses with lagged
CTD data. In situ pressure and temperature are filtered to match the sensor
responses.  Time constants for the pressure response (p), a slow (Tf) and
fast (Ts) thermal response, package velocity (dP), thermal diffusion (dT)
and pressure hysteresis (h) are fitting parameters. Once determined for a
given sensor, these time constants typically remain constant for a cruise.
The thermal diffusion term is derived by low-pass filtering the difference
between the fast response (Ts) and slow response (Tl) temperatures. This
term is intended to correct non-linearities in sensor response introduced
by inappropriate analog thermal compensation.  Package velocity is
approximated by low-pass filtering 1st-order pressure differences, and is
intended to correct flow-dependent response.  Dissolved O2 concentration is
then calculated:

     O2ml/l=[C1*VDOe**(C2*Ph/5000)+C3]*fsat(T,P)*e**(C4*Tl+C5*Ts+C7*Pl+C6*dOc/dt+C8*dP/dt+C9*dT)(1.8.4.0)

where:

O2ml/l      Dissolved O2 concentration in ml/l;
VDO         Raw sensor output;
C1          Sensor slope
C2          Hysteresis response coefficient
C3          Sensor offset
fsat(T,P)   O2 saturation at T,P (ml/l);
T           in situ temperature (deg.C);
P           in situ pressure (decibars);
Ph          Low-pass filtered hysteresis pressure (decibars);
Tl          Long-response low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
Ts          Short-response low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
Pl          Low-pass filtered pressure (decibars);
dOc/dt      Sensor current gradient (microamps/sec);
dP/dt       Filtered package velocity (db/sec);
dT          low-pass filtered thermal diffusion estimate (Ts - Tl).
C4-C9       Response coefficients.



CTD O2 ml/l data are converted to umol/kg units on demand.

Manufacturer information on the SBE43 DO sensor, a modification of the
Clark polarographic membrane technology, can be found at
http://www.seabird.com/application_notes/AN64.htm.

A faster-response JFE Advantech Rinko III ARO-CAV Optical DO sensor, with
its own oxygen temperature thermistor, was installed on the rosette and
integrated with the ODF CTD from station 25 onward.  ODF intends to
evaluate it side-by-side with the SBE43 data, considering its possible use
for future expeditions.  Please contact ODF (odfdata@sts.ucsd.edu) for
further information.  Manufacturer information about the Rinko III sensor
can be found at:

     http://www.jfe-advantech.co.jp/eng/ocean/rinko/rinko3.html.


1.9.  Bottle Sampling

At the end of each rosette deployment water samples were drawn from the
bottles in the following order:


     o   CFC-12, CFC-11, and SF6
     o   3He
     o   Dissolved O2
     o   Dissolved Inorganic Carbon (DIC)
     o   pH
     o   Total Alkalinity
     o   13C and 14C
     o   Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN)
     o   Tritium
     o   Nutrients
     o   d15N-NO3 / d18O-NO3
     o   Salinity
     o   137Cs / 134Cs / 90Sr
     o   129I
     o   Millero Density
     o   Dissolved Calcium



Bottle serial numbers were assigned at the start of the leg, and
corresponded to their rosette/carousel position.  Aside from various
repairs to bottles along the way, no bottles were replaced during this leg.
However some were removed due to carousel problems, which are addressed in
the next section.

The correspondence between individual sample containers and the rosette
bottle position (1-36) from which the sample was drawn was recorded on the
sample log for the cast.  This log also included any comments or anomalous
conditions noted about the rosette and bottles.  One member of the sampling
team was designated the sample cop, whose sole responsibility was to
maintain this log and ensure that sampling progressed in the proper drawing
order.

Normal sampling practice included opening the drain valve and then the air
vent on the bottle, indicating an air leak if water escaped.  This
observation together with other diagnostic comments (e.g., "lanyard caught
in lid", "valve left open") that might later prove useful in determining
sample integrity were routinely noted on the sample log.  Drawing oxygen
samples also involved taking the sample draw temperature from the bottle.
The temperature was noted on the sample log and was sometimes useful in
determining leaking or mis-tripped bottles.

Once individual samples had been drawn and properly prepared, they were
distributed for analysis.  Oxygen, nutrient and salinity analyses were
performed on computer-assisted (PC) analytical equipment networked to the
data processing computer for centralized data management.


1.10.  Bottle Tripping Issues

The first leg of P02 experienced carousel problems that were inherited by
this second leg, P02E.  On Leg 1/P02W, a few of the carousel latches failed
to trigger because of building corrosion from water seeping into some of
the individual magnetic releases (solenoids).  These leaks were plugged
with Scotchkote as a temporary fix, which succeeded for all but one of the
positions.  Thus, P02E started with Niskin bottle 35 removed from the
rosette.  As the cruise progressed, Niskin bottles 1 and 28 were eventually
removed for the same reason.  After these bottles were removed, the
positions on the carousel were sealed up as to prevent further damage due
to leaking.

Table 1.10.0 summarizes when carousel positions were re-ordered or
completely removed from the default tripping line-up during P02E:


Table 1.10.0: P02E Summary of Unusual Tripping Sequences.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carousel   Stations                                                                                   |
|Position   Affected   Comment                                                                         |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   35       88-159    Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)                         |
|   34         91      Bottle intentionally tripped out-of-order (last/at surface)                     |
|   1          96      Bottle intentionally tripped third (2 tripped at bottom, 3 tripped next, then 1 |
|   1        97-159    Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)                         |
|   28      116-159    Bottle removed from rosette (carousel position skipped)                         |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Several backup plans were pursued ashore but SBE32 36-place carousels are
few and far between compared to the 24-place carousels.  Eventually a spare
36-place carousel was borrowed from NOAA/PMEL and sent to the Hawaii port
stop, to be used only if all else failed.

Numerous other minor bottle tripping and/or carousel issues occurred during
P02E.  Most and were attributed to lanyards failing to fully slide off the
latches, or snagging somewhere on the rosette during the release process.
Most of these problems were resolved by re-aligning the lanyards during
cocking to avoid obstructions or snagging points.  Individual mis-tripped
bottles and samples taken from them have been quality-coded 4. More
detailed comments appear in Appendix C.


1.11.  Bottle Data Processing

Water samples collected and properties analyzed shipboard were centrally
managed in a relational database (PostgreSQL 8.1.23) running on a Linux
system. A web service (OpenACS 5.5.0 and AOLServer 4.5.1) front-end
provided ship-wide access to CTD and water sample data.  Web-based
facilities included on-demand arbitrary property-property plots and
vertical sections as well as data uploads and downloads.

The sample log information and any diagnostic comments were entered into
the database once sampling was completed.  Quality flags associated with
sampled properties were set to indicate that the property had been sampled,
and sample container identifications were noted where applicable (e.g.,
oxygen flask number).  Acquisition and sampling details were also made
available on the ODF shipboard website post-cast with scanned versions of
the Console and Sample logs.

Analytical results were provided on a regular basis by the various
analytical groups and incorporated into the database. These results
included a quality code associated with each measured value and followed
the coding scheme developed for the World Ocean Circulation Experiment
Hydrographic Programme (WHP) [Joyc94].

Table 1.11.0 shows the number of samples drawn and the number of times each
WHP sample quality flag was assigned for each basic hydrographic property:


Table 1.11.0: Frequency of WHP quality flag assignments.

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                 Rosette Samples Stations     88-   159                  |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|              Reported                  WHP Quality Codes                |
|              levels       1        2     3     4      5      7      9   |
+------------++----------+------------------------------------------------+
| Bottle     ||  2322    |  0     2317     1     0      0      0      4   |
| CTD Salt   ||  2322    |  0     2322     0     0      0      0      0   |
| CTD Oxy    ||  2322    |  0     2320     0     2      0      0      0   |
| Salinity   ||  2316    |  0     2280    33     3      1      0      5   |
| Oxygen     ||  2313    |  0     2304     5     4      4      0      5   |
| Silicate   ||  2317    |  0     2315     0     2      0      0      5   |
| Nitrate    ||  2317    |  0     2315     0     2      0      0      5   |
| Nitrite    ||  2317    |  0     2315     0     2      0      0      5   |
| Phosphate  ||  2317    |  0     2315     0     2      0      0      5   |
+------------++----------+------------------------------------------------+


Additionally, data investigation comments are presented in Appendix C.

Various consistency checks and detailed examination of the data continued
throughout the cruise.  Chief Scientist, Dr. Sabine Mecking, reviewed the
data and compared it with historical data sets.


1.12.  Salinity Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

One salinometer, a Guildline Autosal 8400B (S/N 69-180), was used
throughout P02E. This salinometer utilized the typical National Instruments
interface to decode Autosal data and communicate with a Windows-based
acquisition PC. All discrete salinity analyses were done in the R/V
Melville's Photo Lab.

Samples were analyzed after they had equilibrated to laboratory
temperature, usually within 6-20 hours after collection. The salinometer
was standardized for each group of analyses (typically 1 cast, sometimes 2;
up to 72 samples) using two fresh vials of standard seawater per group.

Salinometer measurements were made by a computer using LabVIEW software
developed by SIO/STS. The software maintained an Autosal log of each
salinometer run which included salinometer settings and air and bath
temperatures.  The air temperature was monitored via digital thermometer
and displayed on a 48-hour strip-chart via LabVIEW in order to observe
cyclical changes.  The program guided the operator through the
standardization procedure and making sample measurements.  The analyst was
prompted to change samples and flush the cell between readings.

Standardization procedures included flushing the cell at least 2 times with
a fresh vial of Standard Seawater (SSW), setting the flow rate to a low
value during the last fill, and monitoring the STD dial setting.  If the
STD dial changed by 10 units or more since the last salinometer run (or
during standardization), another vial of SSW was opened and the
standardization procedure repeated to verify the setting.

Each salt sample bottle was agitated to minimize stratification before
reading on the salinometer.  Samples were run using 2 flushes before the
final fill. The computer determined the stability of a measurement and
prompted for additional readings if there appeared to be drift. The
operator could annotate the salinometer log, and would routinely add
comments about cracked sample bottles, loose thimbles, salt crystals or
anything unusual in the amount of sample in the bottle.


Sample Collection, Equilibration and Data Processing

A total of 5248 rosette salinity samples were measured.  An additional 14
samples were run for calibrating the underway TSG system.  158 vials of
standard seawater (IAPSO SSW) were used.

Salinity samples were drawn into 200 ml Kimax high-alumina borosilicate
bottles, which were rinsed three times with the sample prior to filling.
The bottles were sealed with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and kept
closed with Nalgene screw caps. This assembly provides very low container
dissolution and sample evaporation. Prior to sample collection, inserts
were inspected for proper fit and loose inserts replaced to ensure an
airtight seal.

After samples were brought back to the analysis lab, the full case was
placed on a wooden frame and sealed around all edges to the workbench top.
Salt bottle storage boxes have either an open grid pattern material or have
holes drilled between bottle locations to facilitate air circulation
between the bottles from bottom to top.  A fan circulated warm air drawn
from behind the Autosal to the underside of the salt case.

A thermometer was placed between two bottles that represent cooler but not
the coldest temperatures, typically bottles 9 and 15 for the square cases
and alongside bottle 3, on the inner side, for the rectangular cases.  Warm
air circulated through the case until indicated glass temperature was
within 1 deg.C of bath temperature.  The case was removed from the warming
frame and allowed to stand for 10 to 30 minutes before analyzing the
salinities.  Equilibration times were logged for all casts and laboratory
temperatures were logged at the beginning and end of each run.

PSS-78 salinity [UNES81] was calculated for each sample from the measured
conductivity ratios.  The difference between the initial vial of standard
water and the next one run as an unknown was applied as a linear function
of elapsed run time to the measured ratios. The corrected salinity data
were then incorporated into the cruise database.

Data processing included double checking that the station, sample and box
number had been correctly assigned, and reviewing the data and log files
for operator comments. Discrete salinity data were compared to CTD
salinities and were used for shipboard sensor calibration.


Laboratory Temperature

The salinometer water bath temperature was maintained at 24 deg.C.  The
ambient laboratory air temperature varied from 20 to 25.5 deg.C during the
sample analyses, typically between 21 and 24 deg.C.


Standards

IAPSO Standard Seawater Batch P-153 was used to standardize all stations.


Analytical Problems

No analytical problems were encountered on CLIVAR/Carbon P02E.


Results

The Autosal standard dial setting rarely changed during P02E, and then only
by small amounts (a total of -6 points from start to finish).  The drift in
readings within any single run was very low (within +/-0.00002) for all of
P02E (about +/-0.0004 in salinity).

Nevertheless, there were up to 0.0015 shifts in Bottle-CTD salinity differences 
observed between the runs of the two analysts, which abruptly stopped from 
station 126 onward, when they star ted using a space heater to bring the samples 
to near-bath temperature. This suggests that this shifting was due to a 
relatively large difference between the water sample temperature and the 
salinometer bath temperature.  The results, both before and after staion 126, 
fall within the estimated accuracy of bottle salinities run at sea - usually 
better than ±0.002 relative to the particular standard seawater batch used.


1.13.  Oxygen Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an SIO/ODF-designed automated
oxygen titrator using photometric endpoint detection based on the
absorption of 365nm wavelength ultraviolet light. The titration of the
samples and the data logging were controlled by ODF PC software compiled in
LabVIEW. Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Brickman Dosimat 765 buret driver
fitted with a 1.0 mL buret. The ODF method used a whole-bottle modified-
Winkler titration following the technique of Carpenter[Carp65] with
modifications by Culberson et al. [Culb91], but with higher concentrations
of potassium iodate standard (~0.012N) and thiosulfate solution (~55 gm/l).
Standard KIO3 solutions prepared ashore were run daily (approximately every
2-4 stations), unless changes were made to the system or reagents.
Reagent/distilled water blanks were also determined daily, or more often if
a change in reagents required it to account for presence of oxidizing or
reducing agents.

Sampling and Data Processing

5234 samples were analyzed from 72 stations on P02E. Samples were collected
for dissolved oxygen analyses soon after the rosette was brought on board.
Six different cases of 24 flasks each were rotated by station to minimize
any potential flask calibration issues. Using a silicone drawing tube,
nominal 125ml volume-calibrated iodine flasks were rinsed 3 times with
minimal agitation, then filled and allowed to overflow for at least 3 flask
volumes. The sample drawing temperatures were measured with an electronic
resistance temperature detector (OmegaTM HH370 RTD) embedded in the drawing
tube. These temperatures were used to calculate umol/kg concentrations, and
as a diagnostic check of bottle integrity. Reagents (MnCl2 then NaI/NaOH)
were added to fix the oxygen before stoppering. The flasks were shaken to
assure thorough dispersion of the precipitate, once immediately after
drawing, and then again after about 20 minutes. A water seal was applied to
the rim of each bottle in between shakes.

The samples were analyzed within 1 hour of collection, and the data
incorporated into the cruise database.

Thiosulfate normalities were calculated from each standardization and
corrected to 20 deg.C. The thiosulfate normalities and blanks were
monitored for possible drifting or other problems when new reagents were
used. An average blank and thiosulfate normality were used to recalculate
oxygen concentrations. The thiosulfate was changed between stations 99 and
100, then again between stations 127 and 128 .  Thus, the first set of
averages were performed on Stations 88 through 99, the second set was done
on Stations 100 through 127, and the third set was done on stations 128
through 159.  The difference between the original and "smoothed" data
averaged 0.07% over the course of the cruise.

Bottle oxygen data were reviewed to ensure station, cast, bottle number,
flask, and draw temperature were entered properly. Comments made during
analysis were reviewed, and anomalies were investigated and resolved. If an
incorrect end point was encountered, the analyst re-examined raw data and
the program recalculated a correct end point.

After the data were uploaded to the database, bottle oxygen was graphically
compared with CTD oxygen and adjoining stations. Any points that appeared
erroneous were reviewed and comments made regarding the final outcome of
the investigation. These investigations and final data coding are reported
in Appendix C.

Volumetric Calibration

Oxygen flask volumes were determined gravimetrically with degassed
deionized water to determine flask volumes at ODF's chemistry laboratory.
This was done once before using flasks for the first time and periodically
thereafter when a suspect volume is detected. The volumetric flasks used in
preparing standards were volume-calibrated by the same method, as was the
10 mL Dosimat buret used to dispense standard iodate solution.

Standards

Liquid potassium iodate standards were prepared and tested in 6 liter
batches and bottled in sterile glass bottles at ODF's chemistry laboratory
prior to the expedition. The normality of the liquid standard was
determined by calculation from weight of powder temperature of solution and
flask volume at 20 deg.C. The standard was supplied by Alfa Aesar (lot
B05N35) and has a reported purity of 99.4-100.4%. All other reagents were
"reagent grade" and were tested for levels of oxidizing and reducing
impurities prior to use.

Analytical Problems

Occasionally, samples were lost due to an occasional problem with the
Dosimat.  After these occurred, the analyst paused the analyses until the
problem was resolved.  A summary of these lost samples can be found in
Appendix C.


1.14.  Nutrient Analysis

Summary of Analysis

5260 samples from 72 CTD stations were analyzed.

The cruise started with new pump tubes; they were changed twice, after
stations 110 and 141.  Three sets of Primary/Secondary standards were made
up over the course of the cruise. The cadmium column efficiency was checked
periodically and ranged between 97%-100%. When the efficiency was found to
be below 97%, the column was replaced.


Equipment and Techniques

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate plus nitrite, and nitrite)
were performed on a Seal Analytical continuous-flow AutoAnalyzer 3 (AA3).
The analytical methods used are described by Gordon et al. [Gord92], Hager
et al. [Hage68] and Atlas et al. [Atla71].  The details of modification of
analytical methods used for this cruise are also compatible with the
methods described in the nutrient section of the GO-SHIP repeat hydrography
manual [Hyde10].


Nitrate/Nitrite Analysis

A modification of the Armstrong et al. [Arms67] procedure was used for the
analysis of nitrate and nitrite. For nitrate analysis, a seawater sample
was passed through a cadmium column where the nitrate was reduced to
nitrite.  This nitrite was then diazotized with sulfanilamide and coupled
with N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine to form a red dye.  The sample was then
passed through a 10mm flowcell and absorbance measured at 540nm. The
procedure was the same for the nitrite analysis but without the cadmium
column.

REAGENTS

Sulfanilamide

Dissolve 10g sulfanilamide in 1.2N HCl and bring to 1 liter volume.  Add 2
drops of 40% surfynol 465/485 surfactant.  Store at room temperature in a
dark poly bottle.

Note: 40% Surfynol 465/485 is 20% 465 plus 20% 485 in DIW.

N-(1-Naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochloride (N-1-N)

Dissolve 1g N-1-N in DIW, bring to 1 liter volume. Add 2 drops 40% surfynol
465/485 surfactant.  Store at room temperature in a dark poly bottle.
Discard if the solution turns dark reddish brown.

Imidazole Buffer

Dissolve 13.6g imidazole in ~3.8 liters DIW.  Stir for at least 30 minutes
to completely dissolve. Add 60 ml of CuSO4 + NH4Cl mix (see below).  Add 4
drops 40% Surfynol 465/485 surfactant. Let sit overnight before proceeding.
Using a calibrated pH meter, adjust to pH of 7.83-7.85 with 10% (1.2N) HCl
(about 20-30 ml of acid, depending on exact strength).  Bring final
solution to 4L with DIW.  Store at room temperature.

NH4Cl + CuSO4 mix

Dissolve 2g cupric sulfate in DIW, bring to 100 m1 volume (2%).  Dissolve
250g ammonium chloride in DIW, bring to l liter volume.  Add 5ml of 2%
CuSO4 solution to this NH4Cl stock. This should last many months.


Phosphate Analysis

Ortho-Phosphate was analyzed using a modification of the Bernhardt and
Wilhelms [Bern67] method. Acidified ammonium molybdate was added to a
seawater sample to produce phosphomolybdic acid, which was then reduced to
phosphomolybdous acid (a blue compound) following the addition of
dihydrazine sulfate.  The sample was passed through a 10mm flowcell and
absorbance measured at 820nm.

REAGENTS

Ammonium Molybdate

H2SO4 solution: Pour 420 ml of DIW into a 2 liter Ehrlenmeyer flask or
beaker, place this flask or beaker into an ice bath.  SLOWLY add 330 ml of
concentrated H2SO4.  This solution gets VERY HOT!! Cool in the ice bath.
Make up as much as necessary in the above proportions.

Dissolve 27g ammonium molybdate in 250ml of DIW. Bring to 1 liter volume
with the cooled sulfuric acid solution. Add 3 drops of 15% DDS surfactant.
Store in a dark poly bottle.

Dihydrazine Sulfate

Dissolve 6.4g dihydrazine sulfate in DIW, bring to 1 liter volume and
refrigerate.

Silicate Analysis

Silicate was analyzed using the technique of Armstrong et al. [Arms67]
Acidified ammonium molybdate was added to a seawater sample to produce
silicomolybdic acid which was then reduced to silicomolybdous acid (a blue
compound) following the addition of stannous chloride.  The sample was
passed through a 10mm flowcell and measured at 660nm.

REAGENTS

Tartaric Acid

Dissolve 200g tartaric acid in DW and bring to 1 liter volume.  Store at
room temperature in a poly bottle.

Ammonium Molybdate

Dissolve 10.8g Ammonium Molybdate Tetrahydrate in ~ 900ml DW. Add 2.8ml
H2SO4* to solution, then bring volume to 1000ml.

Add 3-5 drops 15% SDS surfactant per liter of solution.

Stannous Chloride stock (as needed)

Dissolve 40g of stannous chloride in 100 ml 5N HCl.  Refrigerate in a poly
bottle.

NOTE: Minimize oxygen introduction by swirling rather than shaking the
solution. Discard if a white solution (oxychloride) forms.

Working (every 24 hours): Bring 5 ml of stannous chloride stock to 200 ml
final volume with 1.2N HCl. Make up daily - refrigerate when not in use in
a dark poly bottle.


Sampling

Nutrient samples were drawn into 40 ml polypropylene screw-capped
centrifuge tubes.  The tubes and caps were cleaned with 10% HCl and rinsed
2-3 times with sample before filling.  Samples were analyzed within 1-3
hours after sample collection, allowing sufficient time for all samples to
reach room temperature.  The centrifuge tubes fit directly onto the
sampler.


Data collection and processing

Data collection and processing was done with the software (AACE ver. 6.07)
provided with the instrument from SEAL Analytical.  After each run, the
charts were reviewed for any problems during the run, any blank was
subtracted, and final concentrations (uM) were calculated, based on a
linear curve fit.  Once the run was reviewed and concentrations calculated
a text file was created.  That text file was reviewed for possible problems
and then converted to another text file with only sample identifiers and
nutrient concentrations that was merged with other bottle data.


Standards and Glassware calibration

Primary standards for silicate (Na2SiF6), nitrate (KNO3), nitrite (NaNO2),
and phosphate (KH2PO4) were obtained from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co.
and/or Fisher Scientific.  The supplier reports purities of >98%, 99.999%,
97%, and 99.999 respectively.

All glass volumetric flasks and pipettes were gravimetrically calibrated
prior to the cruise.  The primary standards were dried and weighed out to
0.1 mg prior to the cruise.  The exact weight was noted for future
reference.  When primary standards were made, the flask volume at 20 deg.C,
the weight of the powder, and the temperature of the solution were used to
buoyancy correct the weight, calculate the exact concentration of the
solution, and determine how much of the primary was needed for the desired
concentrations of secondary standard.  Primary and secondary standards were
made up every 7-10 days.  The new standards were compared to the old before
use.

All the reagent solutions, primary and secondary standards were made with
fresh distilled deionized water (DIW).


Quality Control

All data were reported in uM (micromoles/liter). NO3, PO4, and NO2 were
reported to two decimal places and SiO3 to one. Accuracy is based on the
quality of the standards; the levels were:


Table 1.14.1: CLIVAR/Carbon P02E Nutrient Accuracy

                         Parameter   Accuracy (uM)
                         --------------------------
                            NO3          0.05
                            PO4          0.004
                           SiO3           2-4
                            NO2          0.05


Precision numbers for the instrument were the same for NO3 and PO4 and a
little better for SiO3 and NO2 (1 and 0.01 respectively).

The detection limits for the methods/instrumentation were:


Table 1.14.2: CLIVAR/Carbon P02E Nutrient Detection Limits

                     Parameter   Detection Limits (uM)
                     ----------------------------------
                      NO3+NO2            0.02
                        PO4              0.02
                       SiO3               0.5
                        NO2              0.02


As is standard ODF practice, a deep calibration check sample was run with
each set of samples and the data are tabulated below.


Table 1.14.3: CLIVAR/Carbon P02E RMNS cruise-averaged data

                      Parameter   Concentration (uM)
                      -------------------------------
                         NO3        35.86 +/- 0.14
                         PO4        2.50 +/- 0.01
                        SiO3       148.08 +/- 0.51


Reference materials for nutrients in seawater (RMNS) were also used as a
check sample run with each set of seawater samples. The RMNS preparation,
verification, and suggested protocol for use of the material are described
by Aoyama et al. [Aoya06] [Aoya07] [Aoya08] and Sato et al. [Sato10].  RMNS
batch BX was used on this cruise, with each bottle being used once or twice
before being discarded and a new one opened. Data are tabulated below,
along with the assigned values.


Table 1.14.0: CLIVAR/Carbon P02E Concentration of RMNS standard (uM)

             Parameter   Concentration (umol kg-1)   Assigned
             -------------------------------------------------
                NO3           43.13 +/- 0.12            43
                PO4           2.89  +/- 0.02          2.906
               SiO3           138.8 +/- 0.56           136
                NO2           0.04 +/- 0.005          0.034



Analytical Problems

The phosphate channel was an ongoing source of trouble, with the baseline
and peaks being bumpy and/or the baseline jumping up and recovering later,
causing uncertain sample values that necessitated reruns of individual
samples and sometimes even of whole stations. No samples were lost. Prior
to station 95 the sample probe and heater were replaced with spares. The
probe was switched back prior to station 114. The pump, flowcell, control
module and 880nm filter were switched out for spares in succession before
station 115.



References

Aoya06.
     Aoyama, M., "Intercomparison Exercise for Reference Material for
     Nutrients in Seawater in a Seawater Matrix," Technical Reports of the
     Meteorological Research Institute No.50, p. 91, Tsukuba, Japan.
     (2006a).

Aoya08.
     Aoyama, M., Barwell-Clark, J., Becker, S., Blum, M., Braga, E.S.,
     Coverly, S.C., Czobik, E., Dahllof, I., Dai, M.H., Donnell, G.O.,
     Engelke, C., Gong, G.C., Hong, Gi-Hoon, Hydes, D. J., Jin, M. M.,
     Kasai, H., Kerouel, R., Kiyomono, Y., Knockaert, M., Kress, N.,
     Krogslund, K. A., Kumagai, M., Leterme, S., Li, Yarong, Masuda, S.,
     Miyao, T., Moutin, T., Murata, A., Nagai, N., Nausch, G., Ngirchechol,
     M. K., Nybakk, A., Ogawa, H., Ooijen, J. van, Ota, H., Pan, J. M.,
     Payne, C., Pierre-Duplessix, O., Pujo-Pay, M., Raabe, T., Saito, K.,
     Sato, K., Schmidt, C., Schuett, M., Shammon, T. M., Sun, J., Tanhua,
     T., White, L., Woodward, E.M.S., Worsfold, P., Yeats, P., Yoshimura,
     T., A.Youenou, and Zhang, J. Z., "2006 Intercomparison Exercise for
     Reference Material for Nutrients in Seawater in a Seawater Matrix,"
     Technical Reports of the Meteorological Research Institute No. 58, p.
     104pp (2008).

Aoya07.
     Aoyama, M., Susan, B., Minhan, D., Hideshi, D., Louis, I. G., Kasai,
     H., Roger, K., Nurit, K., Doug, M., Murata, A., Nagai, N., Ogawa, H.,
     Ota, H., Saito, H., Saito, K., Shimizu, T., Takano, H., Tsuda, A.,
     Yokouchi, K., and Agnes, Y., "Recent Comparability of Oceanographic
     Nutrients Data: Results of a 2003 Intercomparison Exercise Using
     Reference Materials.," Analytical Sciences, 23: 115, pp. 1-1154
     (2007).

Arms67.
     Armstrong, F. A. J., Stearns, C. R., and Strickland, J. D. H., "The
     measurement of upwelling and subsequent biological processes by means
     of the Technicon Autoanalyzer and associated equipment," Deep-Sea
     Research, 14, pp. 381-389 (1967).

Atla71.
     Atlas, E. L., Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A
     Practical Manual for Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer(R) in Seawater
     Nutrient Analyses Revised," Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22, p.
     49, Oregon State University, Department of Oceanography (1971).

Bern67.
     Bernhardt, H. and Wilhelms, A., "The continuous determination of low
     level iron, soluble phosphate and total phosphate with the
     AutoAnalyzer," Technicon Symposia, I, pp. 385-389 (1967).

Brow78.
     Brown, N. L. and Morrison, G. K., "WHOI/Brown conductivity,
     temperature and depth microprofiler," Technical Report No. 78-23,
     Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1978).

Carp65.
     Carpenter, J. H., "The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the
     Winkler dissolved oxygen method," Limnology and Oceanography, 10, pp.
     141-143 (1965).

Culb91.
     Culberson, C. H., Knapp, G., Stalcup, M., Williams, R. T., and
     Zemlyak, F., "A comparison of methods for the determination of
     dissolved oxygen in seawater," Report WHPO 91-2, WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Office (Aug 1991).

Gord92.
     Gordon, L. I., Jennings, J. C., Jr., Ross, A. A., and Krest, J. M., "A
     suggested Protocol for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of Seawater
     Nutrients in the WOCE Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean
     Fluxes Study," Grp. Tech Rpt 92-1, OSU College of Oceanography Descr.
     Chem Oc. (1992).

Hage68.
     Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A Practical Manual for
     Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer(R) in Seawater Nutrient Analyses.,"
     Final report to Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Contract
     14-17-0001-1759., p. 31pp, Oregon State University, Department of
     Oceanography, Reference No. 68-33. (1968).

Hyde10.
     Hydes, D. J., Aoyama, M., Aminot, A., Bakker, K., Becker, S., Coverly,
     S., Daniel, A., Dickson, A. G., Grosso, O., Kerouel, R., Ooijen, J.
     van, Sato, K., Tanhua, T., Woodward, E. M. S., and Zhang, J. Z.,
     "Determination of Dissolved Nutrients (N, P, Si) in Seawater with High
     Precision and Inter-Comparability Using Gas-Segmented Continuous Flow
     Analysers" in GO-SHIP Repeat Hydrography Manual: A Collection of
     Expert Reports and Guidelines. IOCCP Report No. 14, ICPO Publication
     Series No 134 (2010a).

Joyc94.
     Joyce, T., ed. and Corry, C., ed., "Requirements for WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Data Reporting," Report WHPO 90-1, WOCE Report No. 67/91,
     pp. 52-55, WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office, Woods Hole, MA, USA
     (May 1994, Rev. 2). UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT.

Mill82.
     Millard, R. C., Jr., "CTD calibration and data processing techniques
     at WHOI using the practical salinity scale," Proc. Int. STD Conference
     and Workshop, p. 19, Mar. Tech. Soc., La Jolla, Ca. (1982).

Owen85.
     Owens, W. B. and Millard, R. C., Jr., "A new algorithm for CTD oxygen
     calibration," Journ. of Am. Meteorological Soc., 15, p. 621 (1985).

Sato10.
     Sato, K., Aoyama, M., and Becker, S., "RMNS as Calibration Standard
     Solution to Keep Comparability for Several Cruises in the World Ocean
     in 2000s.," Aoyama, M., Dickson, A.G., Hydes, D.J., Murata, A., Oh,
     J.R., Roose, P., Woodward, E.M.S., (Eds.) Comparability of nutrients
     in the world's ocean., pp. 43-56, Tsukuba, JAPAN: MOTHER TANK (2010b).

UNES81.
     UNESCO, "Background papers and supporting data on the Practical
     Salinity Scale, 1978," UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, No.
     37, p. 144 (1981).










                    Transmissometer Shipboard Procedures

                          PI: Wilford D. Gardner
                   Texas A&M Department of Oceanography
                          wgardnerocean.tamu.edu

Instrument     WETLabs C-Star Transmissometer - S/N CST-327DR

Air Calibration:

  • Calibrated the transmissometer in the lab at beginning, middle and end 
    of leg 2 with the complete sea cable set up.
  • Washed and dried the windows with Kimwipes and distilled water.
  • Recorded the final values for unblocked and blocked voltages plus air 
    temperature on the Transmissometer Calibration /Cast Log.
  • Compared the output voltage with the Factory Calibration data.
  • Computed updated calibration coefficients.


Deck Procedures:

  • Washed the transmissometer windows before every cast. Rinsed both 
    windows with a distilled water bottle that contains 2-3 drops of liquid 
    soap. This was the last procedure before the CTD went in the water.
  • Rinse instrument with fresh water at end of cruise.


Summary:

    Deck calibrations were carried out 3 times during P02E - near the start 
    of the leg, the middle of the leg and the morning after the last 
    station was completed. Results of the pre-cruise laboratory 
    calibration, and deck calibrations done during this cruise, appear at 
    the end of Appendix D with the other instrument/ sensor laboratory 
    calibrations.

After preparing the transmissometer for deployment (see Deck Procedures 
    above), CST-327DR was sent with the rosette for every CTD cast during 
    P02 E (Leg 2) on R/V Melville. Data were reported through a CTD a/d 
    channel, then converted to raw voltages without applying any 
    corrections. The data were averaged into half-second blocks with the 
    CTD data, and later converted into 2-dbar block-averaged data files. 
    The raw voltage data will be reported to Wilf Gardner for further 
    processing post-cruise, and later merged in with the CTD data at CCHDO.

    No problems were encountered with the transmissometer during this leg.





                Cruise Report: LADCP data from CLIVAR/Carbon
                                 P02E 2013

                               Steven Howell




Personnel

UH LADCP group: Eric Firing (PT), François Ascani, and Julia Hummon

Shipboard operators: Steven Howell, UH, and 
                     Gunnar Voet, University of Washington

System description

The University of Hawaii (UH) ADCP group used a Teledyne/RDI Workhorse 
150 kHz Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (LADCP, serial number 
16283, with beams 200 from vertical) to measure ocean currents during the 
spring 2013 CLIVAR/Carbon P02E cruise from Honolulu, Hawaii to San Diego, 
California. The instrument was held near the base of the rosette by an 
anodized aluminum collar connected to three struts that were in turn 
bolted to the rosette frame. Secondary restraint was provided by a 
ratchet strap tightened around the instrument and tied to an upper strut 
of the frame. Power for the LADCP was provided by a Deep Sea Power & 
Light sealed oil-filled marine battery (model SB-48V/18A, serial number 
01527). It was fastened with cord to the rosette frame. Figure 1 shows 
the arrangement of instruments in the rosette.
   
Between casts, a single power/communications cable connected the LADCP 
and battery to a computer and a DC power supply to initialize the LADCP, 
collect data after casts, and recharge the battery. Communication with 
the instrument was managed by a custom serial communication package.

Operating parameters

The LADCP used nominal 16m pulses and 8m receive intervals (assuming a 
standard 1500 m s speed of sound). The blanking interval (distance to 
first usable data) was 16 m.
   
A staggered pinging pattern was used, with alternating 1.2s and 1.6s 
periods between pings. This was to avoid a problem referred to as 
Previous Ping Interference (PPI), which happens when a strong echo off 
the bottom from a previous ping overwhelms the weak scattering signal 
from the water column. PPI occurs at a distance above the ocean floor
of ∆z = 1/2c∆t cos-theta where ∆t is the period between pings, c is the 
speed of sound, and theta is the beam angle from vertical. With constant 
ping rates, the artifact hits a single depth, essentially invalidating all 
data at that depth. By alternating delays, we lose half the data at two 
depths, but have some data through the entire column.


Figure 1: Schematic plan view of instrument and bottle locations on the 
          rosette. Orange elements are parts of the rosette frame. 
          Bottle locations are indicated by dashed circles and numbers. 
          Instruments are identified by letters: A, ADCP; B, Battery for 
          ADCP power; C, CTD;E, Echosounder (120 kHz Benthos altimeter); 
          O, oxygen sensor (secondary); T, transmissometer; and F, 
          Fluorometer for chlorophyll-A. White numerals show ADCP beam 
          positions after the 900 clockwise twist on April 23.




The LADCP control file

CR1        # factory defaults
PS0        # Print system serial number and other info.
WM15       # sets LADCP mode; WB -> 1, WP -> 001, TP -> 000100, TE -> 00000100
TC2        # 2 ensembles per burst
TB 00:00:02.80      ### also try old BB settings, 2.6 and 1.0
TE 00:00:01.20
TP 00:00.00
WN40       # 40 cells, so blank + 320 m with 8-m cells
WS0800     # 8-rn cells
WT1600     # 16-rn pulse
WF1600     # Blank, 16-rn
WV330      # 330 is max effective ambiguity velocity for WB1
EZ0011101  # Soundspeed from EC (default, 1500)
EX00100    # No transformation (middle 1 means tilts would be used otherwise)
CF11101    # automatic binary, no serial
LZ30,230   # for LADCP mode BT; slightly increased 220->230 from Dan Torres
CL0        # don't sleep between pings (CL0 required for software break)


Data processing

Data were processed using version IX.8 of Andreas Thurnherr's 
implementation of Martin Visbeck's LADCP inversion method, developed at 
the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. The LDEO code 
is written in Matlab, and performs a long chain of calculations, including 
transforming the raw LADCP data to Earth coordinates; editing out suspect 
data; meshing with CTD data from the cast and simultaneous shipboard ADCP 
and GPS data; then running both an inverse method and a shear-based 
algorithm to obtain ocean currents throughout the profile. The shear-based 
calculation is used as a check on the inverse method-if they agree, 
confidence in the solution is enhanced. The LDEO code is available at 
ftp://ftp.ldeo.columbia.edu/pub/LADCP.

Only preliminary data processing was performed during the cruise; full 
processing takes more time than was available. The automatic data editing 
is not completely adequate, as ocean bottom reflections are not always 
edited out and the algorithms for detecting and discarding PPI require 
more work. When the data are fully processed, they will be made available 
on the UH ADCP website, http://currents.soest.hawaii.edu as part of the 
CLIVAR ADCP archive.


Data gathered

Data were successfully obtained in every cast at each station. Preliminary 
vertical profile plots of each station were made available on the ship's 
website within 12 hours of each cast.


Problems encountered

We had no major hardware or software problems during the cruise, but there 
were a few glitches. The ADCP twice slipped down in its collar and had to 
be lifted up and re-secured. The odd noise problem from the last leg 
continued. Beam 2 was conspicuously weaker than the others. As before, the 
noise was related to instrument position. Since beam 2 was in the what 
appeared to be the bad spot, before the test cast we tried turning the 
instrument about 300 clockwise to get all beams as far from the CTD frame 
as possible. The test cast was not deep enough for an unequivocal test of 
the orientation, but the next 3 casts revealed that beam 2 was worse than 
before, so we turned it back before station 92.

It is possible that the Benthos 120 kHz altimeter caused acoustic 
interference, but exactly the same altimeter and rosette were used during 
the CLIVAR A20/A22 cruises without the same symptoms. Another possibility 
is that some instrument on the rosette or along the cable introduced 
electrical noise. We have not really resolved the problem, but are 
satisfied that the effects on the data are small.

We had a more fundamental problem through much of the deep basin. Data 
from individual pings are noisy; many pings must be averaged together to 
get useful information. This becomes the limiting factor in determining 
current velocities deep in the ocean, where particles of sufficient size 
to scatter the 1 cm wavelength of the WH15O are scarce. The effective 
range of the instrument dropped to roughly 80m. This was much worse than 
in P02E, where range was typically > 150 m, even in the deep ocean. Range 
dropped gradually; it does not appear to be due to failing transducers, 
but rather to a lack of scatterers.

The net effect is that deep currents are poorly constrained and the 
inversions indicate improbably strong shear, more likely inaccurate 
inversions than real ocean current velocities. We will attempt to tune the 
inversions and constraints to yield more physically plausible results, but 
there may not be sufficient data density to constrain deep currents within 
error bounds of 10 cm s(^-1).


Sample data plots

Figure 2 compares the last station of Leg 1 with the first of Leg 2, which 
was a replicate, occurring in the same spot 9 days later. The two profiles 
differ quite a bit. In the absence of strong currents, motion is dominated 
by tides, internal waves, and inertial motion. These all have time scales 
of a day or less, so features seen by the LADCP cannot be expected to last 
much longer than that. It also means that comparisons with geostrophic 
velocities tend to be messy, as Sabine Mecking and Gunnar Voet showed in 
their last cruise update.


Figure 2: Comparison between the last station of P02W (station 87) and the 
          first station of P02E (station 88). The left plot is ocean 
          velocity in the east-west direction. Positive values are to the 
          east. The middle plot is similar, but north is positive. The 
          third plot has the same data, where the arrows represent 
          horizontal speed and direction at the depth of the arrow origin.

We made both vertical profiles of individual plots and contour plots along 
the cruise track available on the ship's network. A contour plot of data 
from the entire cruise may be the best capsule summary of the preliminary 
data (Figure 3). The strongest well-known current crossed was the 
California current, at about 121°W. Current speed was about 0.27m s to the 
SE. As mentioned above, some of the deep currents (below 3000 m or so) may 
be artifacts of the inversion rather than actual currents.


Figure 3: Contour plot of P02E stations 88 to 159. Tick marks along the 
          bottom of each plot are station locations. The California 
          current is indicated by the blue CC.





CHL0R0FLU0R0CARB0N AND SULFUR HEXAFLU0RIDE MEASUREMENTS

University of Texas (Austin)

PI: Dong-Ha Min

Analysts: David Cooper, Patrick Mears and Andrew Shao




Samples for the analyses of the dissolved chlorofluorocarbons (CFC5, 
freons) CFC-11 and CFC-12 and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) in seawater and 
air were collected during MV-1306. Seawater samples were taken from all 
casts, with full profiles generally taken from alternating casts and 
strategically determined bottles sampled from the remaining casts. These 
results complement the P2 Leg l data obtained by Lamont-Doherty Earth 
observatory (P1: W. Smethie). Full integration of the data sets will be 
made at a later date when intercalibration has been completed.

Seawater samples were drawn from specially designed Niskin bottles that 
use a modified end-cap design to minimize the contact of the water sample 
with the end-cap 0-rings after closing. O-rings were baked before use to 
further reduce potential contamination. Stainless steel springs covered 
with a nylon powder coat were substituted for the internal elastic tubing 
provided with standard Niskin bottles. Samples for CFC and SF6 were the 
first samples drawn from the 10-liter bottles. Care was taken to 
coordinate the sampling analysts to minimize the time between the initial 
opening of each bottle and the completion of sample drawing. In most 
cases, 3He, dissolved oxygen and DIC samples were collected within several 
minutes of the initial opening of each bottle. To minimize contact with 
air, the CFC samples were drawn directly through the stopcocks of the 
10-liter bottles into 250 ml precision glass syringes. Syringes were 
rinsed and filled via three-way plastic stopcocks. The syringes were 
subsequently immersed in holding buckets of clean seawater held at 0-10 
degrees C until 30 minutes before being analyzed. At that time, the 
syringe was placed in a bath of surface seawater heated at approximately 
25 degrees C.

For atmospheric sampling, a ~90 m length of 3/8 OD Dekaron tubing was run 
from the main lab to the bow of the ship. A flow of air was drawn through 
this line into the main laboratory using an air-cadet pump. The air was 
compressed in the pump, with the downstream pressure held at ~1.5 atm. 
using a backpressure regulator. A tee allowed a flow (100 ml mm-1) of the 
compressed air to be directed to the gas sample valves of the CFC 
analytical systems, while the bulk flow of the air (>7 1 mm-1) was vented 
through the backpressure regulator. Air samples were only analyzed when 
the relative wind direction was within 60 degrees of the bow of the ship 
to reduce the possibility of shipboard contamination. Analysis of bow air 
was performed at several locations along the cruise track. Approximately 
five measurements were made at each location to increase the precision. 
Atmospheric data were not submitted to the database, but were found to be 
in good agreement with current global databases and independent 
measurements made by LDEO during P2 leg 1.

Concentrations of CFC-1l, CFC-12 and SF6 in air samples, seawater samples 
and gas standards were measured by shipboard electron capture gas 
chromatography (ECD-GC) using techniques described by Bullister and 
Wisegarver (2008). For seawater analyses, water was transferred from a 
glass syringe to a glass-sparging chamber (~190 ml). The dissolved gases in 
the seawater sample were extracted by passing a supply of CFC-free purge 
gas through the sparging chamber for a period of 6 minutes at 120 - 175 ml 
mm-1. Water vapor was removed from the purge gas during passage through a 
Nafion drier, backed up by a 18 cm long, 3/8 diameter glass tube packed 
with the desiccant magnesium perchlorate. The sample gases were 
concentrated on a cold-trap consisting of a 1/16 OD stainless steel tube 
with a -5 cm section packed tightly with Porapak Q (60-80 mesh) and a 22 cm 
section packed with Carboxen 1004. A neslab cryocool was used to cool the 
trap, to below -50°C. After 6 minutes of purging, the trap was isolated, 
and it was heated electrically to ~175°C. The sample gases held in the 
trap were then injected onto a precolumn (~60 cm of 1/8" O.D. stainless 
steel tubing packed with 80-100 mesh Porasil B, held at 80°C) for the 
initial separation of CFC-12 and CFC-11 from later eluting peaks. After the 
F12 had passed from the pre-column through the second precolum (5 cm of 
1/8 OD Stainless steel tubing packed with MS5A, 80°C) and into the 
analytical column #1 (~170 cm of 1/8 OD stainless steel tubing packed with 
MS5A and held at 80°C) the outflow from the first precolumn was diverted 
to the second analytical column (~150 cm 1/8 OD stainless steel tubing 
packed with Carbograph 1AC, 80-100 mesh, held at 80°C). After CFC-11 had 
passed through the first precolumn, the remaining gases were backflushed 
from the precolumn and vented. The analytical columns and the precolumns 
were in held isothermal at 80 degrees C in an Agilent (HP) 6890N gas 
chromatograph with two electron capture detectors (250°C).

The analytical system was calibrated frequently using a standard gas of 
known CFC and SF6 composition. Gas sample loops of known volume were 
thoroughly flushed with standard gas and injected into the system. The 
temperature and pressure was recorded so that the amount of gas injected 
could be calculated. The procedures used to transfer the standard gas to 
the trap, precolumn, main chromatographic column, and EC detector were 
similar to those used for analyzing water samples. Four sizes of gas 
sample loops were used. Multiple injections of these loop volumes could be 
made to allow the system to be calibrated over a relatively wide range of 
concentrations. Air samples and system blanks (injections of loops of 
CFC-free gas) were injected and analyzed in a similar manner. The typical 
analysis time for seawater, air, standard or blank samples was -12 
minutes. Concentrations of the CFC5 in air, seawater samples, and gas 
standards are reported relative to the S1098 calibration scale (e.g. 
Bullister and Tanhua, 2010). Concentrations in air and standard gas are 
reported in units of mole fraction CFC in dry gas, and are typically in 
the parts per trillion (ppt) range. Dissolved CFC concentrations are given 
in units of picomoles per kilogram seawater (pmol kg-1). CFC 
concentrations in air and seawater samples were determined by fitting 
their chromatographic peak areas to multi-point calibration curves, 
generated by injecting multiple sample loops of gas from a working 
standard (PMEL cylinder 45181) into the analytical instrument. The 
response of the detector to the range of moles of CFC passing through the 
detector remained relatively constant during the cruise. Full range 
calibration curves were run at the beginning and the end of the cruise. 
Single injections of a fixed volume of standard gas at one atmosphere were 
run much more frequently (at intervals of -90 minutes) to monitor 
short-term changes in detector sensitivity.

Results from 1758 seawater samples are reported, mostly for all three 
measured compounds. Random duplicates were taken from 40 casts to estimate 
precision and run variability tests. From the samples from the surface to 
the thermocline (the highest concentrations), we calculate the deviation 
to be 0.7% from the mean of the pairs for CFC-12 and SF6 measurements, and 
0.4% from the mean for CFC-11 measurements. Deviation from the mean of 
pairs from deeper samples ranged from similar levels to approximately 0.01 
fM for CFC-12 and CFC-11. Due to the exceedingly low levels of SF6 present 
in deeper water, accurate estimates of precision are not possible. A very 
small number of additional water samples had anomalous CFC concentrations 
relative to adjacent samples. These samples occurred sporadically during 
the cruise and were not clearly associated with other features in the 
water column (e.g., anomalous dissolved oxygen, salinity, or temperature 
features). This suggests that these samples were probably contaminated 
with CFCs during the sampling or analysis processes. Measured 
concentrations for some anomalous samples are included in the preliminary 
data, but are given a quality flag value of either 3 (questionable 
measurement) or 4 (bad measurement). A quality flag of 5 was assigned to 
samples which were drawn from the rosette but lost due to a variety of 
reasons (transfer loss, operator error or system fault).


References

Bullister, J.L. and 1. Tanhua. 2010. Sampling and Measurement of 
    Chlorofluorocarbons and Sulfur Hexafluoride in Seawater. In: The 
    GO-SHIP Repeat Hydrography Manual: A Collection of Expert Reports 
    and Guidelines. IOCCP Report No. 14, ICPO Publication series No. 
    134, Version 1.

Bullister, J.L. and D.P. Wisegarver. 2008. The shipboard analysis of 
    trace levels of sulfur hexafluoride, chlorofluorocarbon-11 and 
    chlorofluorocarbon-12 in seawater. Deep-Sea Res. I, v. 55, pp. 
    1063-1074.





HELIUM AND TRITIUM

P1: William Jenkins

Sampler: Zoe Sandwith

Helium and tritium samples were collected roughly every 4.5 degrees on 
CLIVAR leg P02E. A total of 13 stations were sampled. 219 samples and 5 
duplicates were taken on this leg.




HELIUM SAMPLING

16 helium samples were drawn at 11 of the stations and 24 Niskins were 
sampled at 2 stations. Although all 36 Niskins were not sampled, depths 
were chosen to obtain an accurate cross-section of the upper 2000m of the 
water column. On the two stations where 24 Niskins were sampled, the 
entire water column profile was sampled. Duplicate helium and tritium 
samples were taken off of one Niskin every third station. Helium samples 
were taken in custom-made stainless steel cylinders and sealed with 
rotating plug valves at both ends. The sample cylinders were leak-checked 
and backfilled with N2 prior to the cruise, and used on the western 
portion of the line. Samples were drawn using tygon tubing connected to 
the Niskin bottle at one end and the cylinder at the other. Cylinders are 
thumped with a bat while being flushed with water from the Niskin to 
remove bubbles from the sample. After flushing roughly 1 liter of water 
through them, the plug valves are closed. Due to the nature of the 0-ring 
seals on the sample vessels, they must be extracted within 24 hours. Eight 
samples at a time were extracted using our At Sea Extraction line in the 
Helium Van on the main deck. In preparation for extraction, the stainless 
steel sample cylinders are attached to the vacuum manifold and pumped down 
to less than 2e7 Torr using a diffusion pump for a minimum of 1 hour to 
check for leaks. The sections are then isolated from the vacuum manifold 
and introduced to the reservoir cans which are heated to >80C for roughly 
10 minutes. Glass bulbs are attached to the sections and immersed in ice 
water during the extraction process. After 10 minutes each bulb is flame 
sealed and packed for shipment back to WHOI. The extraction cans and 
sections are cleaned with distilled water and isopropanol, then dried 
between each extraction. Prior to the cruise, all vacuum components were 
cleaned, serviced and checked for leaks. The glass bulbs are baked to 640C 
for 6 hours and cooled slowly in an oven receiving a steady flow of 
nitrogen. 224 helium samples were taken on Leg 2, which includes 5 
duplicates. Helium samples will be analyzed using a mass spectrometer at 
WHOI.

Vibrations due to waves crashing into the fantail still caused 
difficulty on leg 2. Only once was the shaking bad enough to cause 
any glass sample bulbs to crack on the extraction line.




TRITIUM SAMPLING

Tritium samples were drawn from the same stations and bottles as those 
sampled for helium. Since there was not a water shortage on this cruise, 
a duplicate was taken from the same Niskin as the helium duplicate. 
Tritium samples were taken using tygon tubing to fill 1 liter glass jugs. 
The jugs were baked in an oven, backfilled with argon, and the caps were 
taped shut prior to the cruise. While filling, the jugs are place on the 
deck and filled to about 2 inches from the top of the bottle, being 
careful not to spill the argon. Caps were replaced and taped shut with 
electrical tape before being packed for shipment back to WHOI. 224 
tritium samples were taken, which includes 5 duplicates. Tritium samples 
will be degassed in the lab at WHO[ and stored for a minimum of 6 months 
before mass spectrometer analysis. No issues were encountered while 
taking tritium samples.





DISSOLVED INORGANIC CARBON (DIC)

The DIC analytical equipment (DICE) design was based upon the original 
SOMMA systems (Johnson, 1985, '87, '92, '93). This new design has improved 
on the original SOMMA by use of more modern National Instruments 
electronics and other available technology. These 2 DICE systems (PMEL-1 
and PMEL-2) were set up in a seagoing container modified for use as a 
shipboard laboratory on the aft working deck of the RN Melville. In the 
coulometric analysis of DIC, all carbonate species are converted to CO2 
(gas) by addition of excess hydrogen to the seawater sample. The evolved 
CO2 gas is carried into the titration cell of the coulometer, where it 
reacts quantitatively with a proprietary reagent based on ethanolamine to 
generate hydrogen ions. These are subsequently titrated with 
coulometrically generated OH-. CO2 is thus measured by integrating the 
total charge required to achieve this. (Dickson, et al 2007).

Each coulometer was calibrated by injecting aliquots of pure CO2 (99.999%) 
by means of an 8-port valve outfitted with two calibrated sample loops of 
different sizes (~lml and ~2m1) (Wilke et al., 1993). The instruments are 
each separately calibrated at the beginning of each ctd station with a 
minimum of two sets of these gas loop injections.

Secondary standards were run throughout the cruise (at least one per 
station) on each analytical system. These standards are Certified 
Reference Materials (CRMs), consisting of poisoned, filtered, and UV 
irradiated seawater supplied by Dr. A. Dickson of Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography (SIO). Their accuracy is determined manometrically on land in 
San Diego. DIC data reported to the database have been corrected to the 
batch 124 CRM value. The CRM certified value for this batch is 2015.72 
µmol/kg. The average measured values (in 1mol/kg during this cruise) were 
2014.9 for PMEL-1 and 2015.5 for PMEL-2.

The DIC water samples were drawn from Niskin-type bottles into cleaned, 
pre-combusted 300mL borosilicate glass bottles using silicon tubing. 
Bottles were rinsed twice and filled from the bottom, overflowing by at 
least one-half volume. Care was taken not to entrain any bubbles. The 
tube was pinched off and withdrawn, creating a 5mL headspace, and 0.l2mL 
of 50% saturated HgCl2 solution was added as a preservative. The sample 
bottles were sealed with glass stoppers lightly covered with Apiezon-L 
grease, and were stored in a 20°C water bath for a minimum of 20 minutes 
to bring them to temperature prior to analysis.

Over 1500 samples were analyzed for discrete DIC. About 10% of 
these samples were taken as replicates as a check of our precision. 
These replicate samples were typically taken near the surface, DIC 
maximum, and bottom bottles. The replicate samples were 
interspersed throughout the station analysis for quality assurance 
and integrity of the coulometer cell solutions. Preliminary 
analysis of these replicates indicates that there was a slight 
drift during the course of some of the cells. Closing gas 
calibrations confirmed this drift and further shoreside analysis 
will determine the extent of this drift. However, before any 
correction for this drift, the absolute average difference from the 
mean of these replicates is 0.7 µmol/kg.

The DIC data reported at sea is to be considered preliminary until 
a further shoreside analysis is undertaken.


References:

Dickson, A.G., Sabine, C.L. and Christian, J.R. (Eds.), (2007): Guide to 
    Best Practices for Ocean CO2 Measurements. PICES Special Publication 
    3, 191 pp.

Feely, R.A., R. Wanninkhof, H.B. Milburn, C.E. Cosca, M. Stapp, and 
    P.P. Murphy (1998): "A new automated underway system for making 
    high precision pCO2 measurements aboard research ships." Anal. 
    Chim. Acta, 377, 185-191.

Johnson, K.M., A.E. King, and J. McN. Sieburth (1985): "Coulometric DIC 
    analyses for marine studies: An introduction." Mar. Chem., 16, 
    61-82.

Johnson, K.M., P.J. Williams, L. Brandstrom, and J. McN. Sieburth 
    (1987): "Coulometric total carbon analysis for marine 
    studies: Automation and calibration." Mar. Chem., 21, 
    117-133.

Johnson, K.M. (1992): Operator's manual: "Single operator 
    multiparameter metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) for total carbon 
    dioxide (CT) with coulometric detection." Brookhaven National 
    Laboratory, Brookhaven, N.Y., 70 pp.

Johnson, K.M., K.D. Wills, D.B. Butler, W.K. Johnson, and C.S. Wong 
    (1993): "Coulometric total carbon dioxide analysis for marine 
    studies: Maximizing the performance of an automated continuous 
    gas extraction system and coulometric detector." Mar. Chem., 44, 
    167-189.

Lewis, E. and D. W. R. Wallace (1998) Program developed for CO2 
    system calculations. Oak Ridge, Oak Ridge National 
    Laboratory. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/oceans/co2rprt.html

Wilke, R.J., D.W.R. Wallace, and K.M. Johnson (1993): "Water-based 
    gravimetric method for the determination of gas loop volume." Anal. 
    Chem. 65, 2403-2406.





DISCRETE pH ANALYSES

PT: Dr. Andrew Dickson
Ship technicians: Kristin Jackson and John Ballard


Sampling

Samples were collected in 250 mL borosilicate glass bottles and sealed 
using grey butyl rubber stoppers held in place by aluminum crimp caps. 
Each bottle was rinsed a minimum of 2 times, then filled and allowed to 
overflow by approximately one full volume. A 1% headspace was then 
removed from the bottles using an Eppendorf pipette and poisoned with 60 
[IL of mercuric chloride (HgCl2) prior to sealing with the aluminum caps. 
Samples were collected from the same Niskin bottles as total alkalinity 
or dissolved inorganic carbon in order to completely characterize the 
carbon system, and 2 duplicate bottles were also taken on random Niskins 
for each station throughout the course of the cruise. All data should be 
considered preliminary.

Analysis

pH (µmol/kg H20) on the total scale was measured using an Agilent 8453 
spectrophotometer according to the methods outlined by Clayton and Byrne 
(1993). A Thermo NESLAB RTE-7 recirculating water bath was used to 
maintain spectrophotometric cell temperature at 25.0°C during the 
analyses. A custom 10cm flow through jacketed cell was filled 
autonomously with samples using a Kloehn V6 syringe pump. The 
sulfonephthalein indicator m-cresol purple (mCP) was used to measure the 
absorbance of light measured at two different wavelengths (434 nm, 578 
nm) corresponding to the maximum absorbance peaks for the acidic and 
basic forms of the indicator dye. A baseline absorbance was also measured 
and subtracted from these wavelengths. The baseline absorbance was 
determined by averaging the absorbances from 730-735nm. The samples were 
run using the tungsten lamp only. The blank and absorbance spectrum were 
measured 6 times in rapid succession and then averaged. The ratios of 
absorbances at the different wavelengths were input and used to calculate 
pH on the total scales, incorporating temperature and salinity into the 
equations. The salinity data used was obtained from the conductivity 
sensor on the CTD. The salinity data was later corroborated by shipboard 
measurements. Temperature of the samples was measured immediately after 
spectrophotometric measurements using a Direct Temp USB immersible probe.

Reagents

The mCP indicator dye was made to a concentration of 2.0 mM in 100 mL 
batches as needed. A total of 2 batches were used during the cruise. The 
pHs of the batches were adjusted to approximately 7.7 using dilute 
solutions of HC1 and NaOH and a pH meter calibrated using NBS buffers. 
The indicator was provided by Dr. Michael Degrandpre at the University 
of Montana, and was purified using the HPLC technique described by Liu 
et al., 2011.

Standardization/Results

The precision of the data can be accessed from measurements of 
duplicate analyses, certified reference material (CRM) Batch 124 
(provided by Dr. Andrew Dickson, UCSD), and TRIS buffer Batch 11 
(provided by Dr. Andrew Dickson, UCSD). CRMs were measured at least 
once every 12 hours, and bottles of TRIS buffer were measured once a 
week. The precision obtained from 172 duplicate analyses was found to 
be ±0.0004.

Data Processing

The addition of an indicator dye perturbs the pH of the sample, and the 
degree to which pH is affected is a function of the differences between 
the pH of the seawater and the pH of the indicator. Therefore, a 
correction is applied to all samples measured for a given batch of dye. 
To determine this correction samples of varying pH and water composition 
were randomly run with a single injection of dye and then again with a 
double injection of dye on a single bottle. To determine this correction 
the change in the measured absorbance ratio R where R = (A578Abase)! 
(A434-Abase) is divided by the change in the isosbestic absorbance (Aiso 
at 488nm) observed from two injections of dye to one. (R"-R')! 
(Aiso"-Aiso') is plotted against the measured R value for the single 
injection of dye and fitted with a linear regression. From this fit the 
slope and y-intercept (b and a respectively) are determined by:

                       ∆R/∆Aiso=bR'+a            (1)

From this the corrected ratio (R) corresponding to the measured 
absorbance ratio if no indicator dye were present can be determined by:

                    R=R' - Aiso'(bR'+a)            (2)

Preliminary data has not been corrected for the perturbation.

Problems

Very few problems occurred during the course of the cruise. The biggest 
problem that did occur was tiny bubbles forming inside the cell due to 
cold samples de-gassing as they were heated up rapidly. To combat this, 
the cell was instead flushed with air and then filled with DI water or 
occasionally 2-propanol and allowed to soak in-between stations. This 
proved the most effective method. Prior to running a given station, 3-4 
junk surface seawater pH measurements were made to ensure that the system 
was functioning as expected. Stations were additionally analyzed starting 
with the surface samples and finishing with the deep cold bottom samples 
to reduce the build-up of bubbles.


References

Clayton, T. D. and Byrne, R. H., "Spectrophotometric seawater pH 
    measurements: Total hydrogen ion concentration scale 
    calibration of m-cresol purple and at-sea results," Deep-Sea 
    Res., 40, pp. 2315-2329, 1993.

Liu, X., Patsvas, M.C., Byrne R.H., "Purification and Characterization of 
    meta Cresol Purple for Spectrophotometric Seawater pH Measurements," 
    Environmental Science and Technology, 2011.





P02 leg 2 ALKALINITY
(Laura Fantozzi and David Cervantes, laboratory of Andrew G. Dickson, 
Marine Physical Laboratory, Scripps Institution of Oceanography)

Samples were taken at every station, depending on cast depth the number 
of Niskins sampled varied. Bottles were chosen to match DIC's sample 
choices. One or two extra samples were taken on certain stations to make 
sure the alkalinity minimum was captured. Samples were collected in 250 
ml Pyrex bottles. A headspace of approximately 5 milliliters was removed 
and 0.06 milliliters of saturated mercuric chloride solution was added to 
each sample. The samples were capped with a glass stopper with a Teflon 
sleeve. All samples were equilibrated to 20 degrees Celsius using a 
Thermo Scientific RTE7 water bath.

Samples were dispensed using a volumetric pipette and a system of relay 
valves and air pumps controlled by a laptop using LabVIEW 2011. The 
temperature of the samples at time of dispensing was taken automatically 
by a computer using a DirecTemp surface probe placed on the pipette to 
convert this volume to mass for analysis. During instrument set up it was 
discovered that the sample dispensing unit (SDU) was dispensing less than 
the calibrated volume. This was determined by running titrations using 
the calibrated manual pipette to dispense reference seawater of known 
alkalinity and getting correct alkalinity values while the SDU was giving 
incorrect alkalinity values with the same reference seawater of the same 
alkalinity. An adjustment ratio of 1.00087 was applied to the original 
calibrated volume of 92.258 ml. Therefore, the volume dispensed for 
stations 1-12 was 92.178 ml. Between station 12 and 13 one of the valves 
on the SDU failed and the manual pipette was used again to calculate an 
adjustment ratio for the volume dispensed. The ratio of 0.99983 was 
applied to the previous calculated volume. The new calibrated volume 
dispensed for stations 13-159 would then be 92.193 ml.

Samples were analyzed using an open beaker titration procedure using two 
thermostated 250ml beakers; one sample being titrated while the second 
was being prepared and equilibrating to the system temperature close to 
20°C. After an initial aliquot of approximately 2.3-2.4 ml of 
standardized hydrochloric acid (--0.1M HC1 in -0.6M NaC1 solution), the 
sample was stirred for 5 minutes to remove liberated carbon dioxide gas. 
The stir time was minimized by bubbling air into the sample at a rate of 
200 scc/m. After equilibration, 19 aliquots of 0.04 ml were added. The 
data within the pH range of 3.5 to 3.0 were processed using a non-linear 
least squares fit from which the alkalinity value of the sample was 
calculated (Dickson, et al., 2007). This procedure was performed 
automatically by a computer running LabVIEW 2011.

Two duplicates were taken and analyzed for each station. Throughout the 
cruise, a total of 138 duplicates were analyzed and gave a pooled 
standard deviation of 0.91 mol kg-1.

Dickson laboratory Certified Reference Materials (CRM) Batch 124 was 
used to determine the accuracy of the analysis. The certified value for 
Batch 124 is 2215.08 ± 0.49 mol kg-1. The reference material was 
analyzed 130 times throughout the stations.

The data should be considered preliminary since the correction for 
the difference between the CRMs stated and measured values has yet to 
be finalized and applied. Additionally, the correction for the 
mercuric chloride addition has yet to be applied.


REFERENCE: 

Dickson, Andrew G., Chris Sabine and James R. Christian, editors, 
    "Guide to Best Practices for Ocean CO2 Measurements", Pices 
    Special Publication 3, IOCCP Report No. 8, October 2007, SOP 3b, 
    "Determination of total alkalinity in sea water using an 
    open-cell titration"





13C/14C (RADIOCARBON)

PIs: Ann McNichol, Pd Gagnon WHOI

Technician: Leg 2 - J. Blake Clark, MSI, UC Santa Barbara

The goal of this sampling is to adequately measure the distribution of 
radiocarbon in order to estimate the penetration of bomb-produced 14C and 
quantify the 13C decrease due to the influx of anthropogenic CO, Samples 
were collected at 17 stations determined by a desired longitude with ten 
stations having a full profile (32 samples) and shallow profiles (16 
samples in the upper 1500-2000m of the water column) at the remaining 7 
stations. 432 sample bottles were collected at the 17 stations. Samples 
were collected in 500m1 Pyrex style glass bottles through silicone tubing. 
The bottles were rinsed 2x with seawater, allowed to fill and overflow 
with half of the total volume of the bottle. A small volume was poured out 
for headspace, and 120 µl of saturated mercuric chloride solution was 
added. The stoppers and necks of the bottles were carefully dried, greased 
(with M - Apiezon grease), sealed, and secured with a rubber band.

All samples will be shipped to WHOI from San Diego to be analyzed in the 
AMS lab.





DISSOLVED ORGANIC CARBON AND TOTAL DISSOLVED NITROGEN

PI: Craig Carlson, MSI, UC Santa Barbara

Technician: Leg 2 - J Blake Clark, MSI, UC Santa Barbara

The goal of this group is to obtain Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and 
Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN) values along the P02 line in order to 
better understand the carbon cycle in the ocean on spatial and temporal 
scales. DOC/TDN samples were collected at al odd numbered stations, 
beginning on station number 89. 30 Niskin bottles were sampled at most 
stations, with a full profile of bottles being sampled at various 
stations through out the cruise. The stations with a full profile of 
samples being collected were determined by anomalous depth-profile 
features observed on the CTD down-cast or odd bathymetric features 
determined pre-cast. Upon approach and arrival to the North-American 
continental shelf as the number of bottles being fired were reduced on 
each cast, DOC/TDN samples collected were also reduced accordingly. All 
samples were collected in 60 ml high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottles. 
Bottles were previously cleaned with 10% HC1 solution and rinsed 3 times 
with Mili-Q water. Seawater is introduced to the samples through 
pre-cleaned silicon tubing, the bottles are rinsed three times and the 
samples are immediately frozen after collection in a -20 C freezer. 
Samples in the top 500m of the water column were filtered using a 400 nm 
glass fiber filter (GF/F) through an inline cartridge fitted with silicon 
tubing. Cartridges were previously cleaned with 10% HC1 solution and 
rinse with Mili-Q water. Filtering of the samples is conducted to exclude 
particulate organic matter from the samples due to it's relatively high 
prevalence in the surface waters.

All frozen samples will be shipped back to UC Santa Barbara for analysis. 
TDN





137Cs

PI: Ken Buesseler, Alison Macdonald, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Cs profile samples consisted of three to four 20L cubitainers. Five 
profile samples were collected during leg 2 approximately every 10 
degrees of longitude. Depths were roughly surface-100m, 100-200m, 
250-350m, 400-600m, and filled from three or four Niskin bottles at that 
depth. Each of the cubitainers was filled by the mixed volume from 
multiple Niskin bottles at close depth. After finishing one Niskin 
bottle, sample level was marked on the side of the cubitainer using 
waterproof marker.

All the samples were secured in deck boxes with cardboard sheets between 
layers for stability.


References:

Buesseler, K.O., S.R. Jayne, N.S. Fisher, I.I. Rypina, H. Baumann, 
    Z. Baumann, C.F. Breier, E.M. Douglass, J. George, A.M. 
    Macdonald, H. Miyamoto, J. Nishikawa, S.M. Pike, and S. Yoshida 
    (2012) Fukushima-derived radionuclides in the ocean and biota off 
    Japan. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 109, 5984-5988, 
    doi:10.1073/pnas.1120794109.

Casacuberta, N., P. Masque, J. Garcia-Orellana, R. Garcia-Tenorio, and 
    K.O. Buesseler (2013) 90Sr and 89Sr in seawater off Japan as a    
    consequence of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident. 
    Biogeosciences Discuss., 10, 2039-2067.

Pike, S.M., K.O. Buesseler, C. F. Breier, H. Dulaiova, K. Stastna, and 
    F. Sebesta (2012) Extraction of cesium in seawater off Japan using 
    AMP-PAN resin and quantification via gamma spectroscopy and 
    inductively coupled mass spectrometry. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 
    doi:10.1007/s10967-012-2014-5.


137Cs Cubitainer Contents (Niskins Sampled)

              Station/Cast  Cubitainer ID   Niskins
                                            Sampled
              ------------  -------------  ----------
                  94/1           #73       23-25
                  94/1           #74       26-28
                  94/1           #75       29-31
                  94/1           #76       32-34,36
                 102/1           #77       23-25
                 102/1           #78       26-28
                 102/1           #79       29-31
                 102/1           #80       32-34,36
                 116/1           #81       22-24
                 116/1           #82       25-27
                 116/1           #83       29-31
                 116/1           #84       32-34,36
                 128/2           #85       23-25
                 128/2           #86       26, 27, 29
                 128/2           #87       30-32
                 128/2           #88       33, 34, 36
                 146/1           #89       23-26
                 146/1           #90       27,29-31
                 146/1           #91       32-34,36





129 IODINE SAMPLING

PI: Tom Guilderson, UC Santa Cruz & Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

The goal of 129I sampling is to track Fukushima derived 129I release and 
to describe general large-scale 129I gradient originated from the 
atmospheric nuclear weapons testing.

129I surface water samples were drawn from surface Niskins. In total, 7 
stations were sampled during leg 2 (stations 94, 98, 109, 116, 126, 128, 
147). Surface samples were collected in 500m1 amber bottles. Most surface 
samples were taken from the same Niskins as for Cs samples (P1: Ken 
Buesseler, WHOI) since 129I/134Cs and 129I/137Cs ratio can be used to 
positively identify the presence of Fukushima origin radionuclide. 
Surface samples not taken from the same Niskins as Cs samples were 
duplicated. Bottles were rinsed 2-3 times with sample before filling. 
Electrical tape was used to seal caps and all the samples were 
refrigerated.

Two hydrocast profiles were obtained at 152°W station 102 (68 samples) 
and 126°W station 138 (66 samples). Samples were collected in 250m1 HDPE 
bottles and taken from all Niskin bottles. Duplicates were also taken 
form all Niskins.


References:

Tumey, S. J., T. P. Guilderson, T. A. Brown, T. Broek, and K. 0. 
    Buesseler (2012) Input of 1-129 into the western Pacific Ocean 
    resulting from the Fukushima nuclear event.]. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 
    doi:10.1007/s10967-012-2217-9.





delta-15N-NO3 / delta-18O-NO3 SAMPLING

394 delta-15N-NO3 / delta-18O-NO3 samples were collected during P02E (Leg 
2). Full profiles were sampled at 12 stations. Since no rack was sent 
with the sampling containers, a plastic bucket and packing Styrofoam were 
modified to secure the 25 ampoules during rosette sampling. 14 mL 
ampoules or 60 mL bottles were minimally rinsed twice, the filled to 
approximately 85% of capacity with seawater. The samples were stored 
frozen in a standard commercial freezer on board. Samples will be shipped 
frozen after the ship arrives in San Diego, then analyzed at Princeton 
University (PI Dr. Daniel Sigman - sigmanprinceton.edu)





DENSITY SAMPLING

73 density samples were taken at Stations 104, 138, 154, and 158 
from the same depths as Alkalinity. Sample bottles and caps were 
rinsed 3 time with approximately 10 mL of water, then filled to 
the beginning of the neck to leave head space of 1-2 mL. Samples 
will be analyzed by Ryan Woosley (PI Dr. Frank Millero -
fmillerorsmas.miami.edu at the University of Miami at the end of 
the second leg of P02.





CALCIUM SAMPLING

Calcium samples were taken at Stations 095, 107, 120, 132, 148, 
151, 153, 157, 158, and 159 from an average of 15 depths with 2 
duplicates at each station. Sample bottles and caps were rinsed 3 
times with approximately 10 mL of water, and then filled to the 
beginning of the neck to leave a headspace of 1-2 mL. Samples will 
be analyzed by John Ballard (PI Dr. Todd Martz - trmartzucsd.edu 
at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the end of the second 
leg of P02.





ARGO FLOAT DEPLOYMENT

Three autonomous profiling CTD floats, provided by Dr. Gregory C. Johnson 
of NOAA/PMEL, were deployed as the ship departed their designated station 
locations. The floats began executing their programmed missions after 
self-activation by pressure. Communication with two of the floats was 
established shortly after launch. The third float (F0183) was eventually 
able to communicate in early July after a log-in problem was fixed on the 
receiving end. All three floats were operating normally, returning data 
at the time of this writing.

      UTC Date:Time  Float ID  Station  GPS Position at Launch
      -------------  --------  -------  -----------------------
      20130515:1858   F0185       98     30°0.00'N 156°0.75'W
      20130516:1420   F0183      100     30°0.00'N 153°43.835'W
      20130525:1239   F0184      129     30°0.00'N 132°35.22'W

These floats are Navis floats manufactured by SBE, equipped with SBE-41 
CP CTDs. They are part of the U.S. Argo Program (www.argo.ucsd.edu) a 
global network of over 3500 profiling floats. Data from all Argo floats 
are publicly available in near real-time via the two global servers at 
www.usgodae.org and www.coriolis.eu.org

The floats are designed to dive to a depth of about 1000 m. They then 
drift with the currents at depth for about 10 days before sinking to 
2000 m. Upon reaching 2000 m, they then ascend to the surface, 
collecting CTD data as they ascend. At the surface, before the next dive 
begins, the position of the float is determined, and acquired data are 
transmitted via satellite. The life time of the floats in the water is 
4-5 years.




STUDENT REPORTS

Angelica Gilroy
University of California

Participating in the CLIVAR/CO2 P02E cruise was an experience unlike any 
I have had thus far. As this was my first time going to sea, almost 
everything was new to me. Through preparing the rosette, sampling, and 
watching others play their roles on the ship, I realized how much work 
goes into collecting good data for public use. I recognized the 
importance of fostering good communication and relationships between the 
crew and the science party. Being in an environment where my curiosity 
was well-received was particularly enjoyable. Conversations in the lab 
and at meal-times were invaluable. My knowledge of the Pacific Ocean grew 
immensely, but perhaps more importantly, I will take words of wisdom 
about oceanography with me as I embark upon my first year of graduate 
work this fall.



Georgy Manucharyan
Yale University

As many things in our world, participating in this cruise was quite a 
random decision for me as my research has been theoretical so far. And I 
must say it was a very worthy decision. Perhaps the best part of this 
cruise for me was the interaction with all the people on board from which 
I learned a lot. It started with making knots, progressing to the 
detailed overview of all the sensors on the Rosette and to analysis 
techniques involving a plethora of technical 'tricks' to squeeze out the 
important information from a sample of water taken from the deep ocean. 
I've learned to appreciate the notorious labor that needs to be performed 
in order collect and analyze the water samples, as opposed to just 
downloading the data with a mouse click without having much thought about 
how exactly these things are measured. I have enjoyed being a part of a 
multidisciplinary science team which widened my perspective on the 
important characteristics of the ocean, for example, the carbon cycle its 
associate chemistry processes, and the biological activity. At last, I 
enjoyed the scientific and philosophical overnight discussions with my 
teammates, making this cruise a unique experience that I'd recommend to 
any science student.



Andrew Shao
University of Washington

A large part of my motivation for participating in this cruise was to 
learn how the tracer data that I've been using in my research were 
actually produced. Needless to say, this CLIVAR repeat of P02E has been 
an extraordinary opportunity to achieve that goal. As the CFC student 
on board, I was introduced to the intricacies of how the data are 
collected, processed, corrected, and published. Moreover, I gained 
something else that I had not anticipated: perspective. Before when I 
looked at the bottle data from a hydrographic section, I saw the 
concentration values as useful but impersonal numbers. Now having been 
a member of this cruise, I now understand that each and every data 
point has a distinct human component and is the product of many 
people's extraordinary labors. The crew and science party take the time 
away from friends and family, shirk the comforts of land, and set out 
on into the isolation of the open ocean all to serve the needs of the 
oceanographic community and advance the science. I cannot help but have 
profound respect and appreciation for the men and women I have sailed 
with on this cruise and will remember them and their colleagues whose 
continuing hard work enables my own research.





Yongming Sun
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory

First of all, I want to say it is a great honor for me to take part in 
this cruise. The cruise is a part of a very good repeat hydrography 
program, with a cooperative team and advanced ocean observation 
technology. While on the ship, the science team has been like a family. I 
have received much help, especially on my language. I must thank everyone 
on the cruise. I accepted the rigorous training as a CTD student, which 
has given me further understanding of ocean field observations. 
Previously, I participated in another oceanographic cruise on a Chinese 
vessel. This experience has allowed me to compare Chinese practices with 
those learned on this ship. I will be very glad to introduce the standard 
instruction and advanced technology to Chinese oceanographers when I go 
back to China. Working with the capable and professional staff in many 
oceanographic and atmospheric specialties has improved my knowledge of 
oceanography, giving me a better perspective of the real ocean. I believe 
this will benefit my future research. Working with great partners made 
the job easier, and we completed our tasks as a team. Additionally, the 
food on ship is delicious. It gives us energy and puts us in a good mood 
in the lab. I've gained knowledge, experience and friendship. What can I 
say except, this has been an amazing cruise?



Yeping Yuan
University of Washington

As a coastal/estuarine oceanography major student, I have been on several 
research trips before, but none of them had such a long duration of time 
- three weeks in the sea with limited connection to the land - and a wide 
range of measurements - including many of the hydrographic 
instruments/sensors and chemical analyses. The cruise began with many 
uncertainties to me, including the delay due to mechanical problems in 
the previous leg, the seasickness that I might face to, the CTD rosette 
that I have only seen in the oceanography book, and so on. It is the 
great efforts from the chief and co-chief scientist, all the science 
party, technicians and crews in the RN Melville that make the journey an 
incredible experience in my life, both in the scientific aspect and 
personal level. My main task in this cruise is as a CTD watch stander, 
which includes the rosette preparation, deck operation (rosette 
deployment and recovery), CTD console operation, water samples 
coordination and collections during each cast and also helping 
technicians on CTD/rosette repair as needed. This hands-on experience 
makes me understand how to get the accurate and precise oceanographic 
data and how to solve unpredicted in-situ problems. I also gained 
knowledge beyond the physical oceanography area: the impact of oceanic 
variability on the climate change, global warming and carbon cycles. From 
the discussion with chemistry technicians and scientists and watching how 
they collect and analyze water samples, the deep ocean water is now more 
vivid to me: we could understand the water mass distributions from their 
compositions and even know the 'age' of the water from CFC5 and/or 
isotope measurement. In the science part, I worked with my fellow CTD 
watch stander and scientists on processing some of the data from the 
CTD/ADCP/MET and look forward to seeing the comparison between our 
preliminary results and the previous CLIVAR data and possible 
interpretation on the climate variability in the future.





Cruise Report: Shipboard ADCP measurements
CLIVAR/Carbon P02E 2013

Steven Howell




Personnel

UH LADCP group: Eric Firing (PT), Julia Hummon, and François Ascani

Shipboard operators Frank Delahoyde, SIO and Steven Howell, UH

System description

The R/V Melville normally has two Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) 
mounted in instrument wells in the hull. One, a 150 kHz Teledyne RD 
Instruments Ocean Surveyor, was at the manufacturer for repair so was 
unavailable for the cruise. The other, a 75 kHz Ocean Surveyor (OS75) was 
present and produced data through the entire cruise.

An additional ADCP, a 300kHz Work Horse (WH300, also from Teledyne RD), was 
installed temporarily while the ship was in Yokohama before P02W. it was 
mounted in the open instrument well on a pipe string at about 2.5 feet below 
the hull. Approximate locations of the ADCPs are shown in Figure 1. The WH300 
installation is shown in Figure 2.

Because ship speeds are much faster than typical ocean currents, precise 
knowledge of the speed and orientation of the ship is required to calculate 
currents from the raw data. To this end, the ADCP data acquisition system 
gathered data from 4 additional devices: a Furuno GP-150 GPS for position, a 
Sperry MK 37 gyro for reliable but coarse heading, and two GPS-assisted 
attitude sensors for high-precision heading, an Ashtech ADU and a CodaOctopus 
F185 motion reference unit. The Ashtech heading was inoperative for the 
entire cruise, so we had to rely on the CodaOctopus, which performed well 
most of the time.

Data acquisition from the ADCPs and the other devices was done using UHDAS 
(University of Hawaii Data Acquisition System), an open source software 
system developed by the ADCP group at UH. It automatically updates a website 
on the ship's network that presents near real time plots of current depth 
profiles, contoured sections for the previous few days, and provides a 
variety of data products ranging from raw data to near final currents. For 
extensive documentation about UHDAS, visit the UH ADCP web page, 
http://currents/soest.hawaii/.edu.


Figure 1: Locations of shipboard ADCPs on the Melville during P02W and 
          P02E. Also shown are the two OPS-referenced heading device 
          reference locations. The GP-150 OPS antenna is located in the 
          mast above the stacks.

Figure 2: The WH300 mounted on the pipe string. The picture was taken on 
          the port side looking forward from near the position of the 
          stern thruster. Photo by Drew Cole, who used a pole-mounted 
          GoPro Hero 300 video camera.


While the output of UHDAS is suitable for shipboard use, it is by no 
means a final product as some manual intervention is inevitably necessary 
to deal with issues that arise. The data produced during the cruise must 
be regarded as preliminary; fully processed data will be made available 
within 6 months at the UH website.


Operating parameters

Both the OS75 and WH300 were operated in their default UHDAS configurations 
through the entire cruise except for the first few hours out of Honolulu when 
both instruments were run with bottom track mode turned on.

The OS75 (CPU firmware 23.16, beam angle 300) can operate in two modes. 
Narrow band pings provide greater range, while broadband pings have much 
better accuracy. The OS75 was operated in interleaved mode, which alternates 
broadband and narrowband pings. Bottom track mode was used for the first few 
hours while leaving Honolulu. Narrowband mode used nominal 16 m pings and 
depth ranges below an 8 m blanking interval, while the broadband mode used 8 
m cells and blanking intervals. Pings were 1.8 s apart.

The WH300 (serial number 9806, firmware version 16.28, beam angle 20°) used 2 
m cells and blanking intervals with 0.8 s between pings.

The following control files do not contain the entire set of commands sent to 
the instrument, but these are the ones most frequently changed.



OS75 control file

# Bottom tracking
BP0         # BP0 is off, BP1 is on
BX10000     # Max search range in decimeters; e.g. BX10000 for 1000 m.

# Narrowband watertrack
NP1         # NP0 is off, NP1 is on
NN60        # number of cells
NS1600      # cell size in centimeters; e.g. NS2400 for 24-m cells
NF800       # blanking in centimeters; e.g. NF1600 for 16-m cells

# Broadband  watertrack
WP1         # WPO is off, WP1 is on
WN8O        # number of cells
WS800       # cell size in centimeters
WF800       # blanking in centimeters

# Interval between pings
TP00:01.80  # e.g., TPOO:03.00 for 3 seconds

# Triggering
  CXO,0     # in,out[,timeout]


WH300 control file

BP0         # Bottom track on (BP1) or off (BPO)
BX2000      # BT max search range in decimeters (BX02000 for 200 m)
WN70        # number of cells
WS200       # cell size in centimeters
WF200       # blanking in centimeters
TPO0:00.80  # ping interval; TP00:00.80 is 0.8seconds


Data gathered

Both instruments ran continuously and produced data throughout the 
cruise. On station, all of the instruments generally worked very well. 
The WH300 profiled to 80m or so while the OS75 broadband and narrowband 
modes generally reached 650 and 850m, respectively.


Problems encountered

Steaming increases acoustic noise and vibration, reducing ADCP range. The 
WH300 was particularly affected, becoming nearly useless during transits 
between stations. It is not clear why it had such problems, but a review of a 
couple of earlier Melville cruises with nearly identical WH300 installations 
revealed similar problems. Bubbles can wreak havoc by scattering the beams, 
but the WH position well aft and 2.5 feet below the hull makes that seem 
unlikely. I looked down the instrument well several times, but there appeared 
to be few, if any, bubbles coming up. The most likely explanation is 
vibration, but we have no direct evidence of that. It may be that fairing the 
pipe or the instrument itself could help.

Poor data quality combined with only a preliminary calibration of 
installation angle meant that what little current data could be retrieved was 
obviously flawed, with large along-track biases. It may be possible to clean 
up some of the transit data during post processing, but the WH300 data should 
probably only be used on station.

The OS75 suffered much less during transit. Narrowband mode still exceeded 
600 m while broadband sometimes had trouble below 200m but usually managed 
500m. I understand from the First Mate, David Cook, that the Melville is 
typically ballasted so the bow rides a bit low, reducing bubble noise during 
transit. We appreciate this attention to our needs, and it evidently works.

While the weather was fine for most of P02E, there were a couple of episodes 
with high winds and significant seas. Unlike P02W, the OS75 was never 
overwhelmed by bubbles, though its range was occasionally reduced to about 
500 m in narrow band mode.

We were surprised to note occasional problems with the OS75 on station during 
very calm weather. There would be short periods, usually a minute or less, 
where the signal strength would drop to near zero. Unlike P02W, I never 
observed this to last more than a minute or so. At the moment, our best guess 
is that bubbles filled the instrument well, disrupting the instrument's 
contact with the water. The OS75 well is blind-there is no way for bubbles to 
exit out the top. The OS150 installation on the Melville suffered badly from 
this in previous years, so a similar situation for the OS75 is plausible. If 
this is really the problem, it requires venting the top of the well. The weak 
beam problem resolved as soon as the ship started moving. Since these gaps in 
the data were always short, they will have little effect on the final 
dataset.

As noted above, with the Ashtech ADU heading mode unusable, UHDAS relied 
exclusively on the CodaOctopus F185 for precision heading. The Ashtech had 
been the default. At the beginning of P02E, the UHDAS configuration was 
changed to use the F185 as the primary precision heading device. The precise 
alignment between the F185 and the OS75 was unknown, so a proper heading 
correction could not be applied. The alignment difference appears to be about 
0.3°, which introduced errors that will not be corrected until final 
processing.

When the ship is turning, there is a velocity difference between the ADCP and 
the GPS unless the GPS is co-located with the ADCP. CODAS processing can 
correct for this velocity difference. The reference point of the CodaOctopus 
185 is in the lower lab, within 4 m or so of the ADCP location. This is much 
closer that the Ashtech antenna locations (Figure 1), so a minor correction 
will be needed in the final processing.

On May 26, Mary Johnson noticed problems with the EM122 multibeam that were 
traced to the F185, which had lost its bearings. Frank Delahoyde cycled the 
power, and it re-established heading and attitude. The data were bad from 
roughly 0640 to 0855 UTC. The Sperry gyro feed did continue, so current data 
from that period will be produced during post-processing, although with 
greater errors than usual.





2013 P02E UNDERWAY pCO2 REPORT
(Andrew E. Shao)


The NOAA underway pCO2 measurement system is designed to autonomously take 
continuous measurements of CO2 both in the air and the ocean surface while 
the ship is underway. The system has been designed for deployment on 
non-scientific vessels and as such is meant to be self-contained and 
interfere only minimally with normal ship operations. Onboard the R/V 
Melville, deck air is sampled via a diaphragm pump with the intake mounted on 
the science mast on the bow of the ship and seawater is provided using the 
ship's unfiltered seawater line. Standards are run regularly to ensure 
continued accuracy of the measured data.

The actual pCO2 measurement is performed using a Licor 7000 infrared 
analyzer. IR passes through a reference gas cell flooded with air stripped of 
CO2 and a sample gas cell filled either with deck air or air that has 
equilibrated with a seawater sample. Using a linear fit to the known 
standards, the difference in transmitted IR between the two cells is used to 
determine concentrations.

These CO2 measurements were successfully taken over the course of the leg. 
Checking the data every 3 days, no significant anomalies in the standard 
measurements were observed, the measured atmospheric CO2 values were 
approximately 400ppm, and the surface pCO was slightly undersaturated with 
respect to the atmosphere. However, the meteorological, GPS, and oxygen 
measurements were not collected between 8 May (the departure date) and 22 
May. These problems are tentatively ascribed to a loss of power to the system 
while in port during a test of the ships' emergency generators. However with 
the assistance of Frank Delahoyde (computer and system technician) and Robert 
Palomares (resident technician), these problems were resolved when J turned 
off and cold-started the system.

For further details, contact Geoff Lebon at Geoffrey. T.Lebon©noaa.gov





2013 P02E UNDERWAY EIMS REPORT
(Andrew E. Shao)


The University of Washington Underway Equilibrator Inlet Mass Spectrometry 
(EIMS) system, measuring dissolved nitrogen, oxygen, argon, and CO2, was 
intended to be run over the entirety of this line. However upon startup after 
leaving Honolulu, both filament 1 and 2 in the gas spectrometer were found to 
be defective. This failure may potentially be ascribed to a loss of power 
during a test of the ship's emergency generators resulting in a hard shutdown 
of the system. On 10 May, the decision was made to shutdown EIMS for the 
remainder of the cruise. No data were collected on P02E. For further 
technical information see the P02W cruise report and/or contact Hilary 
Palevsky at hpalevsky©uw.edu.





              CLIVAR P02E 2013 SHIP'S UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS

             Frank Delahoyde/SIO Shipboard Technical Support


R/V Melville has a collection of permanently installed sensors and data 
acquisition systems, most of which were used during P02E 2013, MV1306. The 
collected data consist of GPS navigation, Multibeam echosounder tracks, ADCP 
sections, meteorological and sea surface measurements time series and gravity 
time series. Detailed description of these systems are included with the 
MV1306 data distribution.

GPS navigation data were collected from Furuno GP150, Ashtech ADU5 and 
CodaOctopus F185 GPS devices. The Furuno GP150 and Ashtech ADU5 data were 
collected at a 1hz data period, and the F185 at 5 hz. The GP15O was the 
primary navigation device for P02E deployment positions, hydrographic 
sections and various track maps. The F185 was the primary navigation device 
for the EM122 multibeam and the shipboard ADCP systems.

The multibeam echosounder acoustic data were collected with a Kongsberg EM122 
multibeam echosounder, with the acquisition system running SIS 3.9.2. The 
EM122 was run continuously and the centerbeams used for all acoustic depth 
determinations on P02E. The multibeam data were corrected using sound speed 
profiles that were calculated from CTD deployments. Three of the 24 
36-channel transmitter cards in the EM122 had failed during the first leg 
and were relocated to the outer-most beam positions. The card failures 
resulted in decreased resolution and increased noise levels but did not 
impact the accuracy of depth determinations. Good weather during much of P02E 
contributed to better multibeam data quality than on the previous leg.

ADCP data were collected with a hull-mounted RDI OS-75 ADCP and with an RDI 
WH300 ADCP deployed through the Melville's aft hanger pipe well. The 
Melville's hull-mounted NB15O ADCP was not operational and was not used. The 
ADCP data were acquired and processed using UHDAS software from University of 
Hawaii.

Meteorological and sea surface measurement were made using the shipboard Met 
system. This system continuously made measurements and generated a 15 second 
time series. Sea surface temperature measurements were made with two 
hull-mounted thermistors, (port and starboard). Other measurements, including 
salinity, dissolved oxygen and fluorometer, were determined by sensors 
located in the analytical lab. The salinity measurements were made with a 
5BE45 thermosalinograph (TSG), which measured temperature and conductivity 
and calculated PSS78 salinity. Seawater supplied to these sensors was pumped 
from the bow intake to through CA. 30m of pipe inside the ship.

This cruise presented a unique opportunity to examine the flow 
characteristics of this underway system by comparing Met system bow and 
analytical lab measurements to CTD surface data. CTD data from each surface 
bottle trip on each cast were compared to Met system data matched by time. 
The results of these comparisons are presented in Figure 1. The X axis on 
this plot is "Normalized P02E Day", where 0 is the time and date of the 
surface bottle trip on cast 88/1. The last two Y axis are differences between 
CTD temperature and the port and starboard hull-mounted temperature sensors.

The Met sensors are in good agreement, and the major differences with CTD 
data occur during periods of bad weather. The first Y axis is the difference 
between CTD and TSG temperatures. Here, temperature differences are more 
extreme and distortion due to the interior ship temperature is evident. 
Finally, the second Y axis is the difference between CTD and TSG salinity.


Figure 1: CTD and TSG T and S Comparisons
Figure 2: TSG Salinity


The abrupt change in salinity differences on day 18 was later found to be due 
to biological growth in the Met system pump that had clogged the filter over 
the intake. Discounting the salinity differences after day 17, the comparison 
shows a linear time dependence (drift). Figure 2 is a least-squares 
polynomial fit of the differences.

Earth's gravity field measurements were also collected from the Melville's 
BellAero BGM-3 gravimeter.








                                Appendix A

 CLIVAR/Carbon P02E:  CTD Temperature and Conductivity Corrections Summary


          ITS-90 Temperature Coefficients                 Conductivity Coefficients
 Sta/   corT = tp2*corP**2 + tp1*corP + t0          corC = cp1*corP + c2*C**2 + c1*C + c0
 Cast       tp2          tp1         t0          cp1            c2            c1          c0

088/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000902  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025570
089/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000905  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025566
090/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000909  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025562
091/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000912  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025558
092/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000916  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025554
093/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000919  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025551
094/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000923  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025548
095/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000927  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025544
096/02  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000931  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025541
097/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000935  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025539

098/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000939  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025536
099/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000943  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025534
100/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000947  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025532
101/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000951  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025530
102/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000955  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025529
103/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000958  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025528
104/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000961  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025527
105/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000964  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025526
106/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000968  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025525
107/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000971  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025524

108/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000974  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025524
109/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000978  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025524
110/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000981  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
111/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000985  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
112/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000989  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
113/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000993  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
114/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.000997  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
115/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001001  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025523
116/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001005  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025524
117/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001009  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025524

118/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001013  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025525
119/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001017  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025526
120/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001022  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025527
121/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001026  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025528
122/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001030  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025529
123/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001035  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025530
124/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001039  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025532
125/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001043  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025533
126/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001047  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025535
127/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001052  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025536


128/02  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001056  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025538
129/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001061  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025540
130/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001065  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025542
131/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001070  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025545
132/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001074  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025547
133/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001079  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025549
134/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001083  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025552
135/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001088  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025555
136/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001092  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025557
137/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001096  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025560

138/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001101  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025563
139/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001106  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025566
140/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001110  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025569
141/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001114  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025571
142/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001118  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025574
143/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001122  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025577
144/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001126  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025580
145/02  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001131  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025583





                                    -2-

          ITS-90 Temperature Coefficients                 Conductivity Coefficients
 Sta/   corT = tp2*corP**2 + tp1*corP + t0          corC = cp1*corP + c2*C**2 + c1*C + c0
 Cast       tp2          tp1         t0          cp1            c2            c1          c0

146/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001135  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025587
147/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001139  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025590

148/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001143  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025593
149/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001148  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025597
150/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001152  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025600
151/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001155  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025603
152/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001158  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025606
153/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001161  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025608
154/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001163  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025610
155/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001166  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025612
156/02  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001169  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025614
157/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001172  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025617

158/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001173  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025619
159/01  -2.6347e-11   1.3997e-08  -0.001176  -5.33815e-08  -1.63132e-05   1.36096e-03  -0.025621

                                Appendix B

          Summary of CLIVAR/Carbon P02E CTD Oxygen Time Constants
                        (time constants in seconds)

+------------------+----------------------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+
|    Pressure      |        Temperature         |    Pressure     | O2 Gradient | Velocity |     Thermal       |
|Hysteresis (Tauh) | Long(TauTl) | Short(TauTs) | Gradient (Taup) |   (Tauog)   | (TaudP)  | Diffusion (TaudT) |
+------------------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+
|      50.0        |    300.0    |     4.0      |      0.50       |    8.00     |  200.00  |       300.0       |
+------------------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+----------+-------------------+


    CLIVAR/Carbon P02E: Conversion Equation Coefficients for CTD Oxygen
                        (refer to Equation 1.9.4.0)

 Sta/    OcSlope    Offset   Phcoeff    Tlcoeff     Tscoeff     Plcoeff    dOc/dtcoeff  dP/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)      (c3)      (c2)       (c4)        (c5)        (c6)        (c7)         (c8)        (c9)

088/01   5.992e-04  -0.2562   -0.0037  -4.147e-03   4.141e-03   4.880e-03  -3.308e-03    4.880e-03  -1.210e-03
089/01   5.674e-04  -0.2838    0.9055   1.176e-02  -7.022e-03   3.630e-02   3.775e-03    3.630e-02   6.402e-03
090/01   6.247e-04  -0.2724    0.1678   1.008e-02  -1.236e-02   1.651e-02  -2.003e-03    1.651e-02   3.258e-02
091/01   5.953e-04  -0.2481   -0.0606   5.318e-03  -5.362e-03  -1.374e-02   1.533e-04   -1.374e-02   1.186e-02
092/01   4.637e-04  -0.2694    1.7051   2.153e-02  -4.299e-03   5.038e-02   5.009e-03    5.038e-02  -1.609e-02
093/01   5.738e-04  -0.2409   -0.1037  -1.344e-03   3.065e-03  -3.744e-03   1.789e-03   -3.744e-03  -6.313e-03
094/01   5.862e-04  -0.2470    0.0190  -5.296e-03   6.048e-03   2.618e-02  -2.812e-03    2.618e-02  -8.739e-04
095/01   6.420e-04  -0.2792    0.1175   3.977e-03  -7.254e-03   1.425e-02   7.757e-03    1.425e-02   2.222e-02
096/02   6.170e-04  -0.2666    0.1003  -5.085e-03   3.678e-03   2.173e-02   1.701e-03    2.173e-02  -1.755e-04
097/01   4.950e-04  -0.2773    1.4583   6.601e-03   5.771e-03   6.628e-02   5.829e-04    6.628e-02  -2.288e-02

098/01   6.407e-04  -0.2879    0.1966  -2.812e-03   6.902e-05   3.604e-02  -4.061e-03    3.604e-02   1.024e-02
099/01   6.061e-04  -0.2546   -0.0216   2.952e-03  -3.753e-03  -8.914e-03  -9.249e-04   -8.914e-03   1.092e-02
100/01   6.088e-04  -0.2594    0.0377  -3.128e-03   2.152e-03   1.649e-02  -4.152e-04    1.649e-02  -1.133e-04
101/01   6.226e-04  -0.2642    0.0501  -1.190e-03  -8.983e-04   6.503e-03  -2.214e-03    6.503e-03   7.623e-03
102/01   4.769e-04  -0.2634    1.5242   2.217e-02  -8.206e-03   5.295e-02   8.278e-03    5.295e-02   2.016e-03
103/01   6.369e-04  -0.2888    0.3397   1.697e-03  -3.855e-03   8.181e-03   1.596e-03    8.181e-03   8.572e-03
104/01   6.088e-04  -0.2589    0.0327   3.959e-04  -1.303e-03   1.178e-02   6.207e-04    1.178e-02   8.546e-03
105/01   6.369e-04  -0.2778    0.1563   1.314e-03  -4.136e-03   1.519e-02  -1.022e-03    1.519e-02   1.426e-02
106/01   5.837e-04  -0.2498    0.0943   5.019e-03  -4.059e-03   4.524e-02   9.334e-03    4.524e-02   1.707e-02
107/01   6.352e-04  -0.2771    0.1155   5.110e-04  -3.217e-03   1.438e-02   2.767e-03    1.438e-02   1.095e-02

108/01   6.131e-04  -0.2607    0.0766   1.589e-03  -2.762e-03  -3.010e-03   1.869e-03   -3.010e-03   8.311e-03
109/01   6.355e-04  -0.2756    0.1403  -3.851e-04  -2.187e-03   3.184e-03   4.799e-03    3.184e-03   9.563e-03
110/01   6.314e-04  -0.2747    0.1011  -1.763e-03  -4.614e-04  -1.493e-03  -6.353e-04   -1.493e-03   2.770e-03
111/01   5.975e-04  -0.2487   -0.1168  -4.371e-03   4.175e-03  -8.966e-03  -1.094e-03   -8.966e-03  -6.234e-03
112/01   6.161e-04  -0.2555   -0.0869   2.817e-03  -4.078e-03  -2.074e-02   2.247e-03   -2.074e-02   1.647e-02
113/01   6.089e-04  -0.2700    0.2035   1.072e-04  -4.766e-04   2.332e-02  -2.648e-03    2.332e-02   8.120e-03
114/01   6.484e-04  -0.2823    0.0837  -6.217e-03   2.615e-03   5.771e-03  -2.625e-03    5.771e-03  -2.205e-03
115/01   6.213e-04  -0.2737    0.2757  -4.639e-03   3.115e-03   1.994e-02   1.049e-03    1.994e-02  -5.161e-03
116/01   4.724e-04  -0.2494    1.4301   1.155e-02   3.108e-03   4.974e-02  -5.481e-03    4.974e-02  -2.108e-02
117/01   6.002e-04  -0.2559    0.0414  -6.326e-05   4.921e-05   7.181e-03   2.452e-03    7.181e-03   2.189e-03






                                    -3-

 Sta/    OcSlope    Offset   Phcoeff    Tlcoeff     Tscoeff     Plcoeff    dOc/dtcoeff  dP/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)      (c3)      (c2)       (c4)        (c5)        (c6)        (c7)         (c8)        (c9)

118/01   6.021e-04  -0.2555    0.0622  -4.851e-03   4.775e-03   8.513e-03  -4.312e-03    8.513e-03  -8.366e-03
119/01   5.916e-04  -0.2489    0.1056   5.716e-03  -4.991e-03   1.074e-02   4.070e-03    1.074e-02   2.057e-02
120/01   5.725e-04  -0.2875    0.9480   3.703e-03   9.473e-04   1.856e-02  -2.132e-03    1.856e-02  -1.325e-02
121/01   6.275e-04  -0.2680    0.1019  -4.095e-03   1.796e-03   3.053e-03  -2.700e-03    3.053e-03   2.113e-03
122/01   6.310e-04  -0.2676    0.1080   6.388e-03  -9.185e-03   1.923e-02   1.897e-03    1.923e-02   3.309e-02
123/01   6.440e-04  -0.2881    0.2869   4.253e-03  -7.537e-03   2.871e-02   3.252e-03    2.871e-02   2.109e-02
124/01   6.266e-04  -0.2614   -0.0132  -1.558e-03  -9.281e-04  -6.901e-03  -6.394e-04   -6.901e-03   1.426e-02
125/01   6.155e-04  -0.2612    0.0883   1.675e-03  -3.056e-03   1.155e-02   6.532e-03    1.155e-02   1.149e-02
126/01   6.246e-04  -0.2728    0.1968  -1.346e-02   1.161e-02   1.383e-02  -1.261e-02    1.383e-02  -6.840e-03
127/01   6.411e-04  -0.2746    0.0796  -6.051e-03   2.418e-03   5.537e-03  -6.554e-03    5.537e-03   3.332e-03

128/02   6.169e-04  -0.2591   -0.0097  -4.780e-03   3.220e-03  -9.346e-03   9.107e-06   -9.346e-03  -8.205e-03
129/01   6.136e-04  -0.2610    0.2059  -3.920e-03   2.440e-03   2.533e-02  -3.197e-03    2.533e-02   4.137e-02
130/01   6.347e-04  -0.2779    0.1775  -5.052e-03   2.237e-03   1.226e-02  -4.525e-03    1.226e-02  -5.311e-03
131/01   6.536e-04  -0.2752    0.0076  -3.353e-03  -1.349e-03  -1.588e-02  -1.804e-04   -1.588e-02   2.038e-02
132/01   6.380e-04  -0.2721    0.1553   1.702e-03  -5.110e-03   5.678e-03   4.181e-04    5.678e-03   3.909e-02
133/01   6.194e-04  -0.2643    0.0521  -3.546e-03   1.712e-03  -1.912e-03   1.331e-03   -1.912e-03  -2.264e-03
134/01   6.061e-04  -0.2546   -0.0024  -3.747e-03   2.920e-03   1.242e-04   3.113e-03    1.242e-04  -2.574e-03
135/01   6.444e-04  -0.2710   -0.0412  -5.588e-03   1.074e-03  -1.157e-02  -1.072e-03   -1.157e-02   1.149e-02
136/01   6.095e-04  -0.2690    0.2339  -8.266e-03   7.685e-03   1.669e-02  -8.011e-03    1.669e-02  -9.647e-03
137/01   6.137e-04  -0.2541   -0.0847  -1.254e-03  -3.322e-04  -2.303e-03   3.478e-03   -2.303e-03   3.428e-03

138/01   6.349e-04  -0.2742    0.1367  -6.287e-03   3.065e-03   1.199e-02   6.343e-04    1.199e-02   1.509e-03
139/01   6.507e-04  -0.2805   -0.0016  -6.958e-03   2.433e-03  -7.975e-03   2.471e-03   -7.975e-03  -9.671e-03
140/01   6.241e-04  -0.2709    0.1758  -3.560e-03   1.561e-03   6.093e-03   2.191e-03    6.093e-03   9.326e-03
141/01   5.483e-04  -0.2310    0.3398   2.538e-02  -2.050e-02   4.416e-02   2.708e-03    4.416e-02   7.109e-02
142/01   5.844e-04  -0.2620    0.5071  -1.571e-03   3.978e-03   2.673e-02  -2.800e-03    2.673e-02   1.035e-02
143/01   5.729e-04  -0.2538    0.5565   2.363e-03   7.476e-04   3.248e-02  -2.881e-03    3.248e-02   3.849e-02
144/01   6.153e-04  -0.2636    0.0252   4.990e-03  -7.155e-03   4.709e-03   1.191e-02    4.709e-03  -4.585e-03
145/02   5.992e-04  -0.2490   -0.1728  -2.477e-03   2.201e-03  -1.207e-02   6.284e-03   -1.207e-02  -3.786e-02
146/01   6.420e-04  -0.2646    0.0420  -1.189e-02   7.023e-03   5.346e-03   4.720e-03    5.346e-03   2.866e-02
147/01   5.990e-04  -0.2615    0.2953   2.348e-02  -2.347e-02   3.685e-02  -3.828e-04    3.685e-02   4.650e-02

148/01   6.578e-04  -0.2775    0.0234  -3.621e-02   2.936e-02  -3.136e-03  -9.827e-03   -3.136e-03  -1.035e-02
149/01   6.146e-04  -0.2597    0.0622  -4.034e-03   3.114e-03   1.640e-02   4.659e-03    1.640e-02   5.797e-03
150/01   6.368e-04  -0.2655    0.0104  -2.914e-04  -4.239e-03  -5.459e-03   3.017e-03   -5.459e-03  -2.875e-03
151/01   3.892e-04  -0.1711    0.4325   2.996e-02   1.217e-03  -9.397e-03   2.206e-03   -9.397e-03  -2.857e-02
152/01   4.182e-04  -0.1889    0.6290   2.680e-02  -8.021e-04   7.638e-05   3.594e-03    7.638e-05  -3.738e-02
153/01   4.711e-03  -2.1566    0.8849  -1.055e-01  -2.817e-02   4.656e-02   6.316e-03    4.656e-02   1.696e-01
154/01   7.853e-04  -0.3448    0.4294  -2.433e-02   9.002e-03  -2.878e-02  -7.962e-03   -2.878e-02  -1.596e-02
155/01   3.301e-05  -0.0133   -0.1555   1.502e-01   1.989e-02  -1.476e-01   1.182e-03   -1.476e-01  -1.968e-01
156/02   8.704e-04  -0.3711    0.0880  -1.979e-02  -1.723e-03   7.604e-03   3.356e-03    7.604e-03   4.312e-02
157/01   1.227e-04  -0.0493   -0.3142   8.471e-02   3.713e-03  -3.036e-01   7.465e-04   -3.036e-01  -8.978e-02

158/01   3.416e-04  -0.1494    0.3926   3.523e-02  -3.001e-03   4.627e-02   4.282e-03    4.627e-02  -2.149e-02
159/01   8.757e-04   0.0612  -12.2943  -3.912e-02   8.024e-03   3.672e-02  -1.210e-03    3.672e-02   2.437e-02

                                Appendix C

               CLIVAR/Carbon P02E:  Bottle Quality Comments


Comments from the Sample Logs and the results of STS/ODF's data
investigations are included in this report.  Units stated in these comments
are degrees Celsius for temperature, Unless otherwise noted, milliliters
per liter for oxygen and micromoles per liter for Silicate, Nitrate,
Nitrite, and Phosphate.  The sample number is the cast number times 100
plus the bottle number.  Investigation of data may include comparison of
bottle salinity and oxygen data with CTD data, review of data plots of the
station profile and adjoining stations, and re-reading of charts (i.e.
nutrients).


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 89/1    109    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.0035 high vs    |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -4-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 89/1    111    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.004 high vs     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 89/1    123    o2            3    Bottle O2 5 umol/kg low, does not fit  |
|                                   profile, other parameters ok           |
| 89/1    130    o2            3    Bottle O2 10 umol/kg low, on high      |
|                                   gradient feature                       |
| 90/1    126    bottle        2    Winch overshot bottle 26 target:       |
|                                   tripped 15m shallower than planned.    |
| 90/1    131    o2            3    Bottle O2 8 umol/kg low, value         |
|                                   identical to bottle 32, possible       |
|                                   sampling error                         |
| 91/1    116    bottle        2    Misread bottle 16 target: 30m deeper   |
|                                   than planned.                          |
| 91/1    136    bottle        2    Bottle 36 tripped next-to-last to test |
|                                   new end cap (one level deeper than     |
|                                   usual).                                |
| 93/1    101    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    102    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    103    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    104    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    105    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    106    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    107    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    108    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    109    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    110    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    111    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    112    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    113    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    114    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    115    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    116    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    117    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    118    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    119    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    120    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    121    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    122    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    123    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    124    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    125    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    126    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -5-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 93/1    127    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    128    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    128    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.05 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 93/1    129    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    130    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    131    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    132    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    133    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    133    salt          3    Salinity 0.015 low, matches upcast,    |
|                                   high variability region                |
| 93/1    134    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 93/1    136    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primaries fouled by sea slime.         |
| 94/1    101    bottle        9    Bottle 1 did not close, solenoid       |
|                                   checked by ET after sampling.          |
| 94/1    123    o2            2    Bottle O2 7 umol/kg high, high         |
|                                   gradient                               |
| 94/1    133    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.05/-0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 94/1    133    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.027 high, unstable   |
|                                   reading of CTDC1/CTDC2, high gradient  |
| 94/1    134    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.018 high, matches    |
|                                   upcast, highly variable region         |
| 95/1    102    o2            4    Problem with instrument. Endpoint bad. |
| 95/1    103    o2            4    Problem with instrument. Endpoint bad. |
| 95/1    104    o2            4    Problem with instrument. Endpoint bad. |
| 95/1    108    bottle        2    Winch went 40m past target, bottle 8   |
|                                   tripped 40m shallower than planned.    |
| 95/1    120    bottle        2    Nutrients sampled before DOC           |
| 95/1    122    o2            2    O2 5 umol/kg low, matches upcast, high |
|                                   gradient                               |
| 95/1    132    bottle        2    spigot was already pushed in when O2   |
|                                   went to sample. o2 and salinity values |
|                                   ok.                                    |
| 96/2    201    bottle        9    Bottle 1 tripped third from bottom to  |
|                                   test re-sealed carousel latch. Bottle  |
|                                   did not close, bottle removed for      |
|                                   remainder of cruise.                   |
| 96/2    202    bottle        2    Bottles 2/3 tripped at bottom/next-to- |
|                                   bottom until bottle 1 position passes  |
|                                   tripping tests.                        |
| 96/2    203    bottle        2    Bottles 2/3 tripped at bottom/next-to- |
|                                   bottom until bottle 1 position passes  |
|                                   tripping tests.                        |
| 96/2    206    bottle        3    vent open, leaking                     |
| 96/2    210    o2            5    O2 292 high, forgot stir bar, sample   |
|                                   lost                                   |
| 96/2    222    o2            2    O2 5 umol/kg low, high gradient        |
| 97/1    124    o2            2    O2 8 umol/kg low, high gradient        |
| 97/1    136    salt          5    Analyst reports that the sample was    |
|                                   lost                                   |
| 98/1    123    o2            2    O2 4 umol/kg high, high gradient       |
| 98/1    124    o2            2    O2 4 umol/kg high, high gradient       |
| 98/1    131    o2            2    O2 5 umol/kg low, matches upcast       |
| 99/1    131    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.055/-0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -6-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 99/1    131    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.010 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, in a gradient             |
| 100/1   122    o2            2    O2 7 umol/kg low, matches upcast       |
| 100/1   124    o2            2    O2 5 umol/kg high, high gradient,      |
|                                   matches upcast                         |
| 102/1   133    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.03/+0.035 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 103/1   105    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.004 high vs     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 103/1   129    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.015 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 105/1   111    salt          4    Deep bottle salinity 0.010 high vs     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, analyst notes that        |
|                                   "thimble came out with cap. Possible   |
|                                   contamination"                         |
| 105/1   130    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.017 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, high gradient             |
| 106/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.01/-0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 107/1   105    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.007 high vs     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2.                           |
| 107/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.035/+0.11 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   extremely unstable SBE35RT reading in  |
|                                   a gradient.                            |
| 108/1   128    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;         |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 109/1   128    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.015/+0.07 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 111/1   129    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.012 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 111/1   133    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.036 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 112/1   133    salt          3    Bottle salt 0.013 high compared to     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 114/1   104    bottle        2    Winch overshot target by 7m and came   |
|                                   back down before stopping/tripping     |
|                                   bottle 4.                              |
| 114/1   107    bottle        2    Winch overshot stop, tripped bottle 7  |
|                                   at 75m shallower than planned.         |
| 114/1   109    o2            4    Bottle O2 127 umol/kg low              |
| 114/1   131    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.05/+0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 114/1   131    salt          3    Bottle salt 0.013 high compared to     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 115/1   106    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.010 high vs     |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 115/1   128    bottle        9    Bottle did not close. Carousel         |
|                                   solenoid problems: remove bottle 28    |
|                                   for rest of leg.                       |
| 116/1   108    salt          2    Salts appear to have been sampled from |
|                                   the wrong bottle, box position being   |
|                                   correct, corrected                     |
| 116/1   109    salt          2    Salts appear to have been sampled from |
|                                   the wrong bottle, box position being   |
|                                   correct, corrected                     |
| 116/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.05/-0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 116/1   130    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.070 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 116/1   131    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.010 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 116/1   132    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.012 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -7-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 117/1   112    bottle        2    Winch overshot target, tripped bottle  |
|                                   12 at 38m shallower than planned.      |
| 117/1   129    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.06/-0.08 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 117/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.055/+0.06 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 117/1   134    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.097 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 118/1   113    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.0025 high vs    |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 118/1   134    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.08/+0.10 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 118/1   134    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.025 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 119/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.02/+0.08 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 119/1   130    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.025 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 120/1   117    bottle        2    Winch overshot target by 10m and came  |
|                                   back down before tripping bottle 17.   |
| 120/1   129    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.065/+0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 121/1   102    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.004 high        |
|                                   compared to CTDS1/CTDS2                |
| 121/1   126    salt          4    Bottle salinity 0.042 low compared to  |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, analyst notes that        |
|                                   thimble came out with cap and was      |
|                                   probably contaminated                  |
| 121/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.03/-0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 121/1   133    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.027 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 122/1   102    o2            5    Oxygen rig error. Sample lost.         |
| 122/1   130    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.020 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 122/1   131    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.04/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 122/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.055/+0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 122/1   133    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.010 low compared to  |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 123/1   125    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;         |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   mild gradient.                         |
| 124/1   124    o2            2    Bottle O2 11 umol/kg high, on very     |
|                                   high gradient, ok                      |
| 124/1   129    o2            5    Analyst reports the sample was lost    |
| 124/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;         |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 124/1   133    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.023 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 125/1   129    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.020 low compared to  |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 126/1   131    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.033 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 127/1   105    bottle        2    Winch overshot target by 10m, back     |
|                                   down 7m before stop/trip bottle 5.     |
| 127/1   129    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.075/-0.08 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -8-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 127/1   130    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.040 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, high gradient             |
| 127/1   132    bottle        2    Op.error: bottles 32, 33 target/trip   |
|                                   4m deeper than planned.                |
| 127/1   133    bottle        2    Op.error: bottles 32, 33 target/trip   |
|                                   4m deeper than planned.                |
| 128/2   222    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.103 high compared to |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, other parameters ok       |
| 128/2   233    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.055 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;         |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 129/1   123    bottle        2    Winch shift change: overshot target,   |
|                                   bottle 23 tripped 35m shallower than   |
|                                   planned.                               |
| 129/1   131    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.015/+0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 129/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.01/-0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 131/1   131    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.025 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2. High gradient             |
| 132/1   113    no2           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   12.                                    |
| 132/1   113    no3           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   12.                                    |
| 132/1   113    po4           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   12.                                    |
| 132/1   113    sio3          4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   12.                                    |
| 132/1   130    no2           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   29.                                    |
| 132/1   130    no3           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   29.                                    |
| 132/1   130    po4           4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   29.                                    |
| 132/1   130    sio3          4    Sampling error.  Sampled from niskin   |
|                                   29.                                    |
| 132/1   131    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.369 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 133/1   134    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.023 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 134/1   133    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.03/+0.02 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 134/1   133    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.022 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, high gradient             |
| 136/1   111    no2           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   111    no3           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   111    po4           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   111    sio3          2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   112    no2           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   112    no3           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   112    po4           2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   112    sio3          2    Samples from niskins 11-12             |
|                                   interchanged; sampler error.           |
| 136/1   130    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.04/+0.03 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 137/1   129    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.015/+0.05 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -9-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 139/1   131    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.055/-0.06 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 141/1   127    bottle        2    Winch stopped 10m short of bottle 27   |
|                                   target, then on up to correct target.  |
| 143/1   122    salt          4    Bottle salinity 0.053 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, analyst notes a low water |
|                                   level in bottle, about half full       |
| 143/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.015/+0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   somewhat unstable SBE35RT reading in a |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 145/2   202    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.0025 high vs    |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 145/2   227    o2            3    Bottle o2 23 umol/kg low               |
| 145/2   231    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.06/+0.05 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 145/2   231    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.020 high vs          |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 147/1   104    salt          3    Deep bottle salinity 0.0025 high vs    |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 147/1   131    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.045 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 147/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.11/+0.15 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 148/1   129    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.035/-0.04 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 148/1   130    salt          2    Bottle salinity 0.020 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2, in a gradient             |
| 148/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.13/-0.15 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 148/1   136    bottle        2    Surface bottle tripped at 10m due to   |
|                                   high swell.                            |
| 148/1   136    o2            2    Bottle O2 60 umol/kg high vs CTDO,     |
|                                   CTDO is bad and bottle o2 matches      |
|                                   other mixed layer values.              |
| 149/1   102    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   103    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   104    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   105    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   106    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   107    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   108    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   109    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   110    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   111    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   112    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   113    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   114    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   115    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -10-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 149/1   116    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   117    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   118    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   119    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   120    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   121    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   122    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   123    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   124    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   125    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   126    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   127    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   129    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   130    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   131    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   132    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   132    o2            3    Bottle O2 48 umol/kg low, in gradient, |
|                                   matches upcast                         |
| 149/1   132    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.035/-0.10 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 149/1   133    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   133    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.085 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; very    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 149/1   134    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   136    bottle        2    Surface bottle tripped at 10m due to   |
|                                   high swell.                            |
| 149/1   136    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 149/1   136    o2            2    Bottle O2 52 umol/kg high vs CTDO,     |
|                                   CTDO is bad and bottle o2 matches      |
|                                   other mixed layer values.              |
| 150/1   103    reft          3    deep SBE35RT +0.003/+0.0025 vs         |
|                                   CTDT1/CTDT2; unstable SBE35RT reading. |
| 150/1   105    reft          3    deep SBE35RT +0.003 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading.              |
| 150/1   132    o2            2    Bottle o2 20 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast, in high gradient               |
| 150/1   132    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.051 low vs           |
|                                   CTDS1/CTDS2                            |
| 150/1   133    bottle        2    Op. error: bottle 33 tripped early/on  |
|                                   the fly 2m above stop (cons.op.        |
|                                   distracted).                           |
| 151/1   102    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   103    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   104    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+





                                    -11-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 151/1   105    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   106    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   107    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   108    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   109    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   110    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   111    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   112    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   113    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   114    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   115    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   116    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   117    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   118    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   119    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   120    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   121    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   122    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   123    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   124    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   125    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   126    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   127    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   129    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 151/1   130    ctdt/ctds     2    Secondary TS data used for CTD trips:  |
|                                   primary data noisy.                    |
| 153/1   122    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.035 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 154/1   118    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.04/-0.01 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 154/1   118    salt          3    Bottle salinity 0.026 low vs CTDS1     |
| 154/1   125    o2            2    Bottle O2 31 umol/kg low, matches      |
|                                   upcast, high gradient                  |
| 154/1   125    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.175/+0.185 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 157/1   120    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.225/+0.055 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;  |
|                                   very unstable SBE35RT reading in a     |
|                                   gradient.                              |
| 159/1   107    o2            5    Operator error.  Sample lost.          |
| 159/1   109    reft          3    SBE35RT +0.04/+0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;   |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                    -12-

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Station Sample            Quality                                        |
| /Cast   No.    Property    Code   Comment                                |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 159/1   110    reft          3    SBE35RT -0.07/-0.01 vs CTDT1/CTDT2;    |
|                                   unstable SBE35RT reading in a          |
|                                   gradient.                              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+




                                Appendix D


      CLIVAR/Carbon P02E:  Pre-Cruise Sensor Laboratory Calibrations


+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                     Table of Contents                                       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                                                                  Appendix D |
|Instrument/              Manufacturer     Serial        Station+  Calib           Page (Not  |
|Sensor                   and Model No.    Number        Range     Date            Numbered)  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                         Paroscientific                                                      |
|PRESS (Pressure)         Digiquartz       914-110547    13/5-159  14-Jun-2012         1      |
|                         401K-105                                                            |
|                                                                                             |
|T1 (Primary Temp.)       SBE3plus         03P-4138      1-159     24-Jan-2013         4      |
|T2 (Secondary Temp.)     SBE3plus         03P-4226      1-159     24-Jan-2013         5      |
|                                                                                             |
|REFT (Reference Temp.)   SBE35            3528706-0035  1-159     7-Dec-2012          6      |
|REFT Post-Cruise                                                  18-Jun-2013         7      |
|                                                                                             |
|C1 (Primary Cond.)       SBE4C            04-2569       1-159     16-Jan-2013         8      |
|C1 Post-Cruise                                                    26-Jun-2013         9      |
|                                                                                             |
|C2b (Secondary Cond.)    SBE4C            04-3058       63-159    2-Nov-2012          10     |
|C2b Post-Cruise                                                   26-Jun-2013         11     |
|                                                                                             |
|O2 (Dissolved Oxygen)    SBE43            43-1071       20-159    12-Jul-2012         12     |
|                                                                                             |
|RINKO Optical O2 (+ T)   Rinko III        105           25-159    7-Aug-2012          13     |
|                         ARO-CAV                                                             |
|                                                                                             |
|                                                                  19-Jul-2012         15     |
|TRANS (Transmissometer)  WET Labs C-Star  CST-327DR     1-159     Leg 1 Air Cals      16     |
|                                                                  Leg 2 Air Cals      17     |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ NOTE: station numbers below 88 indicate sensors/instruments were used
                            starting Leg 1/P02W









                       Pressure Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility

SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0914
CALIBRATION DATE:     14-JUN-2012
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   09P CTD Prs s/n: 110547

C1     = -4.348919E+4
C2     =  1.845929E-2
C3     =  1.285114E-2
D1     =  3.610893E-2
D2     =  0.000000E+0
T1     =  3.006810E+1
T2     = -2.604375E-4
T3     =  3.050306E-6
T4     =  3.013015E-8
T5     =  0.000000E+0
AD59OM =  1.28789E-2
AD59OB = -8.81353E+0
Slope  =  1.00000000E+0
Offset =  0.00000000E+0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: RUSKA Model: 2400 s/n: 34336 
t0=tl+t2*td+t3*td*td+t4*td*td*td 
w = 1-t0*t0*f*f 
Pressure = (0.6894759*((cl+c2*td+c3*td*td)*w*(1 -(dl+d2*td)*w)-14.7)


                                Standard-   Standard-
  Sensor               Sensor     Sensor      Sensor   Sensor   Bath
  Output   Standard  New Coefs  Prev Coefs  NEW Coefs   _Temp  _Temp
---------  --------  ---------  ----------  ---------  ------  ------
33268.311     0.17       0.33      0.30       -0.16     27.13  27.334
33469.730   364.96     364.72      0.70        0.24     27.17  27.334
33658.765   709.13     708.99      0.59        0.14     27.20  27.334
33846.469  1053.30    1053.05      0.68        0.25     27.22  27.334
34033.137  1397.55    1397.39      0.58        0.16     27.25  27.334
34402.840  2086.02    2085.81      0.58        0.22     27.27  27.334
34768.150  2774.56    2774.48      0.39        0.08     27.30  27.334
35129.097  3463.18    3463.19      0.22       -0.01     27.32  27.335
34768.251  2774.55    2774.66      0.20       -0.11     27.34  27.334
34403.060  2086.03    2086.21      0.19       -0.19     27.34  27.334
34033.328  1397.56    1397.73      0.25       -0.18     27.38  27.334
33846.696  1053.30    1053.46      0.29       -0.15     27.39  27.334
33658.930   709.13     709.28      0.31       -0.15     27.40  27.334
33469.936   364.96     365.08      0.36       -0.12     27.43  27.334
33267.305     0.17       0.36      0.01       -0.20     16.22  16.201
33468.719   364.96     364.80      0.37        0.16     16.24  16.201
33657.662   709.13     708.97      0.38        0.16     16.25  16.201
33845.400  1053.30    1053.15      0.37        0.15     16.26  16.201
34031.996  1397.56    1397.42      0.36        0.14     16.26  16.201
34401.640  2086.03    2085.83      0.40        0.20     16.30  16.201
34766.833  2774.56    2774.40      0.33        0.16     16.30  16.201
35127.694  3463.19    3463.07      0.25        0.12     16.31  16.201
35484.333  4151.88    4151.78      0.18        0.09     16.33  16.201
35836.896  4840.62    4840.59      0.06        0.03     16.34  16.201
35484.449  4151.87    4152.00     -0.05       -0.14     16.35  16.201
35127.844  3463.19    3463.34     -0.02       -0.16     16.35  16.201
34767.039  2774.57    2774.78     -0.04       -0.21     16.35  16.201
34401.847  2086.03    2086.20      0.03       -0.17     16.36  16.201
34032.184  1397.56    1397.73      0.04       -0.18     16.36  16.201
33845.563  1053.30    1053.42      0.10       -0.12     16.36  16.201
33657.801   709.13     709.19      0.16       -0.05     16.39  16.201
33468.843   364.96     364.98      0.19       -0.03     16.40  16.201
33265.457     0.17       0.44      0.08       -0.27      6.65   6.224
33466.819   364.95     364.83      0.48        0.12      6.65   6.224
33655.717   709.12     708.97      0.53        0.16      6.65   6.224
33843.418  1053.29    1053.11      0.56        0.18      6.67   6.224
34030.002  1397.54    1397.41      0.51        0.13      6.65   6.224
34399.609  2086.00    2085.84      0.55        0.16      6.68   6.224
34764.734  2774.52    2774.37      0.54        0.15      6.68   6.224
35125.528  3463.14    3462.99      0.50        0.15      6.68   6.224
35482.106  4151.83    4151.68      0.47        0.15      6.68   6.224
35834.600  4840.55    4840.44      0.40        0.12      6.68   6.224
36183.152  5529.36    5529.30      0.28        0.06      6.68   6.224
35834.723  4840.56    4840.68      0.17       -0.11      6.68   6.224
35482.277  4151.83    4152.01      0.14       -0.19      6.68   6.224
35125.723  3463.15    3463.37      0.14       -0.22      6.68   6.224
34764.918  2774.54    2774.71      0.21       -0.18      6.68   6.224
34399.772  2086.01    2086.14      0.26       -0.13      6.68   6.224
34030.154  1397.55    1397.68      0.26       -0.13      6.68   6.224
33843.570  1053.29    1053.39      0.29       -0.09      6.68   6.224
33655.838   709.13     709.17      0.33       -0.04      6.68   6.224
33466.887   364.96     364.94      0.37        0.01      6.68   6.224
33263.296     0.17       0.34      0.00       -0.18     -1.21  -1.724
33464.641   364.96     364.74      0.41        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
33653.544   709.13     708.91      0.42        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
33841.219  1053.30    1053.04      0.45        0.25     -1.21  -1.724
34027.781  1397.55    1397.32      0.43        0.23     -1.21  -1.724
34397.362  2086.02    2085.76      0.44        0.25     -1.21  -1.724
34762.473  2774.55    2774.32      0.40        0.23     -1.21  -1.724
35123.237  3463.15    3462.94      0.35        0.21     -1.21  -1.724
35479.792  4151.84    4151.64      0.30        0.20     -1.21  -1.724
35832.258  4840.59    4840.39      0.24        0.19     -1.21  -1.724
36180.738  5529.38    5529.17      0.19        0.22     -1.21  -1.724
36525.423  6218.24    6218.11      0.03        0.13     -1.21  -1.725
36866.316  6907.18    6907.01     -0.02        0.17     -1.21  -1.724
36525.566  6218.26    6218.40     -0.24       -0.14     -1.21  -1.725
36180.980  5529.38    5529.65     -0.29       -0.26     -1.21  -1.724
35832.516  4840.59    4840.90     -0.27       -0.31     -1.21  -1.725
35480.090  4151.85    4152.22     -0.26       -0.36     -1.21  -1.724
35123.522  3463.17    3463.49     -0.18       -0.32     -1.21  -1.724
34762.705  2774.55    2774.76     -0.03       -0.21     -1.21  -1.724
34397.597  2086.02    2086.20      0.01       -0.18     -1.21  -1.724
34027.987  1397.56    1397.70      0.06       -0.14     -1.21  -1.724
33841.409  1053.30    1053.39      0.11       -0.09     -1.21  -1.725
33653.691   709.13     709.18      0.15       -0.04     -1.21  -1.724
33464.760   364.96     364.95      0.19        0.00     -1.21  -1.724
33263.359     0.17       0.46     -0.11       -0.29     -1.21  -1.724





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 4138
CALIBRATION DATE:     24-Jan-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   03
Previous cal:         21-Jun-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90_COEFFICIENTS   IPTS-68_COEFFICIENTS
                      ITS-T90
-------------------   -------------------------
 g = 4.40192731E-3    a = 4.40214027E-3
 h = 6.50694840E-4    b = 6.50911856E-4
 i = 2.33977600E-5    c = 2.34309522E-5
 j = 2.04988124E-6    d = 2.05142804E-6
 f0 = 1000.0          Slope = 1.0  Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1/{g+h[1n(f0/f)]+i[1n2(f0/f)]+j[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1/{a+b[1n(f0/f)]+c[1n2(f0/f)]+d[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
T68 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

  SBE3      SPRT     SBE3    SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
  Freg     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs  NEW Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3159.0572  -1.5059  -1.5060  -0.00002    0.00008
3339.5971   0.9941   0.9943  -0.00017   -0.00013
3604.7395   4.4949   4.4949  -0.00001   -0.00001
3884.7240   7.9964   7.9963   0.00005    0.00007
4179.9450  11.4983  11.4983  -0.00005    0.00003
4489.8693  14.9906  14.9906  -0.00022   -0.00005
4816.6766  18.4936  18.4936  -0.00026    0.00000
5159.4338  21.9930  21.9930  -0.00034    0.00003
5518.8820  25.4929  25.4929  -0.00048   -0.00001
5895.1896  28.9917  28.9918  -0.00059   -0.00003
6288.9059  32.4918  32.4917  -0.00060    0.00002





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 4226
CALIBRATION DATE:     24-Jan-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD Model:   03
Previous cal:         30-Aug-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90 COEFFICIENTS   IPTS-68_COEFFICIENTS
                      ITS-T90
-------------------   -------------------------
 g = 4.38186818E-3    a = 4.38207455E-3
 h = 6.46712520E-4    b = 6.46926865E-4
 i = 2.24590277E-5    c = 2.24918559E-5
 j = 1.80204389E-6    d = 1.80355746E-6
 f0 = 1000.0          Slope = 1.0  Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1/{g+h[1n(f0/f)]+i[1n2(f0/f)]+j[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1/{a+b[ln(f0/f)]+c[1n2(f0/f)]+d[1n3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C)
T68 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

  SBE3      SPRT     SBE3    SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
  Freg     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs  NEW Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3074.5391  -1.5059  -1.5060   0.00005    0.00004
3250.8215   0.9941   0.9942  -0.00020   -0.00008
3509.7895   4.4949   4.4949  -0.00020    0.00001
3783.3395   7.9964   7.9963  -0.00017    0.00006
4071.8662  11.4983  11.4983  -0.00015    0.00004
4374.8712  14.9906  14.9906  -0.00022   -0.00010
4694.4865  18.4936  18.4936  -0.00006   -0.00000
5029.8229  21.9930  21.9930   0.00007    0.00006
5381.6290  25.4929  25.4929   0.00001   -0.00003
5750.0697  28.9917  28.9917   0.00002   -0.00001
6135.7193  32.4918  32.4917  -0.00005    0.00000





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0035
CALIBRATION DATE:     07-Dec-2012
Mfg: SEABIRD          Model: 35
Previous cal:         16-Feb-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90_COEFFICIENTS
----------------------------------
a0 =  4.000167576E-3
al = -1.059556581E-3
a2 =  1.660155451E-4
a3 = -9.317019546E-6
a4 =  2.012171620E-7
Slope = 1.000000 Offset = 0.000000

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 11{a0+al[ln(f)]+a2[1n2(f)]+a3[1n3(f)]+a4[1n4(f)} -273.15 (°C)

   SBE35      SPRT     SBE35   SPRT-SBE35  SPRT-SBE35
   Count     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs   NEW Coefs
-----------  -------  -------  ----------  ----------
659026.9626  -1.5061  -1.5061   -0.00017     0.00002
590645.0049   0.9940   0.9940   -0.00017    -0.00002
507826.0283   4.4948   4.4948   -0.00018    -0.00001
437800.2467   7.9959   7.9959   -0.00022    -0.00001
378447.0872  11.4975  11.4974   -0.00020     0.00005
328138.6418  14.9902  14.9902   -0.00027    -0.00001
285167.6485  18.4922  18.4922   -0.00026    -0.00002
248489.8620  21.9930  21.9930   -0.00023    -0.00001
217083.1315  25.4946  25.4947   -0.00026    -0.00005
190153.3418  28.9931  28.9930   -0.00017     0.00008
166967.0072  32.4934  32.4934   -0.00044    -0.00003





                      Temperature Calibration Report
                       STS/ODF Calibration Facility


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0035
CALIBRATION DATE:     18-Jun-2013
Mfg: SEABIRD          Model: 35
Previous cal:         07-Dec-12
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90-COEFFICIENTS
----------------------------------
a0 =  3.891166934E-3
al = -1.025343400E-3
a2 =  1.619908097E-4
a3 = -9.106715094E-6
a4 =  1.970986285E-7
Slope = 1.000000 Offset = 0.000000

Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Calibration Standard: Mfg: ASL Model: F18 s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90 = 1I{aO+al[ln(f)]+a2[1n2(f)]+a3[1n3(f)]+a4[1n4(f)} -273.15 (°C)

   SBE35      SPRT     SBE35   SPRT-SBE35  SPRT-SBE35
   Count     ITS-T90  ITS-T90  OLD Coefs   NEW Coefs
-----------  -------  -------  ----------  ----------
658922.3875  -1.5025  -1.5025    0.00002     0.00001
590549.0466   0.9977   0.9977   -0.00003    -0.00003
507746.8714   4.4985   4.4985    0.00000    -0.00000
437739.1860   7.9993   7.9992    0.00004     0.00003
378386.6850  11.5013  11.5013    0.00001    -0.00001
328059.0624  14.9962  14.9962   -0.00001    -0.00003
285109.7253  18.4974  18.4974    0.00004     0.00003
248451.9833  21.9969  21.9969   -0.00001    -0.00001
217070.6508  25.4961  25.4962   -0.00004    -0.00002
190139.8707  28.9949  28.9949    0.00001     0.00003
166964.4934  32.4938  32.4938   -0.00000    -0.00001





                        Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc.
            13431 NE 20th Street, Bellevue, WA 98005-2010 USA
Phone: (+1) 425-643-9866  Fax (+1) 425-643-9954  Email: seabird@seabird.com


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2569       SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE:     16-Jan-13  PSS 1978: C(35,15,O) = 4.2914 Seirnens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                  ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------    -----------------------------
g = -1.04780154e+001              a =  1.51027111e-004
h =  1.58729908e+000              b =  1.58729073e+000
i =  8.38055330e-005              c = -1.04779766e+001
j =  9.23998766e-005              d = -8.43958712e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)    m =  3.8
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)    CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND   INST FREO   INST COND    RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  -----------  ---------  -----------  -----------
 0.0000     0.0000     0.00000     2.56860     0.00000      0.00000
-0.9999    34.8204     2.80488     4.92253     2.80487     -0.00001
 1.0001    34.8203     2.97628     5.03070     2.97630      0.00002
15.0001    34.8201     4.27204     5.78283     4.27205      0.00001
18.5001    34.8200     4.61882     5.96794     4.61880     -0.00002
29.0001    34.8176     5.70252     6.51239     5.70253      0.00002
32.5001    34.8087     6.07483     6.68912     6.07482     -0.00001

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4)/10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (aftm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2569         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE:     26-Jun-13    PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.04789607e+001               a =  1.26022700e-004
h =  1.58771515e+000               b =  1.58740731e+000
i = -6.94755467e-005               c = -1.04782939e+001
j =  1.09916171e-004               d = -8.29428062e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m = 3.9
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND   INST FREO   INST COND    RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  -----------  ---------  -----------  -----------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000     2.56861     0.00000      0.00000
 -1.0000    34.7933    2.80290     4.92120     2.80290      0.00000
  1.0000    34.7936    2.97421     5.02932     2.97421      0.00000
 15.0000    34.7943    4.26920     5.78113     4.26920      0.00000
 18.5000    34.7942    4.61575     5.96615     4.61574     -0.00001
 29.0000    34.7933    5.69898     6.51041     5.69900      0.00003
 32.5000    34.7892    6.07180     6.68737     6.07178     -0.00002

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4)/10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (aftm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3058         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 02-Nov-12        PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seirnens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01005228e+001               a =  2.29519565e-004
h =  1.43975781e+000               b =  1.43971195e+000
i =  2.43997621e-004               c = -1.00999619e+001
j =  5.27890498e-005               d = -8.13316861e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =  3.5
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND   INST FREO   INST COND    RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  -----------  ---------  -----------  -----------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000     2.64773     0.00000      0.00000
 -1.0000    34.6226    2.79042     5.13305     2.79043      0.00001
  1.0000    34.6231    2.96102     5.24684     2.96102      0.00000
 15.0000    34.6240    4.25051     6.03764     4.25048     -0.00003
 18.5000    34.6236    4.59556     6.23217     4.59556     -0.00000
 29.0000    34.6223    5.67411     6.80424     5.67417      0.00006
 32.5000    34.6186    6.04540     6.99022     6.04536     -0.00004

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4)/10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (aftm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3058         SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE:     27-Jun-13    PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seirnens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                   ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
------------------------------     -----------------------------
g = -1.01015993e+001               a =   1.14409422e-004
h =  1.44026434e+000               b =   1.44029202e+000
i =  7.16368682e-005               c  = -1.01017161e+001
j =  6.93263690e-005               d  = -8.46230813e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)     m =   3.8
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)     CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   BATH COND   INST FREO   INST COND    RESIDUAL
(ITS-90)    (PSU)    (Siemens/m)    (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  -----------  ---------  -----------  -----------
  0.0000     0.0000    0.00000     2.64772     0.00000      0.00000
 -1.0000    34.5637    2.78612     5.13013     2.78614      0.00003
  1.0000    34.5649    2.95652     5.24381     2.95649     -0.00003
 15.0000    34.5654    4.24408     6.03389     4.24408     -0.00000
 18.5000    34.5652    4.58864     6.22823     4.58864      0.00000
 29.0001    34.5647    5.66574     6.79979     5.66574      0.00001
 32.5001    34.5602    6.03637     6.98556     6.03637     -0.00000

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4)/10(1 + delta-t + Ep) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (aftm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +Ep) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; delta = CTcor; E = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients





SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 1071         SBE 43 OXYGEN CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 21-Jul-12

COEFFICIENTS       A = -1.6343e-003    NOMINAL DYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS
Soc =      0.4611  B =  3.9125e-005    Dl =  1.92634e-4  H1 = -3.30000e-2
Voffset = -0.5086  c = -8.4413e-007    D2 = -4.64803e-2  H2 =  5.00000e+3
Tau20 =    1.25    E nominal = 0.036   H3 =  1.45000e+3
  
    BATH OX  BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   INSTRUMENT     INSTRUMENT   RESIDUAL
    (ml/l)    ITS-90      PSU     OUTPUT(VOLTS)  OXYGEN(ml/l)   (ml/l)
    -------  ---------  --------  -------------  ------------  --------
     1.24      2.00       0.05        0.787          1.24       -0.00
     1.25      6.00       0.05        0.822          1.25       -0.00
     1.26     12.00       0.04        0.875          1.26       -0.00
     1.27     20.00       0.04        0.950          1.26       -0.00
     1.27     26.00       0.04        1.009          1.27        0.00
     1.27     30.00       0.04        1.052          1.28        0.00
     4.20      2.00       0.05        1.455          4.21        0.01
     4.21      6.00       0.05        1.568          4.22        0.00
     4.22     20.00       0.04        1.983          4.22        0.00
     4.23     30.00       0.04        2.311          4.23        0.00
     4.23     12.00       0.04        1.745          4.23        0.00
     4.24     26.00       0.04        2.181          4.24        0.00
     6.77     12.00       0.04        2.486          6.77       -0.00
     6.79     20.00       0.04        2.880          6.79        0.00
     6.80      6.00       0.05        2.217          6.80        0.00
     6.81      2.00       0.05        2.038          6.80       -0.00
     6.85     30.00       0.04        3.424          6.85       -0.00
     6.86     26.00       0.04        3.211          6.85       -0.00

Oxygen (ml/l) = Soc*(V+Voffset)*(1.0+A*T+B*T2+C*T3)*OxSol(T,S)*exp(E*P/K)
V = voltage output from SBE43, T = temperature [deg C], S = salinity [PSU], K = temperature [Kelvin]
OxSol(T,S) = oxygen saturation [ml/l], P = pressure [dbar], 
Residual = instrument oxygen - bath oxygen





DISSOLVED OXYGEN

MODEL:    ARO-CAV
SERIAL:   105
DATE:     August 7, 2012
Location: Calibration office of manfacture department at Kobe
Method:   2 points calibration of span and zero is carried out with 100% 
          saturation water and nigrogen gas. Calibration should be done after 
          making the instruments accustomed in the water and keeping 
          saturation with air- bubbling. Outputs in saturated water and nitr

          Film No = 16008A

                A = -40.0057    E = 0.0045
                B = 130.010     F = 0.00
                C =  -0.42837   G = 0.00
                D =   0.0112    H = 1.00

Results:  Temperature at calibration[°C]     25
          Air pressure at calibration[hPa]  992.2
          Air saturation at calibration[%]   97.9

                Span output  zero output  Span Error  Zero Error
                    [%]          [%]          [%]        [%]
                -----------  -----------  ----------  ----------
          1st       97.3         0.0         -0.6        0.0
          2nd       97.3         0.0         -0.6        0.0
          3rd       97.3         0.0         -0.6        0.0


          Judgement: Good

                           Calibration group,
                           Manufacture department at Kobe
                           JFE Advantech Co., LTD





TEMPERATURE

MODEL:         ARO-CAV
SERIAL:        105
DATE:          August 7, 2012
Location:      Calibration office of manfacture department at Kobe
Method:        The instrument is calibrated in a constant temperature water tank.
               5 outputs in n-value corresponding to 5 water temperature ranging 
               from 3 to 31 degrees C are computed by least square method.
               (To make the tank temperature constant, water is stirred. The 
               reference temperature is measured by a thermometer)
Reference:     JFE Advantech self-made temperature probe calibrated by 'HART 
device         SCIENTIFIC' 1575A Super Thermometer (Platinum Thermo Resistance 
               Probe NSR 160) (certified by JCSS and ITS90)
Temperature:   Temperature (°C) = A+BxN+CxN2+DxN

               A = -5.455093E+00
               B =  1.6693247E+01
               C = -2.144412E+00
               D =  4.5669980E-O1

               Reference  Output   Calculated   Error
                 [°C]       [V]       [°C]      [°C]
               ---------  -------  ----------  ------
                 3.564    0.57794     3.564     0.000
                10.433    1.06415    10.431    -0.002
                17.167    1.56513    17.170     0.003
                24.220    2.08868    24.218    -0.002
                31.285    2.58698    31.286     0.001

Criteria for:  1. The errors in above form must be within ±0.02°C
acceptability  2. After writing the calibration coefficients into instrument,
                  one point check at any temperature must agree with the 
                  accuracy declared by the instrument.

Output Check:  Reference  Calculated  Error
                 [°C]        [°C]     [°C]
               ---------  ----------  -----
                23.251      23.256    0005


          Judgement: Good

                           Calibration group,
                           Manufacture department at Kobe
                           JFE Advantech Co., LTD





PO Box 518                                               (541) 929-5650
620 Applegate St.                 WET Labs           Fax (541) 929-5277
Philomath, OR 97370                                     www.wetlabs.com

                             C-Star Calibration


Date  July 19, 2012             S/N#  CST-327DR           Pathlength 25

                                 Analog output
Vd                                  0.059 V
Vair                                4.613 V
Vref                                4.523 V


Temperature of calibration water                                20.1 °C
Ambient temperature during calibration                          22.0 °C




Relationship of transmittance (Tr) to beam attenuation coefficient (c), 
and pathlength (x, in meters): Tr = e(^-cx)

To determine beam transmittance: Tr = (Vsig - Vdark) / (Vref - Vdark)

To determine beam attenuation coefficient: c = -l/x * In (Tr)


Vd    Meter output with the beam blocked. This is the offset.
Vair  Meter output in air with a clear beam path.
Vref  Meter output with clean water in the path.
Temperature of calibration water:  temperature of clean water used to obtain Vref.
Ambient temperature:  meter temperature in air during the calibration.
Vsig  Measured signal output of meter.


                                Revision M                     7/26/11





                              CLIVAR P2 - 2013

LEG 1

              Transmissometer Air Calibration M&B Calculator
                                CST-327-DR

23-Mar-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.546
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.06
  Reading

Air Temp.    17.096    17.100    17.081    17.068    17.063    17.048

    M        20.512                         Air Temp. Average  17.076
    B        -1.231


22-Apr-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.554
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    20.277    20.767    20.305    20.281    20.275    20.270

    M        20.471                         Air Temp. Average  20.363
    B        -1.208


2-May-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.513
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    20.624    20.618    20.613    20.626    20.647    20.653

    M        20.660                         Air Temp. Average  20.630
    B        -1.219





                              CLIVAR P2 - 2013

LEG 2

              Transmissometer Air Calibration M&B Calculator
                                CST-327-DR

22-May-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.528
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    18.203    18.265    18.334    18.379    18.398    18.365

    M        20.590                         Air Temp. Average  18.324
    B        -1.215

1-Jun-13
           Factory Cal Sheet Info      AVG Deck/Lab Readings
Air                 4.613                     4.512
  Reading
Water               4.523                      N/A
  Reading
Blocked             0.059                     0.059
  Reading

Air Temp.    17.652    17.659    17.677    17.635    17.633    17.650

    M        20.664                         Air Temp. Average  17.651
    B        -1.219





CCHDO Data Processing Notes

Date        Person         Data Type    Action          Summary
----------  -------------  -----------  --------------  -------------------
2013-05-15  Johnson, Mary  CTD/BTL/SUM  Submitted       to go online
            P02W / Leg 1 Bottle and CTD data - very few updates expected, 
            but possible, in the next month.  Documentation is nearly 
            ready, will be submitted within the next day or two after a few 
            more comments on the numerous problems are added to it.

2013-05-21  Johnson, Mary  CrsRpt       Submitted       to go online 
            Documentation for P02W Leg 1 in 3 parts (numbered in sequence).  
            It is probably near-final, pending Jim Swift's (chief 
            scientist's) approval.

2013-05-21  Staff, CCHDO   CrsRpt       Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              P02W-2013_Report_part3.pdf
              P02W-2013_Report_part2.pdf
              P02W-2013_Report_part1.pdf

2013-05-21  Staff, CCHDO   CTD          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_ctd.zip

2013-05-21  Staff, CCHDO   CTD          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_nc.zip

2013-05-21  Staff, CCHDO   BTL/CTD      Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_ct1.zip
              p02w_bottle_files.zip
              p02w_event_files.zip

2013-05-22  Kappa, Jerry   CrsRpt       Website Update  Preliminary PDF version online
              I've placed a new PDF version of the cruise report:
                p02_318M20130321do.pdf
              into the  directory:  
                /co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321/.
              It includes all the reports provided by the cruise PIs, 
              summary pages and CCHDO data processing notes, as well as a 
              linked Table of Contents and links to figures, tables and 
              appendices.

2013-05-22  Johnson, Mary  CrsRpt       Submitted       to go online - all pts in one pdf
            Documentation for P02W Leg 1 with all 3 parts in a single pdf.  
            It is probably near-final, pending Jim Swift's (chief 
            scientist's) approval.  (this is my 6th or 7th attempt to get 
            the 3-in-1 merged documentation in... internet keeps cutting 
            out on the ship)

2013-06-07  Staff, CCHDO  CrsRpt        Website Update  Available under 'Files as received'
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              P02W-2013_Report_All.pdf

2013-07-10  Johnson, Mary  BTL          Submitted       P02W Data updates to go online
            Updates to various parameters and codes for bottle data (oxygen 
            and nutrients) and CTD data.  CTD T,S,O corrections have been 
            updated since the original submission.  Bottle date and time 
            stamps are now the bottom date/time for each cast instead of 
            the date/time for each trip. Updated documentation will be 
            submitted within the week.

2013-07-10  Johnson, Mary  CTD          Submitted       P02W Data updates to go online
            Updates to various parameters and codes for CTD data; CTD T,S,O 
            corrections have been updated since the original submission. 
            CTD date and time stamps are now the bottom date/time for a 
            cast instead of the start date/time of the cast.  Updated 
            documentation will be submitted within the week.

2013-07-10  Johnson, Mary  BTL          Submitted       P02E Final data to go online
            This is the "final" ODF version of bottle data; any further 
            updates will be submitted by each group directly to CCHDO.  
            Cruise documentation will be submitted within the week.

2013-07-10  Johnson, Mary  CTD          Submitted       P02E Final data to go online
            This is the "final" ODF version of P02E CTD data.  The PI for 
            transmissometer data is Wilf Gardner (TAMU).  We have only 
            submitted "raw" data converted to voltages for transmissometer 
            and fluorometer in these files.  Cruise documentation will be 
            submitted within the week.

2013-07-11  Staff, CCHDO   CTD          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received'
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_nc.zip
              p02w_ctd.zip
              p02w_ct1.zip

2013-07-11  Staff, CCHDO   BTL          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received'
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_bottle_files.zip

2013-07-12  Johnson, Mary  CrsRpt       Submitted       Final STS/ODF documentation for P02W
            Final STS/ODF documentation for P02W in 2 zip files:
            1. p02w_CruiseReport.zip (contains the pdf and .txt versions of 
               the cruise report)
            2. p02w_ForJKappa.zip (contains the Figures in .eps or .ps 
               formats, and the original .pdf, .doc or .xls files submitted 
               to us, which we converted to pdf files for the final cruise 
               report)

2013-07-17  Kappa, Jerry   CrsRpt       Website Update  Final leg 1 PDF online
            I've placed a new PDF version of the cruise report:
              p02_318M20130321do.pdf
            into the  directory:  
              /co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321/.
            It includes all the reports provided by the cruise PIs, 
            summary pages and CCHDO data processing notes, as well as a 
            linked Table of Contents and links to figures, tables and 
            appendices.

2013-07-23  Johnson, Mary  CrsRpt       Submitted       P02E final cruise report to go online
            Final STS/ODF documentation for P02E in 2 zip files:
            1. p02e_CruiseReport.zip (contains the pdf and .txt versions of 
               the cruise report)
            2. p02e_ForJKappa.zip (contains the Figures in .eps or .ps 
               formats, and the original .pdf, .doc or .xls files submitted 
               to us, which we converted to pdf files for the final cruise 
               report)

2013-07-24  Staff, CCHDO   CrsRpt       Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02w_CruiseReport.zip
              p02w_ForJKappa.zip

2013-07-24  Staff, CCHDO   CrsRpt       Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02e_CruiseReport.zip
              p02e_ForJKappa.zip

2013-07-24  Staff, CCHDO   BTL          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02e_bottle_files.zip

2013-07-24  Staff, CCHDO   CTD          Website Update  Available under 'Files as received' 
            The following files are now available online under 'Files as 
            received', unprocessed by the CCHDO.
              p02e_ctd.zip
              p02e_nc.zip
              p02e_ct1.zip

2013-08-15  Kappa, Jerry   CrsRpt       Website Update  Final PDF, both legs, online 
            I've placed a new PDF version of the cruise report:
              p02_318M20130321do.pdf
            into the  directory:  /co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321/.

            It includes -- for both the west and east legs -- all the 
            reports provided by the cruise PIs, summary pages and CCHDO 
            data processing notes, as well as a linked Table of Contents 
            and links to figures, tables and appendices.

2013-08-27  Key, Bob       pH           Update needed   Total H scale, not SWS 
            The online file (p02e_hy1.csv included in the zip) shows pH 
              data on SWS.
            The cruise documentation states that measurements were on Total 
              H scale
            Presumably Total H scale is correct and the column labels need 
              to be changed.  
            Confirmed by Andrew Dickson: "Measurements were indeed made on 
              the total hydrogen ion scale." -- Andrew

2013-09-06  Berys, C.      BTL-2legs    Website Update  Exchange, netCDF, and WOCE files online 
            =================================
            318M20130321 processing - BTL/SUM
            =================================
            
            2013-09-06
            
            C Berys
            
            .. contents:: :depth: 2
            
            Submission
            ==========
            
            ===================== ================== ========== ========= ====
            filename              submitted by       date       data type id  
            ===================== ================== ========== ========= ====
            p02w_bottle_files.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 BTL       1030
            p02e_bottle_files.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 BTL       1032
            ===================== ================== ========== ========= ====
            
            Parameters
            ----------
            
            p02w_bottle_files.zip, p02e_bottle_files.zip
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            
            - CTDPRS
            - CTDTMP
            - CTDSAL [1]_
            - SALNTY [1]_
            - CTDOXY [1]_
            - OXYGEN [1]_
            - SILCAT [1]_
            - NITRAT [1]_
            - NITRIT [1]_
            - PHSPHT [1]_
            - CFC-11 [1]_
            - CFC-12 [1]_
            - CFC113 [1]_
            - SF6 [1]_
            - TCARBN [1]_
            - ALKALI [1]_
            - PH_TOT [1]_
            - PH_TMP
            - TRITUM [1]_ [2]_
            - HELIUM [1]_ [2]_
            - DELHE3 [1]_ [2]_
            - DELC13 [1]_ [2]_
            - DELC14 [1]_ [2]_
            - DOC [1]_ [2]_
            - TDN [1]_ [2]_
            - CALCIUM [1]_ [2]_
            - D15N_NO3 [1]_ [2]_
            - SALTREF [1]_
            - CS-137 [1]_ [2]_
            - CS-134 [1]_ [2]_
            - BTL_DATE
            - I-129 [1]_ [2]_
            - BTL_TIME
            - SR-90 [1]_ [2]_
            - BTL_LAT
            - BTL_LON
            - REFTMP [1]_
            - I-129/I-127 [1]_ [2]_
            - LAB_DEN [1]_ [2]_
            - D18O-NO3 [1]_ [2]_
            
            .. [1] parameter has quality flag column
            .. [2] parameter only has fill values/no reported measured data
            
            Process
            =======
            
            Changes
            -------
            
            p02w_bottle_files.zip, p02e_bottle_files.zip
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            
            p02w_hy1.csv, p02e_hy1.csv
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            - both legs combined into one file
            - CTDPRS units changed from 'DBARS' to 'DBAR'
            - PH_SWS changed to PH_TOT
            - REFTEMP changed to REFTMP
            - PH_TEMP changed to PH_TMP, units changed from DEG_C to DEG C
            - D15N-NO3 changed to D15N_NO3, units changed from ‘/MILLEvsAIR’ to ‘’
            
            
            - NOTE: The following are not defined in parameters table
             
              - I-129/I-127 (RATIO)
              - D18O-NO3 (/MILLEvsVSMOW)
              - CS-134 (BQ/M^3)
            
            - NOTE: The following parameters have alternative units than 
              specified in parameters table
            
              - CS-137 units 'BQ/M^3' but expected 'DM/.1MG'
              - SR-90 units 'BQ/M^3' but expected 'DM/.1MG'
              - I-129 units 'BQ/M^3' but expected 
            
            p02w.sea, p02e.sea
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            - both legs combined into one file
            - PH_SWS changed to PH_TOT
            - PHTEMP changed to PH_TMP, units changed from DEG_C to DEG C
            - NOTE: many parameter names and units do not match what is 
              listed in parameters table in order to fit into fixed width 
              format, left as received
            
            p02w.sum, p02e.sum
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            - both legs combined into one file
            - passed sumchk
            
            Directories
            ===========
            :working directory:
              /data/co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321/original/2013.09.06_BTL- 
              2legs_CBG
            :cruise directory:
              /data/co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321
            
            Updated Files Manifest
            ======================
            - 318M20130321hy.txt
            - 318M20130321_hy1.csv
            - 318M20130321su.txt
            
2013-10-11  Berys, C.      CTD          Website Update  Exchange, netCDF, and WOCE files online 
            =============================
            318M20130321 processing - CTD
            =============================
            
            2013-10-11
            
            C Berys
            
            .. contents:: :depth: 2
            
            Submission
            ==========
            
            ============ ================== ========== ========= ====
            filename     submitted by       date       data type id  
            ============ ================== ========== ========= ====
            p02w_ct1.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1031
            p02e_ct1.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1033
            p02w_nc.zip  Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1031
            p02e_nc.zip  Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1033
            p02w_ctd.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1031
            p02e_ctd.zip Mary Carol Johnson 2013-07-10 CTD       1033
            ============ ================== ========== ========= ====
            
            Parameters
            ----------
            
            p02w_ctd.zip, p02e_ct1.zip, p02w_ctd.zip, p02e_ctd.zip
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            
            - CTDPRS [1]_
            - CTDTMP [1]_
            - CTDSAL [1]_
            - CTDOXY [1]_
            - TRANSM [1]_
            - FLUORM [1]_
            - CTDNOBS
            - CTDETIME
            
            .. [1] parameter has quality flag column
            
            Process
            =======
            
            Changes
            -------
            
            p02e_ctd.zip, p02w_ct1.zip, p02e_ctd.zip, p02w_ctd.zip
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            
            - all files renamed
            - both legs combined into a single file
            
            .. -UOW- Conversions, directories and manifest will be 
               automatically generated on commit.
            
2014-01-31  Kappa, Jerry   CrsRpt       Website Update  Final text version online
             I've placed a new text version of the cruise report:
               p02_318M20130321do.txt
             into the  directory:  
               /co2clivar/pacific/p02/p02_318M20130321/.
             It includes all the reports provided by the cruise PIs, 
             summary pages and CCHDO data processing notes.