xvEPA
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
           Environmental Monitoring Systems EPA/600/4-86/012
RfseaSnangle Park NC 2771 1
                        FebrUary 1 986
            Research and Development
Precision and
Accuracy
Assessments for
State and Local Air
Monitoring
Networks, 1983

-------
                                        EPA/600/4-86/012
      PRECISION AND ACCURACY ASSESSMENTS
 FOR STATE AND LOCAL AIR MONITORING NETWORKS
                     1983
                      by
              Raymond C. Rhodes
          Quality Assurance Division
 Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
               E. Gardner Evans
      Monitoring and Assessment Division
 Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
      OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA  27711

-------
                                   NOTICE

     This document has been reviewed  in  accordance with U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency policy  and  approved for  publication.  Mention  of trade
names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
                                    ii

-------
                                 FOREWORD

     Measurement and monitoring research efforts are designed to anticipate
potential environmental problems, to support regulatory actions by develop-
ing an in-depth understanding of  the nature and processes that impact health
and the ecology, to provide  innovative  means  of  monitoring compliance with
regulations, and to evaluate  the  effectiveness  of  health and environmental
protection efforts through the monitoring of long-term trends.  The Environ-
mental Monitoring  Systems  Laboratory,  Research Triangle Park,  North Caro-
lina, has  the  responsibility  for assessment  of  environmental  monitoring
technology and  systems;   implementation of  agency-wide quality  assurance
programs for  air  pollution  measurement systems;  and  supplying  technical
support to other groups in the Agency including the Office of Air and Radi-
ation, the  Office  of  foxic   Substances,  and the  Office of  Enforcement.

     Ambient air quality  data collected by  states and  local  agencies are
used in planning the nation's  air  pollution  control  strategy,  in deter-
mining if National Air Quality Standards are being achieved, and in deter-
mining long-term trends of air quality.  Prior to the regulations of May 10,
1979, the  procedures  used in site  selection,  controlling  equipment,  and
calculating and  validating data  varied considerably  among  agencies.   To
improve and make more  uniform the quality assurance programs  of  the state
and local  agencies and  to require  the assessment and  reporting  of  data
quality estimates  for precision  and  accuracy,  the  May  10,  1979 regulations
were issued.  Reporting of precision and accuracy data were required begin-
ning for calendar  year  1981.  Previous reports summarized the  results for
1981 and 1982.   This report  summarizes  and  evaluates the results  for 1983.
                                     Thomas R. Hauser, Ph.D.
                                            Director
                           Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
                             Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
                                    iii

-------
                                 ABSTRACT

     Precision and  accuracy  data  obtained  from  State and  local  agencies
during 1983 are  summarized and evaluated.  Some comparisons  are  made with
the results previously reported  for  1981  and 1982 to determine the indica-
tion of any trends.   Some  trends  indicated  improvement in the completeness
of reporting of precision  and  accuracy data.   The  national summaries indi-
cate a slight improvement  in the precision  and accuracy assessments of the
pollutant monitoring data collected.   The annual results from  each reporting
organization are  given  so that  comparisons  may be made  from 1981  to 1983
and also with other reporting organizations.

     A comparison of the precision and accuracy data from the Precision and
Accuracy Reporting  System  and that from  the  independent  performance audit
program conducted  by  the  Environmental  Monitoring  Systems  Laboratory  is
given.
                                    iv

-------
                                 CONTENTS

                                                                       Page

Foreword	    iii

Abstract  	 ..... 	     iv

Figures	     vi

Tables	    vii

Acknowledgment	     ix

     1.   Introduction 	      1
     2.   National Results  	      4
             National Data Reporting 	      4
             National Activity in Performing Precision
                Checks and Accuracy Audits 	      4
             1983 Results from the PARS program	      5
             National Precision Results Comparison .... 	      9
             National Accuracy Results Comparison  	     10
             National Frequencies  	 .....     11
     3.   Regional Results	     15
             Regional Data Reporting 	     15
             Regional Comparisons  	     19
     4.   Results by Reporting Organizations 	     29
     5.   Further Evaluation of PARS Data	     31
             Comparison of National Limit Values and 50
              Percentile Values  	     34
     6.   Comparison of Results from the PARS and the Performance
           Audit Program	     36
     7.   Conclusions and Recommendations	     46

References	     47

Appendix A - Glossary	    A-l

Appendix B - Formulas for Combining Probability Limits 	    B-l

Appendix C - Listing of Reporting Organizations	    C-l

Appendix D - Precision and Accuracy Data by Reporting Organization .    D-l

Appendix E - Comparisons of PARS and Performance Audit Data  ....    E-l

-------
                                 FIGURES


Number                                                                 Page

 1.  National Precision Values for 1981, 1982 and 1983	10

 2.  National Accuracy Values for 1981, 1982 and 1983	11

 3.  CO Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	21

 4.  Contiuous S02 Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	 .	22

 5.  Continuous N02 Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	23

 6.  Ozone Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	24

 7.  TSP Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	25

 8.  Lead Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981, 1982
     and 1983	26

 9.  Manual S02 Precision and Accuracy by Regions for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	27

 10.  Manual N02 Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981,
     1982 and 1983	28

 lla. Comparison of PA and PARS for CO  (Level 3)	39

 lib. Comparison of PA and PARS for TSP  (Level 2)	39

 lie. Comparison of PA and PARS for Manual N02 (Level 3)	40

 lid. Comparison of PA and PARS for Manual S02 (Level 3)	40

 lie. Comparison of PA and PARS for Pb  (Level 2)	40

 llf. Comparison of PA and PARS for Continuous S02  (Level  3)   	  41

 12.  Comparison of PA and PARS, National Values,  1983	42
                                    vi

-------
                                    TABLES

Number                                                                   Page
 1.    Requirements for Performing Precision Checks for
       SLAMS Network 	
 2.    Concentration Levels for Conducting Accuracy
       Audits of SLAMS Network 	
 3.    National Percent Data Reporting for Required Precision
       and Accuracy  .... 	
 4.    Year-to-Year Actl- ity of Precision and Accuracy
       Assessments for the Manual Methods  	
 5.    Year-to-Year Activity of Precision and Accuracy
       Assessments for the Continuous Methods  	     7

 6.    National Precision and Accuracy Probability Limit Values
       for Manual Methods  	     8

 7.    National Precision and Accuracy Probability Limit Values
       for Automated Analyzers 	     9

 8.    Cumulative Frequency Distributions of Quarterly Probability
       Limits for All Reporting Organizations (1983) 	    13

 9.    Total Number of Reporting Organizations Required to Report
       by Pollutant for the Year 1983	    15

10.    Percentage of SLAMS Sites with Complete Data in PARS
       for the Year 1983	    16

11.    Number of Reporting Organizations Having Data in the PARS
       Master File for the Year 1983	    29

12.    Comparison of the 50-Percentile Frequency Distribution
       Values with the National Limit Values for 1983	    31

13.    Values of Quarterly Probability Limits Considered as
       Excessive Based on 1983 Data	    35

14.    Summary Comparison of EMSL Performance Audits (PA) vs.
       PARS Accuracy Audit Data for Year 1983	    37
                                     vii

-------
                             TABLES (cont.)

Number                                                                 Page


D-l.  CO Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	   D-3

D-2.  Continuous S02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	   D-7

D-3.  Continuous N02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	   D-12

D-4.  Ozone Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations	   D-16

D-5.  TSP Precision and Accuracy Annual Values for
      Reporting Organizations  	 . 	   D-22

D-6.  Pb Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	 .   D-27

D-7.  Manual S02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	   D-31

D-8.  Manual N02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Values
      for Reporting Organizations  	   D-32

E-l.  PARS and PA Data for CO, Pb, TSP, N02 (Manual) and S02
      (Manual) Methods 	   E-2

E-2.  PARS and PA Data for S02 Continuous Methods	   E-72
                                  viii

-------
                              ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

     The authors express appreciation  to  the  following persons and organi-
zations who  assisted  in the  preparation  of  this  report:  the  States  and
local agencies, for performing  and reporting the results  of  the precision
checks and  accuracy  audits;   the  Regional  Office  persons  responsible  for
reviewing and coordinating the reporting of the precision and accuracy data
to EMSL/RTP;  Robert L.   Lampe,  for reviewing and  processing  the precision
and accuracy reports received from the Regional organizations; Douglas Rice
and Robert  Lyon,  Computer  Sciences Corporation, for  the computer program-
ing, processing,  and  summarization  of  the precision  and accuracy  data;
Edward Barrows, Northrop  Services, Incorporated,  for programming  and  re-
porting of  the  comparii ons of  the results of  the EMSL  performance  audit
program with  the  precision  and  accuracy  data; and  to  Elizabeth Hunike,
EMSL, for typing this report.
                                     ix

-------
                                  SECTION  1

                               INTRODUCTION


     The purpose  of  this  document is to report the third year of data  from
the Precision  and Accuracy  Reporting System  (PARS).   Federal  regulations
promulgated on May  10,  1979, require quality assurance  precision and accu-
racy (P and A)* data to be  collected.  Collection started January  1, 1981,
according to requirements set forth in 40 CFR  Part  58 Appendix A.1  These
requirements provide for  more uniform Quality Assurance  programs and speci-
fic precision  and accuracy  reporting  requirements  across  all  State  and
local air monitoring agencies.

     The major portion of this report consists of summarizations  and evalua-
tions of the P  and A data obtained  by  the efforts of the States and local
agencies.  In  addition,   comparisons  have been made  of  the  accuracy  data
collected for  PARS  with  the  results  of the  National  Performance  Audit
Program (NPAP) which has  been an ongoing program conducted by the Environ-
mental Monitoring Systems Laboratory  (EMSL) since  the early 1970fs.

     These summarizations  and evaluations of  precision  and  accuracy  data
serve the following purposes:

     1.   Quantitative estimates  of the precision  and accuracy of their
          ambient air  monitoring  data  are  available  to  State  and  local
          agencies.

     2.   A comparison of the data from all the agencies may indicate the
          need to improve quality assurance  systems in  specific reporting
          organizations.

     3.   An evaluation of the results may indicate a need for improvement
          in monitoring methodology.

     4.   The assessments provide users of data from the State and Local Air
          Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) network a quantitative estimate of the
          precision and accuracy of the ambient air quality data.
*When one speaks of precision and accuracy of measurement data,2 one really
means the precision and  accuracy  of  the measurement process from which the
measurement data are obtained.   Precision is  a measure of the "repeatability
of the measurement process under specified conditions." Accuracy is a meas-
ure of "closeness to the truth."

-------
     Ambient air quality data, collected by States and local agencies since
1957, have been stored  in the National Aerometric Data Bank (NADB).  These
data are used in  (1) planning the nation's  air  pollution  control strategy,
(2) determining if the  National  Air Quality Standards  are  being achieved,
and (3) determining long-term trends of air  quality.   Prior to  the  EPA air
monitoring regulations  of  May 10,  1979,  the procedures used in selecting
monitoring sites, operating and controlling the equipment, and calculating,
validating and reporting the data varied considerably among agencies.  Fre-
quently the procedures  being  used  were not  well-documented.  These condi-
tions made  it  difficult  to  intercompare  data  from  different sites  and
agencies.  Furthermore, little information was available on the reliability
of the monitoring data.

     To help  alleviate these  problems,  EPA's  air monitoring  regulations
imposed uniform criteria on network  design, siting, quality assurance, moni-
toring methods, and data  reporting  after December 30,  1980.  For example,
only EPA reference, equivalent, or other EPA-approved air monitoring methods
were to be used.   Also, calibration standards were to  be traceable to the
National Bureau of Standards  (NBS)  or  other authoritative standards.  Fur-
ther, the  quality assurance  systems  of  the  states  were  required  to  be
documented and approved by  the EPA  Regional  Offices.   Finally,  the report-
ing organizations must  also follow  specific procedures when assessing the
P&A of their measurement  systems  and must report the P&A data to EPA quar-
terly.  Starting  January  1,  1981,  these  regulations became  effective for
National Air Monitoring Sites (NAMS),  and  beginning January 1,  1983, for
all State and Local Air Monitoring Stations  (SLAMS).

     The precision assessments were determined by performing repeated meas-
urements on  ambient-level  "calibration"  gases  at  two-week  intervals for
continuous methods, or  by obtaining duplicate results from collocated sam-
plers for manual methods.   Table 1 summarizes the requirements for perform-
ing precision  checks.   The accuracy assessments  were generally determined
by analyzing  blind audit  materials  traceable to  NBS.   Table  2  shows the
concentration levels.   During each  calendar year, each  site or instrument
must be audited at least  once.  Details concerning the specific procedures
and computations  used  to  assess  P&A  are   contained  in the   regulations.
           TABLE 1.  REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMING PRECISION CHECKS
                             FOR SLAMS NETWORK
      Parameter
Precision check level
  Frequency
     CO  (continuous analyzer)

     S02, N02, and 03
         (continuous analyzer)

     TSP, S02, and N02
          (manual)

     Pb
   8-10 ppm

0.08 - 0.10 ppm
Collocated sampler
(Ambient concentration)

Duplicate strips
(Ambient concentration)
Once each 2 weeks

Once each 2 weeks


Once each 6 days


Once each 6 days

-------
               TABLE 2.  CONCENTRATION LEVELS FOR CONDUCTING
                         ACCURACY AUDITS OF SLAMS NETWORK
Parameter
S02, N02, 03
(continuous)
CO
TSP (flow only)
S02 (manual)*
N02 (manual)*
Pb**
Level 1
0.03-0.08 ppm
3-8 ppm

0.013-0.020 ppm
0.018-0.028 ppm
0.6-1.8 yg/m3
Level 2
0.15-0.20 ppm
15-20 ppm
1.13-1.70 m3/min
0.033-0.040 ppm
0.046-0.055 ppm
3.5-5.9 yg/m3
Level 3
0.35-0.45
ppm
35-45 ppm

0.053-0.059
ppm
0.074-0.083
ppm
Level 4
0.80-0.90
ppm
80-90 ppm


    Concentration levels corresponding to flow rates of .2 L/min
   **Concentration levels corresponding to flow rates of 50 cfm.
      When a request is made to the NADB for ambient air quality monitoring
data, the requestor receives the P  and A data  along with the routine moni-
toring data.  The requestor, or  user,  of the data  can  feel  more confident
that the data are of the  quality  indicated by the assessments and that the
data have  been  obtained  from  an  agency having  a planned  and documented
quality assurance system.  The EPA  can also rely  on  the data in producing
its control  strategies  and determining whether  standards  have  been met.

-------
                                 SECTION 2

                             NATIONAL RESULTS
NATIONAL DATA REPORTING

     Measures of data reporting are  the percentages  of reporting organiza-
tions which  were required  to report  data  for particular  pollutants  and
which have  reported  results for  at  least  one  calendar quarter  for those
pollutants.  Table 3  shows the progress  in data reporting  over the years
1981, 1982  and  1983.  Improvement  continues for the  continuous N02 method;
however, the percentage still lags behind that for continuous CO,  S02 and 03
methods.  Reporting for the manual methods  for Pb, S02 and N02 was required
by the  regulations beginning  January 1,  1983.  The  fact  that 1983 was the
first year  for reporting  the  manual  S02  and N02 methods  is  perhaps  one
reason for  the percentage data reporting being somewhat low.   Another reason
may be the  fact that these manual methods are being replaced by the contin-
uous methods, which are much more precise and accurate.

     The reporting organizations  which should have  reported data for 1983
but did not are listed in Section 3.
               TABLE 3.  NATIONAL PERCENT DATA REPORTING FOR
                         REQUIRED PRECISION AND ACCURACY
Pollutant
measurement
CO
S02
N02
03
TSP
Pb
S02 (manual)
N02 (manual)
1981
77
82
56
83
94
—
—
~
1982
89
93
72
89
97
—
—

1983
99
96
88
99
99
93
75
86
NATIONAL ACTIVITY   IN  PERFORMING  PRECISION  CHECKS  AND  ACCURACY  AUDITS

     A review  of Tables  4 and  5  clearly  indicates  the considerable increase
In  the  number  of  precision checks  from the beginning  of the PARS system
through 1983  for all pollutant  methods.  The  increase  in effort resulted

-------
because of the effectivity  of  the  regulation requirements for P and A data
for the NAMS sites on January 1, 1981 and for the SLAMS on January 1, 1983.
The reduction  in the  manual N0£  and  S02  methods  has  no  doubt  resulted
from the  replacement  of  the  manual  methods  with  continuous  analyzers.

     For the manual methods, Table 4 shows the average number of data pairs
per collocated site for precision checks and the average number of accuracy
audits per sampler.  If the  collocated samplers are operated every sixth day,
there should be 365/6=61 data pairs per year, assuming that all the results
are above the detection limit.  This level of precision checks is being ap-
proached for the  TSP,  Pb,  and N0£ methods,  but  for the  manual SC>2 method,
the number of precision checks is  only  about  50  percent of  the required num-
ber.  The regulations require that each TSP sampler/site be audited for accu-
racy at least once each year,  and that the other manual methods be audited
at least  twice  per  quarter.   The  computed  average  number of  audits  per
sampler is well above the required frequency.

     For the continuous methods, the minimum frequency for precision checks
is once every  two weeks or 26 per year.  Table  5  indicates that  each year
nearly 60 precision checks are made per analyzer for the S02 method and be-
tween 35 and 40  for  the other  methods.  The regulations  require  at least
one accuracy audit per analyzer/site  per year.  The table indicates that
this requirement  is  being  met on the average for  only  the CO method.  The
average number of audits per analyzer for the S02, N02 and 03 methods indi-
cates that from  5 to  14 percent of the analyzers are not  being audited as
required by  the  regulations.   (Note:   The tabulated values  consider only
the audits at  the three  lower concentration  levels.   Analyzers used  for
episode monitoring,  requiring  level  four  audits,  are  not  considered.)

1983 RESULTS FROM THE PARS PROGRAM

    The measures  of precision  and accuracy are  required  to be computed and
reported for each calendar  quarter  by  each Reporting Organization (a State
or local  agency)  as  percentage values.  For precision,  the repeatability
for each  check is measured  as  the deviation  from expected  values as  a
percentage of the expected value.   For accuracy, the deviation of the audit
value from the true  value is measured  as  a  percentage  of  the  true  value.
For both precision and accuracy, 95 percent probability limits are computed
for the percentage values  from the average  and  standard  deviations  of  the
individual percentage values:

-------
TABLE 4.  YEAR-TO-YEAR ACTIVITY OF PRECISION AND ACCURACY ASSESSMENTS FOR THE MANUAL METHODS
Pollutant
TSP


Pb


N02


S02


Year
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
Avg. no. of
samplers
2,334
2,538
2,662
73
164
452
185
83
77
172
63
46
Precision
Avg. no. of
collocated
sites
317
338
342
13
32
76
38
25
25
34
21
15
No. of valid
collocated
data pairs
13,335
16,281
16,816
473
1,704
3,885
1,422
1,168
1,324
965
706
389
No. of
data pairs
per site
42.1
48.2
49.2
36.4
53.2
51.1
37.4
46.7
53.0
28.4
33.6
25.9
Accuracy
No. of
audits
x levels
5,840
6,461
6,989
581
655
1,389
769
583
348
711
551
301
No. of
audits per
sampler
2.5
2.6
2.6
4.0
2.0
1.5
4.2
2.3
1.5
1.4
2.9
1.1

-------
TABLE 5.  YEAR-TO-YEAR ACTIVITY OF PRECISION AND ACCURACY ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CONTINUOUS METHODS
Pollutant
CO


S02


N02


03


Year
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
Avg. no. of
analyzers
282
354
447
420
566
633
127
193
235
404
514
598
Precision
No. of
precision
checks
8,248
13,089
15,714
10,851
23,144
36,887
2,498
6,876
9,299
10,536
18,964
21,342
Precision
checks
per analyzer
29.2
37.0
35.2
25.8
36.6
58.3
19.7
35.6
39.6
26.1
36.9
35.7
Accuracy
No. of
accuracy
audits x levels
856
1S180
1,501
1,016
1,248
1,625
320
442
635
1,162
1,328
1,705
No. of
audits
per analyzer
1.01
1.11
1.12
0.81
0.73
0.86
0.84
0.76
0.90
0.96
0.86
0.95

-------
                               D ± 1.96 S

  where D = the average of the individual percent differences;
        S = the  standard  deviation of the individual percent differences;*
     1.96 =  the multiplication  factor  corresponding  to  95% probability.

It is these upper  and lower 95% probability limits which  are reported and
discussed in this report.

     Moreover, it should be noted that  the data and the evaluations present-
ed in this  report  include any outlier values which may  have been reported
by the  States   and  local agencies.   It  is  possible  that  the presence  of
outliers might influence such comparisons by having undue impact on average
values for individual reporting organizations.

     Table 6 exhibits the national  values for each of the manual pollutants.
The probability limits in Tables 6  and 7 represent the unweighted arithmetic
averages of all the  reported  probability  limits for  1983.   Historically,
probability limits have been combined in  this manner for this report.  Thus,
for continuity and comparisons to show trends, the unweighted average meth-
od was used here.  A more statistically pure procedure for combining proba-
bility limits, which is described in Appendix B, is now being used in EPA's
PARS system.   By  examining the numbers of  valid  collocated  data  pairs
(16,816) and the number  of  audits  (6989) performed  for TSP,  one can appre-
ciate the amount of  effort being expended in this  country to obtain these
data quality assessments.
           TABLE 6.  NATIONAL PRECISION AND ACCURACY PROBABILITY
                     LIMIT VALUES FOR MANUAL METHODS FOR 1983




Pollutant
TSP
Lead
Sulfur
dioxide
Nitrogen
dioxide
Precision
Number of
valid col-
located
data pairs
16,816
3,885

389

1,324

Probability
limits (%)
Lower Upper
-11 +12
-14 +15

-28 +41

-19 +21
Accuracy


No. of
audits
6,989
1,389

301

348
Probability limits (%)

Level 1
Lower Upper
rm -_ .-••
-8 +7

-14 +7

-6 +10

Level 2
Lower Upper
-6 +6
-6 +4

-9 +5

-5 +6

Level 3
Lower Upper
^•«i miT-.a
	 	

-7 +4

-5 +6
*For the precision of manual methods obtained from paired observations, the
 standard deviation,  S,  is  divided by /2,  to  obtain variability estimates
 that apply to individual reported values.

-------
     The precision limits reflect the repeatability of the methodology used
in the field  to collect  and  analyze the  samples at  ambient levels.  The
spread of the limits may  be somewhat inflated due to measurements at rela-
tively low concentration levels.

     The accuracy of  the manual methods indicates the limits at predeter-
mined concentration  levels for  the chemical  analysis  performed  in  the
samples for lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide.   For the TSP meth-
od, the  accuracy  measurement  is  for the  flow  rate  only.  The probability
limits for manual accuracy are very good and reflect  the quality of work done
in the chemical laboratories for lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide
analyses, and in  the  field for  flow rate measurement for  the TSP method.
Because of the continual replacement of the manual S02 and N0£ methods with
continuous methods, further  discussion of  the manual methods is limited.
The detailed results, however, are tabulated in Appendix D for each report-
ing organization.

     The precision and  accuracy limits  for automated methods  are presented
in Table  7.   Apparent  from the  number of  precision checks,  for example
36,887 for S(>2,  the effort expended is  appreciable  for  the  collection of
quality assurance precision and accuracy data, but necessary to assess data
quality.  Details  of  the  results  are discussed  in  the  analysis  section.
           TABLE 7.  NATIONAL PRECISION AND ACCURACY PROBABILITY
                     LIMIT VALUES FOR AUTOMATED ANALYZERS FOR 1983




S02
03
CO
N02
Precision
No. of
precision
checks
36,887
21,342
15,714
9,299
Probability
limits (%)
Lower Upper
-13 +8
-10 +9
-8 +6
-13 +12
Accuracy

No. of
audits
1,791
1,920
1,515
680
Probability limits (%)
Level 1
Lower Upper
-15 +10
-11 +10
-12 +9
-19 +15
Level 2
Lower Upper
-12 +10
-8 +7
-6 +6
-12 +9
Level 3
Lower Upper
-11 +9
-8 +6
-5 +4
-11 +6
NATIONAL PRECISION RESULTS COMPARISON

     Figure 1 shows the national values for precision for the various meth-
ods.  With  data  from  three  years,  some  minor  trends  are  evident.   Some
slight improvement, as measured by a reduction in the spread of the limits,
is noted for TSP  and the continuous methods,  except  for N02«  The persis-
tent negative bias for the  continuous  S02 method indicates that on the av-
erage there is some negative instrument drift from the most recent calibra-
tion or instrument adjustment  to  the time of  the biweekly precision check.

     Although the manual methods for Pb,  S02,  and  N02 were not required to
be reported until 1983, a number  of  agencies  began reporting in 1981.  The

-------
results for Pb show  a  decided  improvement.  The manual S02 and N0£  methods
are much more variable  than the continuous methods, and, although  the limits
were worse in  1982  than 1981,  the results  for  1983  are appreciably better
than in 1981.
                             NATIONAL. VALUES FOR PRECISION
                                   1081-1882-1083
                     -68
                                               «**>*
            Figure 1.  National precision  values  for  1981,  1982
                       and  1983.
NATIONAL ACCURACY RESULTS COMPARISON

     Figures 2a and 2b  show  the national  values  for accuracy audits for the
manual and  continuous  methods,  respectively.   Improvement  for the  manual
methods is  not  evident except perhaps  for  Pb and S02 level  1.  Slight im-
provement is evident for all the continuous  methods.  The continuous methods
for S02 and N(>2 show more inaccuracy than all other methods.   However, it is
pointed out  that  the  accuracy  audits  for  the manual  methods check  only a
portion of  the measurement method.
                                      10

-------
           NATIONAL VALUES FOR ACCURACY
                 1081-1082-1083
                CONTINUOUS METHODS
NATIONAL VALUES FOR ACCURACY
      1081-1982-1983
      MANUAL METHODS
             Figure  2.   National accuracy values for 1981, 1982
                         and 1983.
      The most  consistent  improvement has occurred with the 03 method.  Al-
though the  continuous N0£ method  is  more variable  than  the other methods,
it has shown  the  greatest  improvement, particularly for the level  1 concen-
tration.

      The general,  and expected,  pattern  of  variability  across  levels  is
very evident,  with the greatest  percentage variability  at the lowest  con-
centration  levels.   The slight negative biases for the  continuous S02 and
N(>2 methods are consistent across all three levels.  This indicates that,  on
the average,  there appears to  be  a negative drift with these analyzers  from
the time of last  calibration or  instrument adjustment until the time of the
accuracy audit.

NATIONAL FREQUENCIES

     Table  8  contains the 1983 frequency distributions for precision prob-
ability limits  and  accuracy probability limits at levels  1,  2 and 3.  The
frequencies are based on the total number of reporting-organization-quarters
of data.  The individual  quarter of  data consists of an  upper  and lower
probability limit for precision,  and  upper and lower probability limits for
accuracy for  each of  the levels.   The narrower the distribution, the better
the data quality.  For  example, for  precision for CO, the upper  5 percen-
tile value  for  the upper  limit  is +14%,  and  the lower 5  percentile  value
                                      11

-------
for the  lower  limit  is -18%.   It  can  be  seen  from both  Figure  2  and
Table 8 that CO  shows  the  tightest range of the pollutants presented.  The
variabilities shown in Table 8 are consistent with those shown in Figures 1
and 2.  And, in  general,  the variabilities are  less  for  1983 than for the
corresponding values reported for  1982.3  The 95th percentiles provide cri-
teria beyond which a reported probability limit may be considered excessive
and for which the computation should be rechecked or the measurement system
investigated and corrected, if so  indicated.
                                      12

-------
                        TABLE  8.   CUMULATIVE  FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF  QUARTERLY PROBABILITY  LIMITS FOR
                                     ALL REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS  (1983)
                                                                MANUAL METHODS
u>
POLLUTANT
      LEVEL

111101 - TSP
    PRECISION
    ACC-LVL 2

112128 - PB
    PRECISION
    ACC-LVL 1
    ACC-LVL 2

142602 - N02
    PRECISION
    ACC-LVL 1
    ACC-LVL 2
    ACC-LVL 3
             - S02
          PRECISION
          ACC-LVL 1
          ACC-LVL 2
          ACC-LVL 3
                    NUMBER OF   	 LOWER PROBABILITY LIMIT 	STD
                   REP.ORG.-QTR  MIN 01* 05% 10% 25% 50%  75%  90% 95% 99% MAX MEAN DEV
                                                    	 UPPER PROBABILITY  LIMIT 	STD
                                                    MIN 01% 05% 10% 25% 50% 15%  90% 95% 99% MAX MEAN DEV
                        558
                        547
                        290
                        249
                        249
                         48
                         44
                         44
                         44
                  32
                  36
                  36
                  36
-71 -42 -26  -21 -14 -09 -06 -04 -02 +01 +07  -11
-36 -26 -15  -12 -08 -06 -03 -01 -00 +03 +08  -06
8.6  -23 +01  +02  +04 +07 +10 +15 +21 +29 +53 +99  +12  9.9
5.3  -29 -04  -01  +01 +03 +05 +09 +12 +16 +27 +52  +06  6.1
-95 -56 -38  -27 -18 -10 -06 -03 -01 -00 +02  -14  12.2  -02 -00 +01 +03 +06  +11  +20  +34 +46 +80 +99 + 15 15.1
-71 -31 -22  -17 -11 -06 -03 -00 +01 +07 +22  -08  8.5  -07 -04 -02 -00 +03  +06  +10  +16 +18 +30 +96 +07 10.0
-51 -26 -18  -14 -09 -05 -02 -00 +02 +06 +07  -06  6.5  -10 -06 -03 -01 +01  +03  +06  +11 +14 +29 +39 +04  6.0


-87 -87 -58  -38 -24 -16 -09 -06 -00 -00 -00  -19  16.3  -12 -12 -00 +01 +10  +15  +31  +48 +58 +80 +80 +21 18.9
-23 -23 -16  -13 -10 -05 -02 -01 -00 +05 +05  -06  5.3  +01 +01 +02 +03 +05  +07  +15  +25 +30 +32 +32 +10  8.1
-26 -26 -19  -16 -07 -02 -01 -00 -00 +01 +01  -05  6.6  -00 -00 +02 +03 +04  +06  +07  +10 +14 +23 +23 +06  4.1
-27 -27 -17  -13 -07 -03 -01 -00 +01 +03 +03  -05  6.5  +01 +01 +01 +01 +04  +05  +07  +09 + 15 +30 +30 +06  5.3


-99 -99 -99  -99 -53 -20 -00 +02 +25 +79 +79  -28  40.5  -00 -00 -00 -00 +10  +37  +75  +99 +99 +99 +99 +41 35.0
-46 -46 -44  -26 -17 -11 -07 -04 -01 -00 -00  -14  10.8  -05 -05 -00 -00 +03  +06  +09  +17 +24 +29 +29 +07  7.0
-36 -36 -31  -21 -12 -08 -03 -00 -00 +02 +02  -09  8.3  -02 -02 -00 +01 +02  +04  +08  +13 +14 +14 +14 +05  4.0
-23 -23 -22  -17 -09 -06 -03 -01 -00 -00 -00  -07  5.9  -02 -02 -01 +01 +02  +04  +06  +07 +08 +10 +10 +04  2.8

-------
(Continued)
                     TABLE 8.   CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY PROBABILITY LIMITS  FOR
                                 ALL REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS  (1983)
POLLUTANT
LEVEL
C42101 - CO
PRECISION
ACC-LVL 1
ACC-LVL 2
ACC-LVL 3
ACC-LVL 4
C42401 - S02
PRECISION
ACC-LVL 1
ACC-LVL 2
ACC-LVL 3
ACC-LVL 4
C42602 - N02
PRECISION
ACC-LVL 1
ACC-LVL 2
ACC-LVL 3
ACC-LVL 4
C44201 - 03
PRECISION
ACC-LVL 1
ACC-LVL 2
ACC-LVL 3
ACC-LVL 4
C42601 - NO
PRECISION
NUMBER 1
REP.ORG.-

382
303
303
300
9

411
313
316
312
40

261
178
180
179
16

431
332
331
330
43

3
                                                        AUTOMATED ANALYZERS

                           	  LOWER PROBABILITY LIMIT 	STD
              REP.ORG.-QTR. MIN 01% 05% 10% 255! 50% 75% 90% 95% 99% MAX MEAN DEV
                           -61 -35 -18  -14 -10 -07 -04 -03 -02 +02 +07 -08   6.5
                           -99 -52 -29  -24 -15 -09 -05 -01 -00 + 04 +06 -12  11.7
                           -44 -28 -18  -13 -08 -05 -02 -01 -00 +0
-------
                                  SECTION 3

                               REGIONAL RESULTS
REGIONAL DATA REPORTING

     All reporting  organizations having SLAMS/NAMS  sites for given pollu-
tants are  required  to report P  and A data.   The  numbers of such  reporting
organizations are listed in Table 9.   Note  that  only four reporting organ-
izations use the  manual  S02 method at SLAMS sites  and  only seven use  the
manual NO2 method.
         TABLE 9.  TOTAL NUMBER OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS REQUIRED
                   TO REPORT BY POLLUTANT FOR THE YEAR  1983
Automated
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Nation
CO
C42101
6
3
10
22
19
10
11
5
11
4
101
S02
C42401
6
4
11
24
23
11
9
4
9
3
104
methods
N02
C42602
4
2
12
14
14
10
5
3
9
2
75

03
044201
6
3
12
25
22
10
11
3
11
2
105
Manual methods
TSP
111101
6
4
16
32
28
14
12
9
12
4
137
Pb
112128
5
3
9
9
14
10
7
3
8
4
72
S02
142401
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
4
N02
141602
0
0
1
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
7
      The breakdown of data  completeness  (defined  as the percentage of re-
porting organizations  which  reported P&A  data to  EPA  as  required  each
quarter) is given in Table 10.
                                     15

-------
           TABLE 10.  PERCENTAGE OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS WITH
                      COMPLETE DATA IN PARS FOR THE YEAR 1983
Automated
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Nation
CO
C42101
85
92
100
83
78
91
78
68
77
88
83
S02
C42401
92
66
100
79
77
82
69
100
60
88
80
pollutants

N02 03
C42602 044201
56
100
96
51
65
70
68
92
58
81
69
79
96
99
81
76
96
80
96
75
94
84

TSP
111101
98
72
99
97
99
95
97
96
82
100
95
Manual
pollutants
Pb S02
112128 142401
95
75
88
78
89
83
66
75
59
59
79
	
. — „
94
	
	
	
— ._
50
	
72

N02
141602
100
75
100
63
0
	
	
	
73
NOTE: 	 Means no data was  required,  there  being no SLAMS sites for these
      pollutants.
     For some reason, on a national basis, the percentages of reporting or-
ganizations submitting complete  reports have  decreased  somewhat  from 1982.
Complete reporting is lowest  for the continuous N02  method,  only slightly
worse than for the S02 and N02 manual methods.

     A number  of  reporting organizations having SLAMS/NAMS  sites for cer-
tain pollutants have  reported no precision  or accuracy data for 1983  for
these pollutants:
                                     16

-------
Reporting organization*
Region
I
II
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
State
NH
VI
VI
AL
AL
NC
TN
OH
IN
IN
IN
OK
LA
IA
MT
Number
30001
55001
55001
01011
01012
34003
44002
36004
15001
15002
15008
37102
19001
16002
27004
Name
New Hampshire
Virgin Islands
Virgin Islands
Alabama Dept. of Envir. Management
Jefferson County
Mecklenburg County
Memphis-Shelby County
Ohio EPA, SE District
State of Indiana
Evansville
Indianapolis
Oklahoma City-County
State of Louisiana
Linn County
Missoula City-Co. Health Dept.
Pollutant
N02
S02
TSP
S02
N02
N02
N02
S02
N02
N02
Pb
N02
Pb
N02
(manual)
CO
 IX
NV       29100      State of Nevada
NV       29200      Washoe County
NV       29100      State of Nevada
NV       29300      Clark County
GU       54100      Guam
GU       54100      Guam
GU       54100      Guam

HI       12120      Hawaii
HI       12120      Hawaii
CA       05036      San Diego
  CO
  N02
  03
  Pb
  S02
  TSP
  S02
(manual)
  S02
  N02
  Pb
*A complete listing of the  reporting  organizations is given in Appendix C.

     Precision and accuracy  reporting for  1983  was complete  only for the
following Region and pollutant combinations:
                        Region

                         II
                         III
                         III
                         III
                         V
                         VIII
                         X
                               Pollutant

                                  N02
                                  CO
                                  S02
                               N02 (manual)
                               N02 (manual)
                                  S02
                                  TSP
                                     17

-------
     Considering the reporting for all pollutants and all reporting organi-
zations, the  reporting  organizations  of  Region  III  were most  complete
(97%).  Region VII data was the least complete.

                                       Percentage of
                      Region          reports complete

                       I                    84
                       II                   84
                       III                  97
                       IV                   80
                       V                    83
                       VI                   74
                       VII                  65
                       VIII                 88
                       IX                   66
                       X                    85

     When considering the various pollutant methods across all Regions, re-
porting was most complete for TSP.

                                        Percentage of
                    Pollutant          reports complete

                    TSP                      95
                    03                       84
                    CO                       83
                    S02                      80
                    Pb                       79
                    NO2 (manual)             73
                    S02 (manual)             72
                    N02                      69

     As for prior years, reporting is less complete  for the continuous N02
method than for all other methods.  Appropriate allowance has been made for
the quarters during which ozone is not monitored.
                                     18

-------
REGIONAL COMPARISONS

     Figures 3  through  10 compare  the precision  and  accuracy probability
limits for  1981,  1982  and 1983.  These comparisons  are  presented for each
Region and  for  the nation as  a whole  on a pollutant by pollutant basis.

CO

     All regions  indicate  some improvement in precision  and  most show im-
provement in accuracy at all levels (Figure 3).  Noted exceptions for accu-
racy are Regions  II and VI, which  show more variability than in 1981 and
1982.

S02

     Most regions show improvement in precision (Figure 4).  Regions I, II,
VI and IX  indicate some degradation in accuracy.   A negative bias persists
in both precision and accuracy.

NO
     Most regions  show improvement in  precision and  accuracy  (Figure 5).
An exception for  precision is Region X.  Region  VII  continues  to have the
greatest variability in precision.  Region VII also shows greater variabil-
ity in accuracy at levels  1 and 2 than for previous years.  The small nega-
tive bias  in  both  precision  and  accuracy  persists,  similar  to
     The precisions for most regions have not changed appreciably from 1982
(Figure 6).  Region VII  appears to show improvement  over  the three years;
Region VIII appears to  be getting worse.   Slight  improvement is indicated
for most regions for accuracy at the three levels.

TSP

     The charts  (Figure  7)  consistently show appreciably  more variability
in precision than accuracy.  This  results  because the precision checks in-
volve the total measurement process whereas the accuracy audit applies only
to the flow portion of  the process.   On the average,  minor improvements in
both precision and accuracy are evident.

Pb

     Figure 8 shows considerable variability in both precision and accuracy
from region to region and also from year to year within some regions.  This
may be partly explained by the  fact  that assessments  for Pb were not offi-
cially required until  1983, for which the results appear more uniform across
regions.  A noticeable  negative  bias exists for the level  2 accuracy audit
results.
                                     19

-------
S02 (Manual)

     The limits (Figure  9)  are considerably  wider for precision  than  for
accuracy, except for Region VI  which has very tight  limits  for precision.
This large difference screams for an explanation.   Wider  limits for preci-
sion are expected  since the results  from collocated  samplers  involve  the
entire measurement process, whereas  the  accuracy  audits  involve  only  the
chemical analytical portion.  Negative biases  in  accuracy results are per-
sistent from year to year for Regions IV and IX,  but not for other regions.

N02 (Manual)

     The results (Figure  10)  are similar  to  other manual methods in that
the precision limits are  considerably wider than  for  accuracy.  Regions V
and VII reported no precision data for 1981 and 1982.

General

     Taking into account the minor  trends  of  improvement, the  general con-
sistency from year to  year  of  the differences of  results among pollutants
and among levels of the  same pollutants  on a  national basis, and among re-
gions for given pollutants,  is truly  amazing.  These appreciable differences
which persist from year to  year strongly indicate  that whatever forces or
causal factors are in action (at play) in each region and in each pollutant
measurement system are  very persistent over the years.   These  significant
differences between regions  should  be  investigated to identify the major
causal factors,  since  some regions  consistently  produce more  precise  and
accurate data than other regions.

     Further, each region should  evaluate the differences among the states
and reporting organizations in  a  similar graphical manner as shown by Fig-
ures 3  through  10.  Then Investigations should be  conducted  to determine
why some  states or  reporting  organizations  produce  better precision  and
accuracy than others.   Appropriate  corrective actions should then be taken
to improve  the precision and accuracy of the reporting organizations having
the worst results.
                                      20

-------
          CARBON MONOXIDE PRECISION
                1881-1882-1883
             AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 1
         1981-1982-1983
      AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
       CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 2
                1981-1882-1883
             AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 3
         1981-1982-1983
      AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
Figure 3.   Carbon monoxide  precision and accuracy by region for  1981,
             1982,  and  1983.
                                        21

-------
                $02 PRECISION
                I08I-I082-I889
              AUTOMATED ANALY2ERS
 40-
             S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
                1981-1982-1983
              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
-48



48 —
P
R 30~
0
s »-
B
i* "~
? -
L -10-
I
M
I -28-
T
S
-38-
X








I
















1
(






*
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL »
1981-1982-1983
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS

1"
a


n
i
i
j



fcrifl
1 :] : '
! v !: i^
: i j ]-^ j
H «2
D »3
n
; t



Ftf In

I1 it
3_ u L li





*>•
                                              40-
                                             -38-
                                             -40-
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
   1981-1982-1983
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
 Figure 4.   Continuous S02 precision and accuracy by region for  1981,
              1982,  and 1983.
                                       22

-------
                                              SB-
                                              68-
               N02 PRECISION
               1881-1882-1883
            AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
                                             -80.
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL I
   1881-1882-1883
 AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
                                                          1
                                                          J
                       I

                       § «2

                       D •»
            N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
               1881-1882-1883
            AUTOMATED  ANALYZERS
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
   (881-1882-1883
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
Figure 5.   Continuous  N02 precision and  accuracy by  region  for  1981,
             1982,  and  1983.
                                      23

-------
                                               48-
                                               S0-
                                               20-
                                                10-
                OZONE PRECISION
                 1881-1882-1883
              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
                                              -48-
               OZONE ACCURACY LEVEL I
                   1881-1882-1883
                 AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
                                                                                   I
                                                                           I
             020NE ACCURACY LEVEL 2
                 1881-1882-1883
              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
-48-
                                               40-
                                               38-
                                               28-
                                                18-
L-,e-

M
I -28-
T
S
  -M-
X
  -40-
               OZONE ACCURACY LEVEL 3
                   1881-1882-1883
                AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
                                                                                    0 83
   Figure 6.   Ozone  precision and accuracy  by region for 1981, 1982,
                and 1983.
                                        24

-------
             TSP PRECISION
             1881-1882-1883
 TSP ACCURACY
1881-1882-1883
Figure  7.  TSP precision and  accuracy by  region for  1981, 1982,
            and 1983.
                                  25

-------
p
R
0
B
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y

L
I
M
I
T
S
 100
LEAD PRECISION
1981-1982-1883
MANUAL METHODS
  80-
  60-
  40-
  20-
 -20-
 -40-
 -60-
 -80-
                                     D
-100-
                                               40-
                                               30-
                                               20-
                                               10-
                           L -10-

                           M
                           I -20-
                           T
                           S
                             -30-
                           X

                             -40-
                                                           LEAD ACOJRACY LEVEL t
                                                               1881-1882-1883
                                                               MANUAL METHODS
                                                                 1"

                                                                 §  «2

                                                                 0  63
                                                    i^
                       48-
                      -40-
                                   LEAD ACCURACY LEVEL 2
                                      1881-1882-1883
                                      MANUAL METHODS
      Figure  8.  Lead precision and  accuracy by  region  for  1981,
                   1982, and 1983.
                                       26

-------

60-
p 50-
40 —
j 20-
I >0-
T U.
-10-
I -20-
M
I -30-
T
S -40-
X -58-
-60-
1 l
a co CB c
i) CM -
a.QCOCQ -IHXHI-IO X
S02 PRECISION
1081-1082-1083
MANUAL METHODS



1 rfb
v
1 | 8,
1 B«
'— 1 	 1" 1 1 1 1 1

1


P
g 20-
B
A
L
I
. T a
1 1
j a) co e
— CM «
i i
>- -IHSCHI-W X
	 ,
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 1
1081-1082-1083
MANUAL METHODS



i'
I
[

1
!«
] 83
1 ••*" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1081-1082-1083
MANUAL METHODS



.
|i V

1-
D M
•"' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1


-
P
R «»
0 20-
B
A
B lft_
I IB
-, L
I
Y
L
1
X <0-)H3H
> rs) —
> CD CO
1 L





-1
x
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
1081-1082-1083
MANUAL METHODS




I 1
1 tfT ^
J ft

_

1-
SA9
ot
D w
1 l l -•»«» ~T 	 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
> +4«f& 1 •$• <£- <$ * 
-------



~
P 58-
R
0 48-
e
A 38-
I 28-
J 18-
T
Y e
!: -18-
I
I
T
S -30-
x -«-
_cn-
N02 PRECISION
1881-1882-1883
MANUAL METHODS





•41 1
KS
• M
I;






1-
B 62








j






"1




fcU
D »
















3
i




J
tj
S
»




So
p
D
0 28-
B
A
L
I
^
Y
L
I -10-
M
I
T
S -28-
X
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1881-1882-1883
MANUAL METHODS
1

62
D«
HI lirf^i ii
• H ' 1*1 Mil H 1
H *1B 1KJ 1 j
J " 1
;









p
g 28-
B
A
I 18~
Y 8"
L
I -18-
M
I
T
S -28-
X
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 1
1881-1882-1883
MANUAL METHODS

1"
S 82

F
II




D «
« | Jl
ty j
'






30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
**


P
g 20-
B
A
B IB-
II ID
L
I
T a
Y
L
I -18-
M
I
T
S -28-
X

N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
1881-1882-1883
MANUAL METHODS
1"
S 82
D"


fi
I
1
i











J — i — i i i i i i i
**•
Figure 10.  Manual N02 precision and accuracy by region for 1981,
            1982, and 1983.
                                28

-------
                                 SECTION 4

                     RESULTS BY REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
     Table 11  shows  the total number  of  Reporting Organizations reporting
data to EMSL  in  1983.   By  comparing  the  numbers  between  Tables  9  and 11,
one can see the  extra  effort  exerted by  some  of  the  State and local agen-
cies to provide  quality ssurance information  in  cases where  they  have no
SLAMS or  NAMS sites.  There  are  an additional 10  reporting organizations
for CO, 11 for continuous  S02, 9  for continuous N02,  14  for  ozone, 5 for
TSP, 17  for  Pb,  20  for  manual S02  and  22  for  manual  N02«   Apparently,
these additional  sites  are special purpose monitoring sites or additional
local sites not in the SLAMS/NAMS network.
          TABLE 11.  NUMBER OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS HAVING DATA
                     IN THE PARS MASTER FILE FOR. THE YEAR 1983
Automated
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Nation
CO
C42101
6
3
12
30
19
11
11
5
10
4
111
S02
C42401
6
3
14
33
24
11
10
4
7
3
115
pollutants
N02
C42602
3
2
14
25
13
9
6
3
7
2
84

03
044201
6
3
14
36
24
10
11
3
10
2
119

TSP
111101
6
3
16
37
30
14
12
9
11
4
142
Manual
pollutants
Pb S02
112128 142401
5
3
9
29
13
10
7
3
6
3
89
0
0
0
21
0
1
0
0
1
1
24

N02
141602
0
0
1
22
2
2
1
0
0
1
29
     Appendix D shows the annual combined upper and lower probability limits
for each reporting  organization.  Each reporting  organisation  can compare
their values  with  those  of  other  reporting organisations  and  with  the
regional and national values.   Also given for each  reporting organization
are the following informational items:
                                     29

-------
     Continuous methods

     No. of SLAMS and NAMS sites
     No. of analyzers
     No. of precision checks
     No. of accuracy audits
Manual methods

No. of SLAMS and NAMS sites
No. of samplers
No. of collocated sites
No. of accuracy audits
     Any user  of  monitoring data  from  some  specific  site and  time  period
should obtain, from the local air  monitoring  agency, the precision and accu-
racy data for the specific sites and time periods involved.

NOTE:  The regional and national probability  limits  shown in Appendix D have
been calculated according to the most correct statistical procedure described
in Appendix B, and do not agree with the unweighted arithmetical average val-
ues presented in the main body  of  the  report.   However,  relative comparisons
among regions, pollutants,  years,  accuracy levels, and  precision  versus ac-
curacy comparisons are essentially the same by both methods.
                                      30

-------
                                 SECTION 5

                      FURTHER EVALUATION OF PARS DATA
     Some interesting comparisons  can  be made by considering the correspond-
ing national averages of  Tables  4 and 5  and  the 50-percentile values of the
probability limits of Table  6.   Table 12 compares  these  limits  by consider-
ing the spread, or range, of the limits.
     TABLE 12.  COMPARISON OF THE 50-PERCENTILE FREQUENCY DISTRIBU-
                TION VALUES WITH THE NATIONAL LIMIT VALUES FOR 1983

Manual methods
TSP
Pb
N02
S02
Precision
Accuracy*
Precision
Accuracy
Precision
Accuracy
Precision
Accuracy
Continuous methods
CO
03
N02
S02
Precision
Accuracy
Precision
Accuracy
Precision
Accuracy
Precision
Accuracy
National values
Lower
limit
-11
— 6
-14
- 6
-19
- 5
-28
- 9
- 8
- 6
-10
- 8
-13
-12
-13
-12
Upper
limit
12
6
15
4
21
6
41
5
6
6
9
7
12
9
8
10
Range
23
12
29
10
40
11
69
14
14
12
19
15
25
21
21
22
50-percentile
Lower
limit
- 9
- 6
-10
- 5
-16
- 2
-20
— 8
- 7
- 5
- 9
— 7
-11
-10
-12
-10
Upper
limit
10
5
11
3
15
6
37
4
6
5
8
6
10
8
7
8
values
Range
19
11
21
8
31
8
57
12
13
10
17
13
21
18
19
18
*A11 accuracy values for all pollutants are for Level 2.

                                      31

-------
     In all cases the  spreads  (ranges)  of  the  probability limits  are some-
what greater  for  precision than for  accuracy  and considerably so  for the
manual S02  and  manual N0£  methods.   These differences are  consistent for
both the National averages  and the 50-percentile  values.   These same rela-
tionships also existed for  1981 and   1982.  (In practically  every case the
ranges are  less  for 1983 than for  1982.)   This means  that  the short-term
within-sampler variability  (precision)  is  larger  than the  variability  of
accuracy which includes  variations between,  or among,  samplers as  well as
imprecision within  samplers.   This may  seem  contradictory  at first,  but
giving consideration to  exactly how  the results are  obtained  and what the
results represent will provide a rational explanation.
           In the case of TSP, the precision results are obtained from col-
located sampler data.  They introduce variability from the analytical filter
weighing process, the filter handling and conditioning process, and also the
flow rate measurement process; whereas the accuracy audit is a check only on
the flow  rate measurement.   Further, the  collocated sampler  results  are
obtained at  all  ambient concentrations  above  1  yg/m^,  the  detection limit
for the method.   At low  concentration levels  the  relative  variability is
greater than  at  higher  concentrations.  The combined  effects of these two
causes explain the wider limits for precision.

     Manual SO? and N02»  Similar  to the TSP  data, the precision  results
are obtained from collocated sampler  data.  They introduce variability from
the flow measurement, absorbing  solutions, sampling,  sample handling, and
storage effects  (stability)  of the samples as well as the  laboratory ana-
lytical portion  of  the  method; whereas the accuracy  audit  is a check only
on the  laboratory  analytical portion of the  method.  Further,  the collo-
cated sampler results are obtained at all ambient  concentrations above the
detection limits of the methods.   Many of these  concentrations are below
the concentrations  of  the  accuracy  audits.  At  lower concentrations, the
relative variability is greater than  at higher concentrations.

     As noted from Table  12, these differences are  considerable, indicating
that only a  small  portion  of  the variability results  from the laboratory
analytical part of the method.  A very considerable amount of  variability of
the method is attributed  to  other portions  of the measurement process.  The
very wide limits of uncertainty attributed  only  to  the imprecision of these
methods strongly emphasizes  that  the manual methods  should be replaced by
the continuous anlayzers.   Alternatively, if  any  reliance  is to be placed
on individual daily data from the manual methods,  all of the various por-
tions of the  measurement  processes must  be  much  more  closely  controlled, if
possible.

     Pb.  The precision  estimates  for Pb are  obtained from the analysis of
duplicate strips from the same hi-vol filter.   Consequently, actual varia-
bility of Pb  content across  the length of the filter,  filter  handling  (with
possible loss of particulate), variation in cutting filter  strips, and the
extraction of real-world  particulate  are  involved  in  addition to the chemi-
cal analytical portion  of the  method.  The  accuracy audit data are obtained
                                      32

-------
from the chemical analysis of  strips  to which known amounts of water-solu-
ble Pb salts have been  added and  thus  do  not  involve the other portions of
the measurement  process,  nor   do  they  involve  real-world  particulates.

     Further, similar to the other  manual methods  (TSP,  N02, and S(>2), the
precision estimates are  obtained  at all  concentrations above the detection
limit.  Many of  these concentrations  are less than those  of  the accuracy
audits.  At lower  concentrations, the  relative variability is expected to
be greater than at higher concentrations.

Manual Methods (General).  To make  valid comparisons  of the precision and
accuracy data, such  comparisons  should be made at  the  same concentration
levels.  Only then will it be possible  to determine whether the larger var-
iabilities of the precision estimates  are due to  differences in concentra-
tion level  or  to  the  larger  scope  of  the  measurement  system  involved.

     Such comparison studies can be accomplished when the raw concentration
data are obtained  from  the  State and local agencies for each sample day as
specified by the proposed regulation revisions to Appendix A of 40 CFR, Part
58.  Now only the reporting organizations could perform such studies since
they have the raw data available.

     The estimation  of  the  magnitude  of  the   contributions  of the various
sources of variability  to the total  measurement processes could be system-
atically studied in specially designed  experiments.

CO, S02, N02, 03 (Continuous Methods).  For   these   continuous  measurement
methods, the precision assessments reflect the within-instrument variability
obtained from  bi-weekly checks  at  relatively low  concentrations,  namely

                        8-10 ppm for  CO
                and   .08 -.10 ppm for  S02, N0£, and 03.

In comparison, the accuracy audits include between-instrument variability as
well as imprecision,  but are  conducted at higher  concentrations for levels
2 and 3.

         Level 2        15-20 ppm for  CO
                      .15 -.20 ppm for  S02, N02, and 03.

         Level 3       35-45 ppm for  CO
                      .35 -.45 ppm for  S02, N02, and 03.

     Level 1 accuracy audits are  conducted at  concentrations of

                      .03 -.08 for CO
                        3-8 for S02,  N02, and 03.

     At Level 1,  concentrations less than those  for the precision checks,
the probability limits for accuracy are wider  than for precision.
                                     33

-------
COMPARISON OF NATIONAL LIMIT VALUES AND 50-PERCENTILE VALUES

     With reference  again  to Table 12,  in all cases  the  spreads (ranges)
of the National Average  values  for both precision and accuracy are greater
than for the  corresponding 50-Percentile  values.   The  most  logical expla-
nation is that the National average values are unduly influenced by extreme
values.  If the distributions of the upper probability limits and the lower
probability limits were  near normal,  as they  should  be,  the 50-Percentile
values should closely agree with the National average values.

     An evaluation of the shape of the distributions does in fact show.that
the distributions are not normal due to an excessive number of extreme val-
ues (i.e.,  values in the tails of the distribution).

     All of the distributions of the upper and lower probability limits are
generally symmetric about zero.  The only  exception is  for  the S02 contin-
uous method,  for  both precision and  accuracy.  For  precision  checks,  the
distribution of the lower probability limits is biased  from  5 to 7 percent
on the negative.   A  similar  observation  was made  for  1981  and 1982 data.
This means  that,  on  the average,  the  precision  checks resulted  in values
about 5 percent less than the assumed concentrations.   No solid explanation
can be stated  for  this  trend.  One possible explanation  is  that the rela-
tively low  concentrations  of  S02  (0.08 0.10  ppm) in  cylinders  specially
prepared for precision checks may  degrade  after preparation.   For accuracy
audits, the negative  bias  is from 3 to 5  percent. This  means that on the
average, the results  of  the  accuracy  audits were  from  3  to 5 percent less
than the assessed  concentrations  of  the  audit  gases.   Again,  it  may  be
possible that this bias  represents a degradation  of  the S02  audit gases.
These biases for S02  were  observed previously in the  1981 data and seem to
be consistent in magnitude and  direction.   Another explanation of the neg-
ative biases  for  precision and  accuracy  for  S02  is  that the instruments,
on the average,  tend to drift  in  a negative  direction as  previously dis-
cussed on page  9.   No   satisfactory  explanation   can  be  provided  at this
time.  However, this  consistent  bias  should be investigated and corrected,
if possible.

     A review of Table  8 clearly shows the  large  variability of precision
data for the  manual  methods  and,  in  particular,   the presence  of many ex-
treme values for the  S02 and N02 methods.  Table  8 and Figure  2  show more
variability of the accuracy  audit  results from the continuous  S02 and N02
methods than for CO and 03.

     Based on the frequency distributions of Table 8,  quarterly probability
limit values  which exceed  those  listed in  Table  13  should  be considered
excessive or outlier  values  and should initiate immediate investigation to
determine and, hopefully, correct  the  cause  of such excessive values.  The
values given in Table 13 are slightly  tighter in  some  cases than the cor-
responding values given  in the report for the 1982 data.
                                     34

-------
TABLE 13.  VALUES OF QUARTERLY PROBABILITY LIMITS CONSIDERED
           AS EXCESSIVE BASED ON 1983 DATA

Manual methods
TSP
Pb
NO 2
SO 2
Continuous methods
CO
03
NO 2
SO?
Precision limits
± 28
± 42
± 58
± 70
± 16
± 20
± 28
± 23
Level

± 20
± 22
± 28
± 28
± 28
± 50
± 33
Accuracy
1 Level
± 16
± 16
± 16
± 25
± 18
± 20
± 29
± 27
limits
2 Level 3

	
± 15
± 20
± 15
± 19
± 23
± 25
                             35

-------
                                 SECTION 6

   COMPARISON OF RESULTS  FROM THE  PARS  AND THE PERFORMANCE  AUDIT PROGRAM
     A general comparison between the accuracy data of the PARS program and
the Performance Audit (PA) data is included in this report.  The audit data
are the  results  of  an  independent  check,  the National  Performance  Audit
Program (NPAP),  conducted  by the  Quality  Assurance Division  (QAD)  of the
EMSL.

     In the NPAP,  specially  prepared samples  or devices are sent from EMSL
to the ambient air  monitoring agencies.   The samples or devices are careful-
ly and accurately assessed by EMSL utilizing NBS Standard Reference Materi-
als (SRM's) or standards.   The monitoring  agencies analyze  or measure the
samples or devices  as unknowns  or blinds and  report  their results to EMSL
for evaluation.  Audit  programs  are  conducted  for  the  following pollutant
measurements using the materials indicated:

                                                      Portion of measure-
Measurement^           Audit materials	             ment system audited

S02 (manual)      Freeze-dried sodium sulfite         Chemical analytical
N02 (manual)      Aqueous sodium nitrite              Chemical analytical
Pb                Filter strip with  lead nitrate      Chemical analytical
TSP               Reference flow device               Flow
CO                Cylinders containing CO gas         Continuous instrument
S02               Cylinder containing S02 gas         Continuous instrument

     The audit materials  or  devices  are prepared at three to six different
concentrations or  flow  levels.   Separate reports on  the  evaluation of the
PA data are published by EMSL.4»5»6
     &
     As indicated  above,  the NPAP does not yet  include  an  audit  for the
ozone or continuous  N02 methods.   Therefore, no comparisons of the NPAP or
PA data with the PARS data are possible  for these measurements.

     Since precision  assessments  are  not  made  in the  PA  program,  only
accuracy can be  compared across the  PARS and the PA programs.  For the pur-
pose of  this  report, the  results from  PARS and the PA  system are compared
at approximately  the same  levels  by  matching laboratories  and reporting
organizations.   Since the  PARS  data  are presented  with outliers,  the same
approach was taken  with the  audit  data.  Knowledge of the historical audit
data reports,  however,  indicates  that the  presence of  outliers  may make a
significant difference  in  the audit  results for some agencies.
                                     36

-------
     Comparisons of the national values of the probability limits (Table 14)
exhibit good agreement  between the  results  of the  two  programs.   However,
there is considerable variation between the results of the two programs when
comparisons are made on Regional and reporting organization bases.  Lack of
better agreement  results  from  several factors.  First,  the inclusion  of
outlier values  in  the PA data  appears to  have  introduced  some  excessive
distortion of general trends.  Second, even though the PARS averages in Table
14 are weighted by  the number of  audits,  variations due to  many sources of
error for both data sets are averaged together to  obtain  the national values,
thereby masking any  correlations  which may have  existed for the results of
individual agencies.  Third,  the concentration levels  for the two systems do
not coincide exactly  at  each of  the audit levels.   Fourth, the PA data are
the results of independent external audits, while the PARS accuracy data are
based on the results of independent internal audits.   The expected effects of
the last-mentioned factor would cause  the  spread of the  limits for the PA to
be wider than that for the PARS.   Examination of the results (see Table 14)
confirm these expectations.
     TABLE 14.  SUMMARY COMPARISON OF EMSL PERFORMANCE AUDITS (PA)
                vs. PARS ACCURACY AUDIT DATA FOR YEAR 1983
Pollutant
CO
PA
PARS
N02 (manual)
PA
PARS
S02 (manual)
PA
PARS
LEAD
PA
PARS
TSP
PA
PARS
S02 (Cont)
PA
PARS
Audits

1753
(1228)

78
( 248)

59
( 184)

644
(1097)

2700
(5996)

506
(1281)
National values
probability limits (Z)a
Level 1
Lower Upper

-23 +21
(-15) (+13)


(- 9) (+12)

-45 +43
(-26) (+15)

-24 +23
(-12) (+12)




-26 +23
(-18) (+17)
Level 2
Lower Upper

-10 +13
(- 8) (+ 8)

-15 + 7
(- 8) (+10)

-15 +19
(-18) (+11)

-25 +22
(-10) (+ 9)

-11 +10
(- 7) (+ 7)

-20 +18
(-12) (+13)
Level 3
Lower Upper

-14 +16
(- 7) (+ 6)

- 9 +7
(- 7) (+ 8)

-13 +19
(-14) (+ 7)

-20 +19





-18 +15
(-12) (+12)
Level 4
Lower Upper


(- 4) (+ 3)




- 8 +12








- 6 +6
(- 8) (+ 8)
aNOTE:  The  national  probability limits for both PA and the PARS shown in
 the table have  been calculated  by the procedure  given in Appendix B, to
 enable an equitable comparison  to  be made.  Therefore,  the values for PARS
 do not agree with  the  values of Tables 6 and 7 and the figures previously
 presented.
                                     37

-------
     Comparisons of the PA and the PARS results by Region are shown in Fig-
ures lla through f.  The figures show considerable variation among Regions.

C£.

     For a given Region  the  width of the probability  limits  is nearly the
same for PA  and PARS,  except  for Region II,  where PARS is  less  than PA;
Region VIII,  where PARS is  less than  PA;  and Region III, where  PARS  is
greater than PA.

     Region VI probability  limits for both PA and PARS are considerably wider
than for other  regions.  Region VIII's PA limits  are  wider than all other
regions except for Region VI.

TSJP.

     The width  of  the  probability  limits  for PARS  is,  for  all  Regions
except VII, less than for PA.  This may be explained by the fact that with-
in each reporting  organization the  flow rate checks are not  as completely
independent from their internal standards as are the PA audits.  Regions II
and IX have more variability than other Regions.

N02 (manual).

     The wide variability of the PA for Region IV needs explanation.  Also,
for Region  VI the  considerable difference  in PA  and PARS  limits  should
somehow be explained.

S02 (manual).

     For PA results  there  is a definite negative  bias  for  both Regions IV
and V.  This  bias  does not  exist for PARS.   A possible explanation is that
for PA  the samples  are  prepared at EMSL/RTP  and some degradation  of the
samples occurs  prior to  analysis is the SLAMS  laboratories.   For  PARS the
standards are prepared locally and analyzed soon after preparation.

Pb.

     There is considerable variation in the  results  from Region to Region.
However, for all Regions, the PARS variability  is considerably less than for
PA.  This may be explained by the fact that the local independently-prepared
standards for PARS have  close  traceability to the  materials used for cali-
bration, whereas the standards for PA, since they are prepared at EMSL/RTP,
are more  completely  independent.  There appears to  be no  significant bias
in either the PA or the PARS results.

     Regions  III,  IV, and V  PA results have  much  more  variability than for
other regions.
                                     38

-------
                 25
If
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
•«
-10


| -14
S. -ifi
III'

_ *•
_ .
- T I
T
IT
i t
i
_ i
^ j_t^
- l







— 0.
—
- T T
PA "PARS *'
"™" ^L ^L

iii.
i i i i i 11
co-
T _


T





» •
T






.4.
J. ,








T '





•
"T





.J.

_
_
T _
_
T
1
i _
-1- -
J. _
L J.
—
•
^—
•OMITTING KY 001 _
\ l i i 1 II
                -22
Figure 11a. Comparison of PA and PARS for CO (level 3).
£3
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
.71!
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

—
•
- jT

—
i
i -
T
l
i
—
» *
T T
1
1
1
T -
|
•
•T
i
1
1
Ll
MM

T

i

•
1 1 1
TSP-
—
T T -r



j
•
_
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
T
|
I1
*

•
T
1

T ~

i
"~ i —
—
_
1 1 1
                      5678     9    10
                      REGIONS
Figure 11b. Comparison of PA and PARS for TSP (level 2).
                        39

-------
 20
 10
-10
-20
i i — r 	
i i i
~i —
|-T
1
1
.J-
•
1
1 — I 	
rT
1
I
JL
1 1
1 1
I"
1 1
1 *
• PARS
1
1
N02
1
        1     2345     6789     10
  Figure 11c. Comparison of PA and PARS for manual NC^devel 3).

-------
3U
40
30
20

10

o

-10
-20
-30
-40
-50

—
—


•



•









T



J.









T -i
i
1
Lj

i
1










i
l

•i
X









T



1
1








T




1








T
1 *
1
T
1 .
1 *
X
•


-59




T
T T I
1 *
T •»'
1 i
Ii
, i
^ 	 M 	 1 	
' I' I'
J- 1
J-

1 PA ! PARS
•OMITTING K!
S02
—
—


__
T
1


•
i —
_
>001
                            5     6
                            REGION
9   10
Figure 11f. Comparison of PA and PARS for continuous SC-2 (level 3).
                          41

-------
                                        s
                                                               PROBABILITY LIMITS, percent

                                                     CJ     fsl     1>            -»     N     W
NJ
                            (Q
                             i
                             to
                             o
                             o

                            I

                             1
0)
3
Q.
                             Q]
                             ^
                             o'

                             9L

                             gj_
                             c
                             CO
                             s
1 1 1 1
— u___..

p_ j. 	
I— •
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 ,——.—.
1-
"""* a^ ^^ ^^^ ^^
l-r-^- T— T
1 1 1 ^1
1 1 1 ! o

•
--H '
h?Hlr
H ! 1 -
i i ' •
i i i 1 „
	 ., '
•
	 i — _
__^>« ^^P ««i
. 	 , '
i i i i



o
o
H
z
c
o

m
Q
O
tft


1 1 III
1 	
1 1 1 1
(III

K_ _ _ .. J_
"~~ •

- (1 	
1 1 1 1
1 1,1 1
— ' •
'


- , , , 7*=!
	 i i i i i __
i
pi
i i f
_--.__! ' n? "~

	 , '

	 1 '
'.I l-o


1 1
, 	 ' ' ' H
I— H i-
1 ! 1

-------
SO? (Continuous).

     Regions IV and VI  show  considerably more variation of PA results than
other Regions.   Region IV PA  results  are  wider  due  to  the  results from
laboratories in two particular reporting organizations in the Region.  The
PARS data show nearly the same variability across Regions except for Region
I which has less variability.

     All Regions, except  II  and  III, show a  slight  negative  bias  for both
PA and PARS data, similar to the negative biases for the manual S02 method.

Missing PA and PARS Comparisons

     Comparsion of the  results from PARS  and PA are,  of  course,  possible
only when  the  data are  available from  both  systems  for  paired reporting
organization-laboratory combinations.  Paired data were not  available for
67 comparisons.  Of these,  data  was not available  because of missing data
from the PARS for 15 com.arisons.

                                    Reporting
              Region     State     organization     Pollutant

               II         VI          55001           TSP
               IV         AL          01011           CO, Pb
                          AL          01013           CO, Pb
               V          IN          15002           CO
               VI         LA          19001           Pb
               VII        IA          16002           N02  (manual)
                          MO          26003           Pb
               IX         CA          05036           Pb
                          NV          29100           CO, TSP
                          GU          54100           TSP
               X          AK          02020           Pb
     Lack of laboratory participation in the National Performance Audit Pro-
gram was the  reason for no  available paired data for  52  cases.   In these
cases, the  laboratories (reporting  organization)  did  not  comply  with the
requirements of  the federal  regulations.   In   some  of  these cases,  the
laboratory requested the  audit  samples  but  did  not  report  any  results.
                                     43

-------
Region

 I

 II


 III
           Reporting
State     organization
 IV
 VI
 VII
 VIII
 IX
ME
MA
NJ
PR
VI
DC
MD
PA
VA
WV
AL
AL
FL
FL
KY
IN
MI
MI
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
LA
NM
OK
OK
TX
TX
TX
MO
MO
MO
CO
MT
MT
MT
MT
ND
SD
WY
CA
HI
20001
22001
31001
40001
55001
09001
21001
39001
48005
50002
01011
01013
10001
10003
18002
15010
23001
23002
36001
36006
36008
36009
36010
19001
32002
37102
37103
45001
45004
45006
26001
26003
26005
06001
27001
27002
27003
27004
35001
43001
52001
05036
12120
Laboratory

  301001
  304001
  308001
  309001
  310001
  312100
  312001
  311002
  415001
  314002
  319001
  419001
  323005
  323004
  416001
  429011
  326001
  426001
  327001
  427001
  427003
  427004
  427005
  334001
  430001
  431001
  431002
  333001
  433004
  433008
  338001
  438003
  438005
  344001
  339002
  439001
  439002
  439003
  341001
  342001
  343001
  445005
  348001
Pollutant

 Pb
 TSP
 Pb
 Pb
 TSP
 CO, TSP, Pb*
 CO, Pb*
 TSP
 TSP
 CO
 CO
 TSP
 CO
 CO
 TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 Pb
 Pb*
 Pb
 Pb
 Pb
 Pb, TSP
 CO
 TSP
 Pb
 TSP
 TSP
 Pb**
 Pb, TSP
 CO, TSP
 Pb, TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 CO,* TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 TSP
 Pb, TSP
 CO,* S02*
      (manual)

 Continued
                              44

-------
                        Reporting
  Region     State     organization     Laboratory     Pollutant

   IX         NV          29100           346001        CO,* TSP
              NV          29300           446002        TSP
              GU          54100           349001        TSP
   X          ID          13001           554004        CO**
              ID          13001           354001        TSP
              ID          13001           554003        Pb*

    ^Requested audit samples, but reported no results.
   **Requested audit samples twice, but reported no results.

In several cases, data were unavailable from both PARS and PA:

                        Reporting
  Region     State     Organization     Laboratory     Pollutant

   II         VI          55001           310001        TSP
   IV         AL          01011           319001        CO
   VI         LA          19001           334001        Pb
   VII        MO          26003           438003        Pb
   IX         CA          05036           445005        Pb, TSP
              NV          29100           346001        CO, TSP
              GU          54100           349001        TSP
                                45

-------
                                 SECTION 7

                      CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
     The results  of  PARS data for  1983  indicate  some  general improvement
over the  data for  1982.  However,  considerable  differences exist  among
Regions and individual  reporting organizations for  most  measurement meth-
ods.  Investigations should be made by the Regions and the states to deter-
mine the causes of these significant differences.

     Comparison of PARS  and  PA data show  more variability  of  the  PA data
than for PARS.  These  differences  are  presumably  due to  the fact that the
external PA  accuracy  audits  are   more   completely   independent  than  the
internal PARS accuracy  audits.   These  differences  have  been consistent for
the years 1981, 1982, and 1983.

     Further improvement  in  the data  quality  assessments, which are mea-
sures of the monitoring  data quality,  can  be achieved only through  contin-
uing efforts of State and local agency personnel involved (first-hand) with
the operation and quality control  of  their  measurement systems.   Regional
QA Coordinators can  also assist  through  their  review of the operations and
quality control practices across the States in their Regions.

     Each Regional  QA  Coordinator  should  evaluate the PARS  data from all
the reporting  organizations  within his  Region to  identify those organiza-
tions having  excessively large  variations  of probability limits.   Investi-
gation should be  made  to determine  the causes  and correct them to preclude
future excessive  deviations.   Similarly,  Regional QA  Coordinators  should
review the  operations  of the reporting  organizations having significantly
better precision  and accuracy  results  in order to identify specific proce-
dures which should be  uniformly used  throughout the  Region and the Nation
to further  improve the reliability of the monitoring data in the National
Aerometric Data Base.
                                     46

-------
                                 REFERENCES
1.   Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40,  Part 58,  "Ambient  Air  Quality
     and Surveillance."

2.   Rhodes, R.C.  "Guideline on the Meaning and Use  of Precision  and Accu-
     racy Data Required by 40 CFR Part  58,  Appendices A and B."  U.S.  En-
     vironmental Protection Agency Report, EPA 450/4-84-006.   Research Tri-
     angle Park, NC 27711.   June 1983.

3.   Evans, E.G., R.C. Rhodes, W.J.  Mitchell and J.C. Puzak.   "Summary of
     Precision and Acura -.y Assessments  for  the State  and Local Air Monitor-
     ing Networks, 1982»"   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, EPA-
     600/4-85-031.  Research Triangle Park,  NC 27711.  April  1985.

4.   Rhodes, R.C., B.I. Bennett and J.C. Puzak.   "EPA's National Performance
     Audit Program for Ambient Air Pollution Measurements."  In Proceedings
     of the 75th  Annual Meeting of  the Air  Pollution  Control  Association,
     New Orleans, LA, June 1982.  Presentation 82-23.

5.   Lampe, R.L., B.F. Parr, G.  Pratt,  O.L.  Dowler and W.J. Mitchell.
     "National Performance Audit Program:  Ambient Air Audits  of Analytical
     Proficiency-1983."  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency Report,  EPA
     600/4-84-077.  Research Triangle Park,  NC 27711.  October 1984.

6.   Rhodes, R.C., W.J. Mitchell, J.C.  Puzak and E.G. Evans.   "Comparison
     of Precision and  Accuracy  Estimates from  State and  Local Agency  Air
     Monitoring Stations with  Results  of EPA's National Performance Audit
     Program."  Journal of  Testing  and Evaluation, JTEVA,  Vol. 13,  No.  5,
     September 1985, p. 374-378.

7.   Thrall, A.D. and C.S.  Burton.  "Special Report,  Issues Concerning the
     Use of Precision  and Accuracy  Data."   U.S.  Environmental Protection
     Agency Report,  EPA-450/4-84-006.  Research Triangle Park,  North Caro-
     lina 27711.  February 1984.
                                     47

-------
                                 APPENDIX A

                                  GLOSSARY
State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) — monitoring  stations se-
lected by the  states  and included in the  State  Implementation Plans.  The
stations and  the  plans  are  approved by  the Regional  Administrator.  The
purposes of  the monitoring  are  to  determine  compliance to  the  National
Ambient Air  Quality  Standards  (NAAQS)  and to determine  background levels
of the criteria pollutants.

National Air Monitoring  Sites (NAMS) — a  subset  of  the SLAMS, selected by
the states in  collaboration  with the Regional Offices  and  approved by the
Administrator.  The purpose  of  the sites is to  monitor in  the areas where
pollution concentration  and  population  exposure  are  expected to be highest
in terms of  the NAAQS.  Although,  in  actuality  the NAMS are a  subset of
SLAMS, the NAMS  sites and the non-NAMS  SLAMS  sites are  often referred to
as two separate groups,  the NAMS and SLAMS sites, respectively.

Reporting Organization — a  state,  or  subordinate  organization within the
state that is  responsible  for a set of  SLAMS  stations, monitoring for the
same pollutant  and  for  which  PARS data  can be  logically  pooled (statis-
tically combined).  It is  important  to emphasize that  a  reporting organi-
zation is pollutant- and site-specific and is responsible for the sampling,
calibration, analysis, data  quality  assessment,  and  reporting of the moni-
toring data  for the  specific pollutant.  It is  possible  that  a particular
SLAMS station may belong to  two different  reporting  organizations, but the
likelihood of this occurring is small.

Precision (Continuous Analyzers) — a measure of  repeatability  obtained from
actual concentration in a gas cylinder and the values indicated by the ana-
lyzer.  For  S02,  N02,  and  03  analyzers  the  gas  concentration  used for
the precision  check  must be between 0.08  and  0.10  ppm and for  CO it must
be between 8 and 10 ppm.  The data from all  biweekly analyzer  checks for a
given pollutant are  combined and 95% probability limit values reported to
EPA each quarter  by  each reporting organization.   For  this  report, the
quarterly values for  1983  were combined and overall 95% probability limits
were calculated for  each reporting organization, for each  Region, and for
the nation, as described in Appendix B.

Precision (Manual Methods) — a measure  of repeatability  for TSP, N02, and
S02 manual methods (bubblers)  determined by operating  collocated samplers
at selected  sites.   At each collocated  site one sampler is  designated as
the "actual" sampler  and  the  other as the "check"  sampler,  and the difference
between the two samplers  provides  the precision estimate.  For Pb, precision
                                    A-l

-------
estimates are  obtained by  analyzing  duplicate  strips  from a  high volume
filter sample  collected  at a  site  where high  Pb  concentrations exist.
These precision  checks are made  weekly and  reported quarterly.   The data
from the manual methods were calculated  in  a similar manner as the automated
(continuous) analyzers.

Accuracy (Continuous Analyzers) — the agreement between an analyzer result
and a known  audit  concentration.   Accuracy estimates are obtained  at least
once per year  for  each analyzer by introducing  blind audit materials into
the analyzer.   The audit  samples  must  span  at least  three concentration
levels and, whenever possible, must be traceable to NBS or other authorita-
tive reference.  At least  25%  of  the  analyzers in each reporting organiza-
tion must  be  audited  each quarter.   The percentage difference  for  each
audit concentration is determined and the average for all analyzers checked
within that  quarter is calculated for  each level.   The standard deviation
for each level is  then used to calculate the 95% probability limits for the
reporting organization which in turn are submitted quarterly to EPA.  These
quarterly values  were  combined  to determine  the  annual  values  presented
here.  They  were calculated in  the same  manner as  described  earlier for
precision.

Accuracy (Manual Methods) — the agreement between an observed value and a
known or reference value.   For N02 and S02 manual methods, the accuracy of
the analytical  portion of  the  method  is  assessed at  three  levels by the
analysis of  known  audit materials.  For Pb,  the accuracy of the analytical
portion of the  method is assessed at two  levels.   For TSP, the  flow rate
(or air volume) portion of  the method is assessed at  the nominal flow rate.

Completeness — the number  of the precision and accuracy checks reported as
compared to  the number that should have been reported  if all checks  had been
done in accordance with the regulations.  This  value,  expressed  as a per-
centage, is  not  corrected for instances where equipment failure prevented
conducting the check,  or for periods when monitoring  data were invalidated.

National Ambient Air Audit  Program (NAAAP) —  an external performance audit
program conducted  by  EPA on state and  local  agency organizatons.  Organi-
zations operating SLAMS stations are required  to  participate in this program
directed by  the  Environmental  Monitoring  Systems  Laboratory  (EMSL) of the
EPA at Research  Triangle  Park,  NC.   In this  program, blind audit materials
prepared by  EMSL  are  sent to participating laboratories.  The laboratories
analyze the  samples and return  the results  to  EMSL.  Shortly after the audit
is completed each  participant  receives  a report that compares his  perform-
ance to that of all other participants.  The use of audit materials for the
manual SOo audits  (freeze-dried SOj),  manual  N(>2  audits  (NaN(>2 solution),
and particulate  SO^,  NO^, and  Pb  audits (spiked  filter  strips) evalu-
ates only the analytical proficiency of  the laboratory.  The reference flow
device used  in the TSP sampler audit  evaluates only  the  accuracy of the
flow calibration.   However, the  CO  and  S02  continuous   analyzer audits
evaluate the  entire measurement system.   As  explained above, the  external
NAAAP audits are  conducted in essentially the same  manner as the  internal
audits (accuracy  checks)  for  the PARS  program.  The  audits for the manual
methods and  CO analyzer are conducted semiannually and  those for flow  (TSP)
and continuous S02 monitors are conducted  once per year.

                                    A-2

-------
                                 APPENDIX B

                 FORMULAS FOR COMBINING PROBABILITY LIMITS
     When combining the probability limits for individual calendar quarters
to compute the yearly probability limits for a given reporting organization,
the following formulas are used.  These formulas determine the yearly prob-
ability limits for the reporting organization which would have been computed
from all the individual percent difference values, d^, obtained during the
year.  To accomplish this, from each quarterly pair of probability limits,
the average, D, and standard deviation, Sa, are back-calculated:

                        LL + UL
                    D = 	
                        UL - LL
                    a   2(1.96)

where  LL = lower probability limit
       UL = upper probability limit

Except for the effect of the round-off of the reported probability limits
to integer values, the above equations determine the original D and Sa val-
ues used by the reporting organizations to compute the originally reported
limits.

     Yearly average, D, and standard deivation, S, values are computed from
the quarterly values as follows:
where n^ = the number of individual percent difference, d^, values for each
           quarter
                               )*n.L(Di-D)
                                    B-l

-------
     The appropriate yearly probability limits for the reporting organiza-
tion are computed using the formulas:

                   UL = 1) + 1.96 S~

                   LL = 1 - 1.96 S"

NOTE:  The same formulas are used for combining yearly reporting organiza-
       tion limits into state limits, state limits into region limits, and
       region limits into national limits.

Example:  Suppose that the lower and upper 95% probability limits for CO
          for precision for the four quarters of a year are:


Quarter
1
2
3
4

Number of
Precision Checks
10
9
13
7
Lower
Probability
Limit
_g
-5
-6
-12
Upper
Probability
Limit
+6
+9
+4
+11
                        -8+6
                            " = -1
                       = 3.6
              2(1.96)
     Similar computations for the other quarters, give values in  the  follow-
ing table.

             Quarter       n       TT      S       D" - D
1
2
3
4

10
9
13
7
39
-1
+2
-1
-0.5

3.6
3.6
2.6
5.9

-0.78
2.22
-0.78
-0.28

                                     B-2

-------
     Then
          D =
              10(-1) + 9(2) + 13(-1) + 7(-0.5)


                           39


              -8.5

              	 = -0.22
               39
     / ^ - 1  •   1
S =
     /9(3.6)2+8(3.6)2+12(2.6)2+6(5.9)2+lO(-0.78)2+9(2.22)2+l3(-0.78)2+7(-0.28)2


                                   39 - 1
      510.30 + 58.90
            38
      14.98   =  3.87
The upper and lower 95% probability limits are then computed as:


          UL = D + 1.96 S


             = -0.22 + 1.96(3.87)


             = 7.37 or 7 rounded off to nearest integer



          LL = D - 1.96 S


             = -0.22 - 1.96(3.87)


             = -7.81 or -8 rounded off to nearest integer
                                    B-3

-------
            APPENDIX C
LISTING OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Region
01
01
01
01
01
01
02
02
02
02
03
03

03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04

No.
07
20
22
30
41
47
31
33
40
55
08
09

21
21
21
21
21
39
39
39
48
48
48
48
50
50
01
01
01
01
01
01
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
State
Name
CONNECTICUT
MAINE
MASSACHUSETTS
NEW HAMPSHIRE
RHODE ISLAND
VERMONT
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
PUERTO RICO
VIRGIN ISL\NDS
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
MARYLAND
MARYLAND
MARYLAND
MARYLAND
MARYLAND
PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
VIRGINIA
VIRGINIA
VIRGINIA
WEST VIRGINIA
WEST VIRGINIA
ALABAMA
ALABAMA
ALABAMA
ALABAMA
ALABAMA
ALABAMA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA

No.
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001

001
002
003
005
006
001
002
003
001
002
003
005
001
002
Oil
012
013
014
015
016
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
Oil
012
013
Reporting Organization
Name
AIR MONIT. SEC. DEPT. OF ENV. PROTECT.
BUREAU OF A. Q. C. DEPT. OF ENV. PROTECT
DIV. OF A. Q. C. DEPT. OF ENV. QUAL . ENG
AIR RESOURCES AGENCY
DIV. OF A. HAZ. MAT. DEPT OF ENV. MANAGE.
AIR & SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS
DEPT. OF ENV.PROT., DIV. OF ENV. QUAL.
DEPT. OF ENV. CONSERV. DIV. OF AIR
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD.
DEPT. OF CONS. AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS
STATE OF DELAWARE DNR & EC
WASHINGTON, DC DC & RA

STATE OF MARYLAND
ALLEGANY COUNTY
ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY
BALTIMORE COUNTY
PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA DER
ALLEGHENY CO. BAPC
PHILADELPHIA AMS
VIRGINIA STATE AIR POLL. CONTROL BOARD
CITY OF ALEXANDRIA
FAIRFAX COUNTY
ROANOKE COUNTY
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
WVA NORTHERN PANHANDLE REGIONAL OFFICE
ALABAMA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AL, JEFFERSON CNTY BUREAU OF ENV. HEALTH
ALABAMA DEPT. OF ENV. MANAGEMENT MOBILE
AL, HUNTSVILLE AIR POLL. CONTROL DEPT.
AL, TRICOUNTY DIV. OF AIR POLL. CONTROL
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY - ALABAMA
FDER, NORTHWEST DISTRICT
FDER, NORTHEAST DISTRICT
FDER, ST. JOHNS RIVER DISTRICT
FDER, SOUTHWEST DISTRICT
FDER, SOUTH FLORIDA DISTRICT
FDER, SOUTHEAST FLORIDA DISTRICT
FDER, NORTHEAST DISTRICT BRANCH OFFICE
FL, JACKSONVILLE B10-ENV. SERVICES DIV.
FL, HILLSBOROUGH CO., ENV. SERVICES DIV.
FL, PINELLAS CO. DEPT OF ENV. MANAGEMENT
               C-l

-------
Region
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05

No.
10
10
10
10
10
11
18
18
18
25
34
34
34
34
42
44
44
44
44
44
44
14
14
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
23
23
24
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
State
Name
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
MISSISSIPPI
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TENNESSEE
TENNESSEE
TENNESSEE
TENNESSEE
TENNESSEE
ILLINOIS
ILLINOIS
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
INDIANA
MICHIGAN
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO
OHIO

No.
014
015
016
017
018
010
001
002
003
100
001
002
003
004
001
001
002
003
004
005
006
001
002
003
001
002
003
005
008
009
010
100
001
002
001
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
012
013
014
Reporting Organization
Name
PL, MANATEE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FL, SARASOTA CO. AIR POLL. CONTROL DIV.
FL, PALM BEACH COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FL, BROWARD CO. ENV. QUAL. CONTROL BOARD
FL, DADE CO. DEPT OF ENV. RESOURCES MGMT
GEORGIA AIR QUAL. EVALUATION SECTION EPD
KENTUCKY DIV. OF AIR POLL. CONTROL
KY, JEFFERSON CO. AIR POLL. CONTROL DIST.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY - KENTUCKY
MISSISSIPPI BUREAU OF POLLUTION CONTROL
NC NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVEL.
NC, FORSYTH COUNTY ENV. AFFAIRS DEPT.
NC, MECKLENBURG CO. DEPT. OF ENV. HEALTH
NC, WESTERN REGIONAL AIR POLL. CONTROL
SC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENV. CONTROL
TENNESSEE DIV. OF AIR POLL. CONTROL
TN, MEMPHIS-SHELBY CO. HEALTH DEPARTMENT
METRO HEALTH DEPT NASHVILLE-DAVIDSON CO.
TN, KNOX COUNTY DEPT. OF AIR POLL. CONTROL
TN, CHATTANOOGA-HAMILTON CO. AIR POLL. CONT
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY - TENNESSEE
DIV. OF AIR POLL. CONT., ILLINOIS EPA
CHICAGO DEPT. OF CONSUMER SERVICES
COOK COUNTY DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONT.
AIR POLL. CONT. DIV. INDIANA STATE
DIV. OF AIR POLL. CONT., EVANSVILLE
ST. JOSEPH COUNTY
AIR POLL. CONT. DIV., VIGO COUNTY
INDIANAPOLIS APC DIVISION
ANDERSON LOCAL AGENCY
PORTER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
LAKE COUNTY CONSOLDTD A Q MONIT WRK GRP
AIR QUAL. DIV., MI. DEPT. OF NAT. RES.
AIR POLL. CONT. DIV., WAYNE COUNTY
MINNESOTA POLL. CONT. AGENCY, AIR MO
OHIO EPA, CENTRAL DIST. OFFICE
OHIO EPA, NORTHEAST DIST. OFFICE
OHIO EPA, NORTHWEST DIST. OFFICE
OHIO EPA, SOUTHEAST DIST. OFFICE
OHIO EPA, SOUTHWEST DIST. OFFICE
AKRON AIR POLL. CONTROL
AIR POLL. CONT. DIV., CANTON CITY
SOUTHWESTERN OHIO AIR POLL. AGENCY
CLEVELAND DIV. OF AIR POLL. AGENCY
REGIONAL APC AGENCY, DAYTON
AIR POLL. CONT. DIV. OF LAKE CNTY.
AIR POLL. UNIT, PORTSMOUTH CITY
NORTH OHIO VALLEY AIR AUTHORITY
C-2

-------
Region
05
05
05
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
08
08
08
08
08
08
08
08
08
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
69

No.
36
36
51
04
04
19
32
32
37
37
37
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
16
16
16
17
26
26
26
26
26
28
28
28
06
27
27
27
27
35
43
46
52
03
03
03
05
05
05
05
12
29
State
Name
OHIO
OHIO
WISCONSIN
ARKANSAS
ARKANSAS
LOUISIANA
NEW MEXICO
NEW MEXICO
OKLAHOMA
OKLAHOMA
OKLAHOMA
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
IOWA
IOWA
IOWA
KANSAS
MISSOURI
MISSOURI
MISSOURI
MISSOURI
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEBRASKA
NEBRASKA
COLORADO
MONTANA
MONTANA
MONTANA
MONTANA
NORTH DAKOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA
UTAH
WYOMING
ARIZONA
ARIZONA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA
HAWAII
NEVADA

No.
015
016
001
001
002
001
001
002
101
102
103
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
001
002
003
001
001
002
003
004
005
001
002
003
001
001
002
003
004
001
001
001
001
100
200
300
001
004
036
061
120
100
Reporting Organization
Name
TOLEDO POLL. CONTROL AGENCY
MAHONING TRUMBULL AIR POLL. CONTROL
WI. DEPT. OF NAT. RES., AIR MONIT. UNIT
DEPT. OF POLL. CONT. & ECOLOGY CONT. MON
DEPT. OF POLL. CONT. & ECOLOGY
DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES, NEW ORLEANS
ENV. IMPROVEMENT DIV., SANTA FE
CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE ENV. HEALTH DIV.
OK STATE DEPT. OF HEALTH
OKLAHOMA CITY-CNTY. HEALTH DEPT.
TULSA CITY-CNTY. HEALTH DEPT.
TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD
DALLAS ENV. HEALTH & CONSERVATION DEPT.
EL PASO CITY-CNTY. HEALTH DEPT.
FT. WORTH PUBLIC HEALTH DEPT.
GALVESTON COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
HOUSTON DEPT. OF PUBLIC HEALTH
SAN ANTONIO METRO. HEALTH DISTRICT
POLK COUNTY PHYSICAL PLANNING
LINN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
UNIVERSITY HYGIENIC LABORATORY
STATE OF KANSAS
LABORATORY SERVICES PROGRAM
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ST. LOUIS CITY
KANSAS CITY
SPRINGFIELD
STATE OF NEBRASKA
LINCOLN
OMAHA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
MT AIR QUAL. BUREAU, DEPT. OF H&ENV.
YELLOWSTONE CNTY. AIR POLL. CONT. AGENCY
GREAT FALLS CITY-CNTY. HEALTH DEPT.
MISSOULA CITY-CNTY HEALTH DEPT.
STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DEPT. OF HEALTH, DIV. OF ENV. HEALTH
STATE BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY
DEPT. OF ENV. QUAL., AIR QUAL DIV
ARIZONA DEPT. OF HEALTH SERVICES
MARICOPA COUNTY
PIMA COUNTY
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
BAY AREA AIR QUAL. MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
SAN DIEGO AIR POLL. CONTROL DISTRICT
SOUTH COAST AIR QUAL. MANAGEMENT DIST.
STATE OF HAWAII, DEPT. OF HEALTH
NEVADA DIV. OF ENV. PROTECTION
C-3

-------
Region
09
09
09
10
10
10
10

No.
29
29
54
02
13
38
49
State
Name
NEVADA
NEVADA
GUAM
ALASKA
IDAHO
OREGON
WASHINGTON
Reporting Organizations
No.
200
300
100
020
001
001
001
Name
WASHOE COUNTY
CLARK COUNTY
GUAM EPA
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL




CONSERVATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELFARE
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DEPT. OF ECOLOGY
QUALITY

C-4

-------
                      APPENDIX D




PRECISION AND ACCURACY DATA BY REPORTING ORGANIZATION
                         D-i

-------
 Explanation of Column Heading Abbreviations for Tables D-l,  D-2, D-3, D-4
                            (Continuous Methods)
     Column
No.    Heading abbreviation

 1     REPORTING ORGAN.

       STATE

       REGION
            Explanation
2
3
4
5

6
7
8
9

10
11

12
13

14
15

16
17
NO. SLAMS
NO. NAMS
NO. ANAL
NO. PREC. *
PR. LIMITS
LOW
UP
NO. AUDS
NO AUDS L4
LEVEL 1
LOW
UP
LEVEL 2
LOW
UP
LEVEL 3
LOW
UP
LEVEL 4
LOW
UP
Reporting organization SLAMS number

Two letter state abbreviation

EPA regional office number (RGO#)

Number of SLAMS sites, not including NAMS

Number of NAMS sites

Number of analyzers

Number of precision checks performed and
reported

Probability limits

Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits

Number of accuracy audits per

Number of audits of level 4



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits



Lower probability limits

Upper probability 'limits

   D-2

-------
         TABLE D-l.
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   07001     5  0
   XXCT      5  0
CO PRECISION AND ACCURACY  ANNUAL VALUES FOR
REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS

        AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
XXNH
41001
**RI
47001
XXVT
XRG01
31001
XXNJ
33001
XXNY
40001
**PR
XRG02
08001
xxDE
09001
XXDC
21001
XXMD
39001
39002
39003
XXPA
48001
48002
48003
48005
XXVA
50001
50002
XXWV
1
1
4
4
2
2
0
0
1
1
13
9
9
4
4
1
1
14
2
2
1
1
5
5
17
0
4
21
6
0
4
0
10
1
2
3
0
0
4
4
0
0
2
2
0
0
6
2
2
7
7
2
2
11
0
0
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
4
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
	 PRECISION 	 	
NO.
NO.
ANAL
20
20
4
4
32
32
8
8
8
8
4
4
76
41
41
58
58
11
11
110
9
9
12
12
28
28
87
8
24
119
32
16
16
16
80
4
8
12
PREC.
CHECKS
128
128
36
36
368
368
214
214
170
170
223
223
1,139
326
326
444
444
121
121
891
57
57
98
98
269
269
525
93
147
765
223
113
95
113
544
25
95
120
PR.LINS
LOU
-08
-08
-04
-04
-07
-07
-10
-10
-04
-04
-05
-05
-07
-09
-09
-05
-05
-09
-09
-07
-10
-10
-07
-07
-10
-10
-09
-05
-10
-09
-05
-05
-12
-05
-07
-05
-13
-13
UP
+ 11
+ 11
+ 07
+ 07
+ 09
+ 09
+ 06
+ 06
+ 06
+ 06
+ 06
+ 06
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 06
+ 06
+ 10
+ 10
+ 07
+ 09
+ 09
+ 04
+ 04
+ 09
+ 09
+ 11
+ 07
+ 07
+ 10
+ 05
+ 06
+ 07
+ 06
+ 06
+ 07
+ 04
+ 06
NO.
AUDS
6
6
2
2
13
13
23
23
8
8
5
5
57
12
12
77
77
8
8
97
8
8
8
8
29
29
22
17
8
47
8
4
10
4
26
4
7
11
NO.
AUDS
L4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


	 A(

LEVEL 1
LOU
-14
-14
-01
-01
-05
-05
+ 00
+ 00
-04
-04
-05
-05
-06
-11
-11
-07
-07
-30
-30
-11
-06
-06
-04
-04
-15
-15
-13
-10
-09
-11
-06
-02
-04
-02
-04
-09
-14
-12
UP
+ 13
+ 13
+ 17
+ 17
+ 11
+ 11
+ 10
+ 10
+ 03
+ 03
+ 02
+ 02
+ 11
+ 09
+ 09
+ 10
+ 10
+20
+ 20
+ 12
+ 06
+ 06
+ 04
+ 04
+ 14
+ 14
+ 10
+ 07
+ 06
+ 08
+ 05
+ 03
+ 05
+ 03
+ 04
-01
+ 07
+ 05
;CUKACT 	
"ROBABILITY 1
LEVEL 2
LOU
-04
-04
-06
-06
-03
-03
-05
-05
-03
-03
-03
-03
-05
-05
-05
-04
-04
-21
-21
-06
-09
-09
-04
-04
-12
-12
-11
-05
-07
-09
-05
-04
-06
-04
-06
-06
-09
-08
UP
+ 05
+ 05
+ 15
+ 15
+ 08
+ 08
+ 09
+ 09
+ 01
+ 01
-01
-01
+ 08
+ 11
+ 11
+ 07
+ 07
+ 16
+ 16
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 02
+ 02
+ 08
+ 08
+ 05
+ 04
+ 07
+ 06
+ 02
+ 02
+ 09
+ 02
+ 06
+ 01
+ 05
+ 04

.ini 1 3 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU
-05
-05
-07
-07
-04
-04
-06
-06
-04
-04
+ 00
+ 00
-06
-05
-05
-03
-03
-13
-13
-05
-10
-10
-04
-04
-10
-10
-09
-05
-07
-07
-04
-05
-05
-05
-06
-07
-10
-09
UP LOU UP
+ 03
+ 03
+ 13
+ 13
+ 05
+ 05
+ 08
+ 08
+ 01
+ 01
+ 01
+ 01
+ 06
+ 08
+ 08
+ 03
+ 03
+ 07
+ 07
+ 05
+ 07
+ 07
+ 02
+ 02
+ 07
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 01
+ 02
+ 08
+ 02
+ 05
+ 00
+ 04
+ 03
   XRG03
           42  10
                     260  1,853  -09 +09   129
                         0 -11 +09 -09 +06 -08 +05

                               (continued)
                                      D-3

-------
                           TABLE  D-l  (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
REPORTING

ORGAN
STATE NO.
REGION SLAM
01011
01012
01013
XXAL
10001
10003
10011
10012
10013
10016
10017
10018
x*FL
11010
XXGA
18001
18002
xxKY
25100
xxMS
34001
34002
34003
XXNC
42001
xxSC
44002
44003
44004
44005
XXTN
1
0
2
3
1
2
3
3
3
1
3
3
19
4
4
7
1
8
1
1
4
2
3
9
2
2
3
3
1
1
8
NO.
NAMS
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
2
0
2
2
10
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
4
NO.
ANAL
0
16
0
16
4
8
20
20
20
4
20
16
112
21
21
24
12
36
4
4
13
8
20
41
8
8
20
20
5
4
49
NO.
PREC. PR.LIMS
CHECKS LOW UP
0
93
0
93
50
47
580
130
141
54
120
98
1,220
176
176
145
50
195
32
32
76
53
130
259
143
143
175
116
33
71
395

-13

-13
-10
-27
-04
-11
-04
-18
-07
-05
-09
-10
-10
-10
-12
-10
-09
-09
-07
-08
-06
-07
-12
-12
-05
-11
-03
-05
-09

+ 06

+ 06
+ 05
+ 05
+ 04
+ 09
+ 04
+ 09
+ 05
+ 06
+ 07
+ 03
+ 03
+ 05
+ 11
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 09
+ 09
+ 04
-01
+ 04
+ 02
+ 04
NO.
AUDS
0
6
0
6
6
6
25
7
25
6
8
7
91
9
9
24
4
28
4
4
13
8
59
80
47
47
33
28
11
9
81
NO
AUD
L4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


S LEVEL
LOU U

-03

-03
-04
-09
-09
-19
-07
-17
-44
-27
-17
-24
-24
-17
-23
-17
-11
-11
-15
-13
-10
-11
-23
-23
-11
-18
-07
-09
-13

+ 11

+ 11
+ 05
+ 04
+ 10
+ 10
+ 07
+ 16
+ 43
+ 14
+ 15
+ 04
+ 04
+ 15
+ 10
+ 14
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 07
+ 07
+ 08
+ 12
+ 12
+ 06
+ 09
+ 07
+ 06
+ 08

ACCU
-PRO
1 LE
P LO

-04

-04
-03
-05
-04
-25
-05
-03
-04
-26
-10
-07
-07
-09
-06
-08
-05
-05
-07
-03
-02
-03
-09
-09
-06
-15
-02
-06
-10
KH\.l""
BABILITY
VEL 2 LE
M UP LO

+ 10

+ 10
+ 05
+ 02
+ 09
+ 16
+ 06
+ 05
+ 10
+ 13
+ 10
+ 02
+ 02
+ 07
+ 08
+ 07
+ 08
+ 08
+ 05
+ 04
+ 05
+ 06
+ 07
+ 07
+ 05
+ 08
+ 03
+ 04
+ 07




-04
-05
-06
-28
-04
-05
-03
-25
-10
-05
-05
-07
-03
-07
-04
-04
-07
-03
-03
-04
-08
-08
-05
-03
-04
-03
-04
1 TMTTC«*.
VEL 3 LEVEL 4
Ul UP LOU UP




+ 03
+ 02
+ 09
+ 16
+ 06
+ 05
+ 05
+ 11
+ 10
+ 03
+ 03
+ 06
+ 06
+ 06
+ 05
+ 05
+ 04
+ 04
+ 04
+ 04
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 04
+ 04
+ 06
+ 05
XRG04

14001
14003
XXIL

15001
15002
15008
23001
23002
54  22

 7   1
 4   1
11   2
287  2,513   -09 +07
 35    366
 20    107
 55    473
-11  +05
-11  +08
-11  +05
            15
             1
            11
            27

            20
            24
            44
        77   -11  +08
         2   -07  +14
        66   -06  +03
       145   -09  +06

       122   -07  +08
       142   -15  +09
       264   -12  +10
346    0  -16  +11  -08 +08 -07 +06

  9    0  -09  +07  -08 +07 -08 +05
 11    0  -18  +11  -10 +07 -09 +06
 20    0  -15  +10  -09 +07 -08 +05

  9    0  -39  +22  -12 +11 -07 +10
  0    0
 11    0  -09  +09  -05 +09 -04 +04
 20    0  -26  +19  -08 +10 -06 +07

  8    0  -10  +08  -05 +02 -07 +03
  9    0  -16  +11  -03 +08 -04 +07
 17    0  -13  +09  -05 +06 -06 +06
24001     92      49    386  -11 +06    21     0  -21 +17 -13 +12 -12 +08
XXMN      92      49    386  -11 +06    21     0  -21 +17 -13 +12 -12 +08
                                                      (continued)
                                      D-4

-------
                          TABLE D-l  (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED  ANALYZERS
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE
poefTCTftM * ***ma * t*\*
un
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM NAMS
36001
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36014
36015
36016
XXOH
51001
XXUJ
1
0
1
3
0
0
1
1
2
1
10
4
4
2
2
0
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
10
2
2
nu .
NO. PREC.
ANAL CHECKS
12
8
4
20
8
8
4
3
8
4
79
27
27
78
49
22
120
46
50
34
3
83
23
508
160
160
PR. L IMS
LOU
-07
-10
-11
-06
-06
-04
-14
+ 00
-08
-05
-08
-07
-07
UP
+ 10
+ 07
+ 10
+ 09
+ 04
+ 05
+ 08
+ 00
+ 02
+ 05
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
un
nu .
NO. AUDS
AUDS
5
5
4
6
4
4
4
4
4
4
44
6
6
L4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

LEVEL 1
LOU
-08
-22
-16
-19
-14
-11
-12
-09
-09
-05
-14
-12
-12
UP
+ 15
+ 10
+ 07
+ 16
+ 10
+ 13
+20
+ 03
-05
+ 04
+ 12
+21
+21

LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU
-07
-14
-06
-19
-19
-12
-08
+ 00
-07
-09
-11
-06
-06
UP
+ 11
+ 09
+ 03
+ 15
+ 14
+ 08
+ 15
+ 00
-02
+ 05
+ 09
+07
+ 07
LOU
-05
-09
-09
-16
-11
-06
-04
-04
-08
-07
-09
-03
-03
UP LOU UP
+ 07
+ 12
+ 03
+ 08
+ 03
+ 00
+ 10
+ 03
+ 00
+ 01
+ 06
+ 00
+ 00
XRG05
         49  20
                    281   1,936  -10 +07
                                         128    0 -18 +14 -10 +09 -09  +07
04001
XXAR
19001
XXLA
32001
32002
x*NM
37101
37102
37103
XXOK
45001
45002
45003
45006
XXTX
0
0
1
1
4
3
7
2
0
2
4
2
0
1
1
4
0
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
2
0
2
5
2
0
1
8
1
1
12
12
16
18
34
8
8
8
24
44
8
3
6
61
6
6
74
74
83
100
183
45
45
44
134
2,307
58
20
33
2,418
-03
-03
-12
-12
-08
-06
-07
-19
-15
-06
-14
-07
-13
-05
-11
-07
+ 01
+ 01
+ 05
+ 05
+ 08
+ 06
+ 07
+ 14
+ 09
+04
+ 10
+ 06
+ 12
+ 19
+ 05
+ 07
1
1
4
4
9
19
28
4
10
10
24
72
8
3
6
89
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
XRG06
28002
         16   14
                    132   2,815  -08 +07
16001
16002
16003
XXIA
17001
*XKS
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
*XMO
2
2
1
5
3
3
0
2
4
2
1
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
4
8
5
4
17
12
12
4
20
13
11
3
51
75
32
27
134
64
64
16
139
90
59
17
321
-08
-08
-12
-09
-08
-08
-08
-16
-50
-10
-05
-31
+ 04
+ 08
+ 10
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 13
+ 13
+ 13
+ 16
+ 08
+21
9
11
5
25
9
9
4
7
6
7
4
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
                           52  -01 +01
                                                0 -13 +01 -10 -01 -04  +00
                                                0 -13 +01 -10 -01 -04  +00

                                                0 -11 +15 -04 +11 -06  +07
                                                0 -11 +07 -08 +04 -09  +04
                                                0 -11 +10 -08 +08 -09  +06

                                                  +10 +16 +05 +12 -20  +15
                                                  -25 +15 -09 +09 -08  +11
                                                0 -30 +41 -08 +11 -01  +05
                                                0 -28 +31 -08 +11 -07  +09

                                                0 -22 +23 -15 +15 -17  +15
                                                0 -20 +14 -18 +12 -13  +18
                                                  +02 +14 -07 +03 +00  +03
                                                0 -18 +06 -14 +07 -08  +07
                                                0 -21 +21 -15 +14 -16  +15
                                         146    0 -21 +21 -13 +13 -14  +13
                                                  -17 +15 -05 +01 -02  +03
                                                  -14 +09 -09 +10 -14  +10
                                                  -20 +00 -07 +04 -03  +01
                                                  -17 +10 -08 +06 -10  +08

                                                0 -10 +07 -07 +04 -06  +03
                                                0 -10 +07 -07 +04 -06  +03

                                                  +04 +04 -01 +11 +02  +03
                                                  -16 +10 -05 +06 -04  +03
                                                  -18 +38 -11 +27 -13  +22
                                                  -56 +71 -20 +17 -16  +06
                                                  -14 -11 -11 -07 -09  -07
                                                  -34 +39 -15 +17 -14  +12
                                                0 -06 +02 -01  +00  -01  +00

                                                       (continued)
                                       D-5

-------
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAMS
   28003     2  ' 0
   XXNB      4   0
                             TABLE  D-l  (Continued)
                                AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
   XRG07
            21
16001
XXCO
27001
27003
27004
XXflT
46001
XXUT
*RG08
03100
03200
03300
xxAZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
XXCA
12120
xxHI
29100
29200
29300
*XNV
XRG09
02020
XVAK
13001
XXID
38001
XXOR
49001
xxUA
11
11
1
1
1
3
7
7
21
4
7
1
12
24
3
5
20
52
0
0
2
2
2
6
70
5
5
2
2
5
5
14
14
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
4
0
2
2
4
2
4
2
4
12
2
2
0
0
1
1
19
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2

NO.
ANAL
8
16
96
52
52
3
4
1
8
39
39
99
8
29
12
49
84
64
26
96
270
6
6
7
8
10
18
343
18
18
3
3
28
28
56
56
-rKtC15J
NO.
PREC.
CHECKS
40
92
611
282
282
29
37
22
88
425
425
795
57
86
70
213
452
407
149
587
1,595
108
108
7
54
62
116
2,032
106
106
19
19
367
367
637
637
.UN--

PR. LIMS
LOU
-09
-06
-23
-10
-10
-12
-16
-03
-18
-04
-04
-09
-09
-11
-04
-09
-11
-04
-04
-04
-07
-14
-14
???
-08
-05
-07
-08
-03
-03
-09
-09
-04
-04
-08
-08
UP
+ 08
+ 05
+ 17
+ 08
+ 08
+ 31
+ 04
+ 12
+ 21
+ 04
+ 04
+ 09
+ 04
+ 07
+ 06
+ 07
+ 15
+ 04
+ 06
+ 10
+ 11
+ 18
+ 18
???
+ 06
+ 03
+ 05
+ 11
+ 04
+ 04
+ 05
+ 05
+ 07
+ 07
+ 01
+ 01

NO.
AUDS
5
11
73
20
20
2
5
2
9
31
31
60
4
6
6
16
38
32
5
24
99
227
227
7
8
5
13
355
13
13
3
3
68
68
40
40
NO.


	 A

AUDS LEVEL I
L4
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
5
0
0
7
0
3
3
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LOU
-10
-08
-23
-11
-11
+ 04
+ 06

+ 05
-06
-06
-09
-34
-17
-05
-21
-14
-09
-23
-04
-12
-25
-25
777
-09
-01
-07
-21
-13
-13
-05
-05
-18
-18
-08
-08
UP
+ 05
+ 04
+ 21
+ 22
+ 22
+ 20
+ 11

+ 15
+ 09
+ 09
+ 16
+ 14
+ 10
+ 01
+ 11
+ 14
+ 09
+ 06
+ 16
+ 14
+24
+ 24
777
+ 08
+ 02
+ 06
+ 21
+ 11
+ 11
+ 05
+ 05
+ 10
+ 10
+ 05
+ 05
CCUR
PROB
ACY 	
ABILITY
LEVEL 2
LOU
-08
-05
-10
-03
-03
-10
+ 02

-02
-05
-05
-05
-05
-06
-03
-05
-09
-03
-08
-03
-07
-08
-08
777
-05
-07
-07
-08
-03
-03
-04
-04
-07
-07
-07
-07
UP
+ 03
+ 03
+ 09
+ 10
+ 10
+ 20
+ 06

+ 11
+ 06
+ 06
+ 09
+ 03
+ 05
+ 01
+ 03
+ 09
+ 02
+ 02
+ 13
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
777
+ 03
+ 14
+ 09
+ 09
+ 03
+ 03
-01
-01
+ 05
+ 05
+ 03
+ 03
LIMI
LEVEL 3
LOU
-07
-06
-10
-03
-03
-17
-03

-07
-07
-07
-06
-01
-05
-04
-04
-08
-03
-06
-04
-07
-10
-10
177
-03
-02
-03
-09
-04
-04
-02
-02
-06
-06
-04
-04
UP
+ 01
+ 02
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+23
+ 08

+ 13
+ 06
+ 06
+ 08
+ 02
+ 05
+ 01
+ 03
+ 07
+ 01
+ 01
+ 09
+ 06
+ 08
+ 08
777
+ 02
+ 04
+ 03
+ 07
+ 03
+ 03
-01
-01
+ 02
+ 02
+ 02
+ 02
•r f

LEVEL 4
LOW UP



+01 +03
+01 +03






+01 +03
+00 +01


+00 +01


-07 +02

-07 +02




-01 +03
-01 +03
-05 +04








   XRG10     26   4

   NATION  326  114
  105  1,129  -08 +06   124    0  -15 +09 -07 +04 -06 +03

1,789 15,714  -10 +09 1,515   14  -18 +16 -09 +09 -08 +07 -03  +05
                                         D-6

-------
TABLE D-2.  CONTINUOUS  S02  PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES
            FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
                         AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE
_ Bnp/*v*vnfcj A«**kim*4*«*


NO. NO.
REGION SLAM HAMS
50001
50002
xxwv
XRG03
01011
01012
01013
01015
01016
**AL
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10007
10011
10012
10013
10015
10016
10018
XXFL
11010
xxGA
18001
18002
18003
XXKY
25100
XXMS
34001
34002
34003
XXNC
42001
XXSC
44001
44002
44003
44006
xxTN
XRG04
14001
14003
XXH
2
3
5
40
1
1
0
1
0
3
1
3
2
1
0
0
3
3
1
0
1
2
17
10
10
8
0
0
8
2
2
«
1
0
5
4
4
2
1
0
0
3
52
9
6
15
3
3
6
43
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
5
1
1
0
4
0
*
2
2
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
16
11
3
14

NO.
r ncwi 9
Nn
nu .
PREC.
ANAL CHECKS
17
24
41
387
0
3
8
4
40
55
4
11
7
4
3
8
16
27
16
4
4
4
108
34
34
32
16
45
93
14
14
56
4
4
64
26
26
12
4
4
134
154
548
84
34
118
106
279
385
2,824
0
13
39
4
2,283
2,339
54
119
48
56
17
35
498
158
205
30
50
39
1,309
298
298
189
95
3,847
4,131
146
146
431
19
22
472
272
272
169
37
24
8,963
9,193
18,160
972
170
1,142

PR. LIMS
LOU UP
-06 +10
-09 +07
-09 +08
-12 +09

-30 +07
-22 +20
-06 +02
-09 +14
-09 +15
-11 +04
-19 +19
-21 +08
-23 +08
-22 +00
-18 +09
-10 +01
-15 +02
-11 +03
-17 +10
-16 +08
-21 +22
-15 +07
-27 +13
-27 +13
-19 +02
-16 +13
-12 +11
-12 +11
-19 +07
-19 +07
-09 +05
-17 +03
-22 +02
-11 +06
-11 +09
-11 +09
-07 +05
-11 +06
-14 +02
-09 +13
-09 +12
-12 +13
-14 +12
-20 +14
-15 +12

NO.
AUDS
17
24
41
232
0
4
3
0
8
15
6
7
6
6
5
6
22
7
20
1
6
6
98
12
12
41
5
20
66
11
11
25
3
7
35
115
115
11
8
8
59
86
438
22
13
35


1 YMT T £
AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
L4 LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP
3 -04
0 -11
3 -09
4 -14
0
0 -34
0 -06
0
8 -13
8 -27
0 -05
1 -30
0 -14
0 -71
0 -13
1 -40
0 -15
0 -16
2 -14
0
0 -05
0 -39
4 -26
1 -25
1 -25
1 -26
0 -03
16 -24
17 -25
0 -24
0 -24
3 -13
0 -06
0 -28
3 -23
0 -16
0 -16
3 -11
0 -18
0 -12
54 -13
57 -13
90 -21
0 -09
0 -18
0 -13
+12 -03
+14 -09
+13 -07
+12 -10

-09 -25
+12 -07

+11 -10
+16 -14
+10 -02
+32 -26
+00 -19
+41 -03
+18 -19
+16 -37
+09 -12
+07 -08
+05 -09

+12 -01
-10 -39
+16 -20
+29 -24
+29 -24
+14 -20
+08 +00
+19 -14
+16 -18
+01 -23
+01 -23
+09 -11
+23 -03
-09 -23
+13 -18
+13 -10
+13 -10
+07 -18
+13 -19
+03 -12
+08 -12
+08 -13
+14 -16
+10 -07
+09 -13
+11 -11
+06 -04
+10 -07
+09 -06
+09 -10

+13 -22
+02 -21

+10 -09
+10 -16
+11 -07
+40 -29
+20 -14
+30 -09
+27 -02
+22 -40
+06 -12
+07 -13
+06 -10

+13 -02
-05 -40
+18 -21
+25 -15
+25 -15
+10 -19
+09 +00
+13 -10
+12 -17
+00 -23
+00 -23
+07 -09
+04 +03
-07 -21
+09 -16
+11 -10
+11 -10
+14 -12
+14 -20
+09 -12
+10 -10
+11 -12
+14 -16
+11 -08
+06 -14
+11 -12
+ 05
+ 09
+ 07
+ 09

+ 01
+ 07

+ 08
+ 09
+ 07
+41
+ 14
+52
+ 16
+26
+ 09
+ 08
+ 07

+ 12
-06
+21
+ 23
+23
+ 07
+ 07
+ 10
+ 10
-01
-01
+ 06
+ 04
-06
+ 09
+ 10
+ 10
+ 04
+ 12
+ 12
+ 09
+ 09
+ 13
+12
+ 04
+ 11
-03 +08

-03 +08
-15 +07




-07 +04
-07 +04

















-08 +06
-08 +06


-12 +07


-12 +07


-09 +03


-10 +09
-10 +09
-09 +08



                                              (continued)
                                D-7

-------
                           TABLE  D-2  (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
  07001    11   2
           11   2
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
20001
xxriE
22001
XXHA
30001
XXNH
41001
xxRI
47001
*XVT
XRG01
31001
XXNJ
33001
xxNY
40001
XXPR
55001
XXVI
XRG02
08001
XXDE
09001
XXDC
21001
21003
21005
XXMD
39001
39002
39003
XXPA
48001
48002
48003
48005
xxVA
0
0
6
6
4
4
1
1
2
2
24
6
6
18
18
3
3
3
3
30
7
7
0
0
1
2
0
3
14
2
2
18
3
0
4
0
7
2
2
11
11
1
1
4
4
1
1
21
8
8
18
18
0
0
0
0
26
1
1
2
2
5
0
0
5
12
5
5
22
7
0
0
0
7
NO.
NO.
ANAL
51
51
8
8
68
68
19
19
16
16
12
12
174
55
55
152
152
9
9
7
216
32
32
8
8
24
8
3
35
119
28
28
175
40
20
16
20
96
PREC.
CHECKS
342
342
99
99
696
696
447
447
446
446
100
100
2,130
406
406
856
856
96
96
7
7
1,358
202
202
52
52
230
48
17
295
733
315
175
1,223
274
143
107
143
667
PR.
LOU
-12
-12
-08
-08
-10
-10
-15
-15
-09
-09
-10
-10
-11
-13
-13
-07
-07
-13
-13
777
-09
-10
-10
-15
-15
-13
-16
-12
-13
-10
-09
-16
-11
-11
-11
-17
-11
-12
LIMS
UP
+ 08
+ 08
+ 06
+ 06
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 07
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 09
+ 13
+ 13
+ 07
+ 07
+ 08
+ 08
777
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 05
+ 05
+ 11
+ 11
+ 04
+ 10
+ 11
+ 08
+ 05
+ 10
+ 06
+ 07
+ 06
+ 07
+ 06
NO.


	 A

NO. AUDS LEVEL 1
AUDS
21
21
16
16
21
21
50
50
12
12
7
7
127
28
28
249
249
10
10
7
7
287
9
9
8
8
26
10
4
40
30
67
8
105
10
4
11
4
29
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
LOU
-13
-13
-05
-05
-12
-12
-09
-09
-13
-13
-08
-08
-11
-09
-09
-09
-09
-26
-26
777
777
-10
-13
-13
-17
-17
-19
-19
-19
-19
-14
-10
-21
-13
-08
-10
-11
-10
-10
UP
+ 13
+ 13
+ 13
+ 13
+ 09
+ 09
+ 06
+ 06
+ 08
+ 08
+ 09
+ 09
+ 10
+ 09
+ 09
+ 12
+ 12
+ 14
+ 14
777
777
+ 12
+ 10
+ 10
+ 13
+ 13
+ 17
+ 14
+ 17
+ 16
+ 13
+ 08
+ 04
+ 10
+ 03
+ 03
+ 05
+ 03
+ 03
CCUK
PROB
ACT 	
ABILITY
LEVEL 2
LOU
-11
-11
-07
-07
-12
-12
-09
-09
-10
-10
-09
-09
-10
-08
-08
-06
-06
-25
-25
777
777
-07
-09
-09
-05
-05
-10
-17
-19
-13
-12
-05
-17
-09
-06
-09
-13
-09
-10
UP
+ 08
+ 08
+ 16
+ 16
+ 09
+ 09
+ 08
+ 08
+ 07
+ 07
+ 08
+ 08
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 23
+23
777
777
+ 11
+ 09
+ 09
+ 11
+ 11
+ 10
+ 16
+ 12
+ 12
+ 08
+ 05
+ 04
+ 07
+ 01
+ 03
+ 09
+ 03
+ 05
1 TMTTC — — . ~ ~ •.

LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU
-10
-10
-04
-04
-12
-12
-10
-10
-07
-07
-07
-07
-10
-13
-13
-09
-09
-13
-13
-09
-10
-10
-06
-06
-09
-16
-17
-11
-10
-10
-17
-11
-08
-11
-12
-11
-11
UP LOU UP
+ 09
+ 09
+ 12
+ 12
+ 11
+ 11
+ 07
+ 07
+ 07
+ 07
+ 07
+ 07
+ 09
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 19
+ 19
+ 10
+ 12
+ 12
+ 08
+ 08
+08
+ 16
+ 14
+ 11
+ 09
+08 -15 +02
+ 05
+08 -15 +02
+ 01
+ 04
+ 09
+ 04
+ 05
                                                     (continued)
                                      D-8

-------
                            TABLE  D-2 (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
15001
15002
15008
15010
15100
XXIN
23001
23002
XXMI
24001
xxflN
36001
36002
36003
36004
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36013
36014
36015
36016
XXQH
51001
x*UI
XRG05
04001
XXAR
19001
**LA
32001
32002
XXN.1
37101
37102
37103
xxOK
45001
45002
45003
45006
x*TX
7
1
3
0
0
11
2
4
6
3
3
0
2
2
2
0
0
4
0
1
2
3
3
0
0
19
5
5
59
1
1
8
a
10
0
10
5
1
1
7
6
1
1
1
9
6
0
0
0
0
6
7
4
11
13
13
2
3
1
0
2
2
2
5
1
0
0
1
3
2
24
13
13
81
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
4

NO.
ANAL
52
5
12
4
4
77
38
25
63
46
46
8
19
8
7
13
8
27
20
8
8
0
11
12
8
150
67
67
521
8
8
24
24
31
4
35
19
1
8
28
96
4
3
15
118
TKtCISJ
NO.
PREC.
CHECKS
250
27
76
29
17
399
200
119
319
520
520
45
97
74
7
66
43
162
116
54
52
0
53
135
49
946
436
436
3,762
47
47
136
136
169
11
180
75
3
32
110
4,872
29
20
89
5,010
.UN 	
PR.LIMS
LOU UP
-14 +09
-17 +06
-11 +09
-05 +12
-19 +12
-14 +09
-14 +11
-20 +09
-17 +11
-12 +11
-12 +11
-09 +10
-16 +12
-13 +13
777 777
-20 +05
-09 +10
-10 +10
-19 +20
-16 +08
-11 +06

-10 +14
-11 +10
-11 +09
-14 +12
-12 +08
-12 +08
-14 +11
-09 +05
-09 +05
-20 +09
-20 +09
-12 +09
-23 +05
-13 +09
-28 +14
-12 +16
-14 +08
-24 +13
-08 +05
-21 +11
-11 +13
-16 +08
-09 +05

NO.
AUDS
24
10
12
2
8
56
13
9
22
26
26
4
4
0
7
3
4
8
6
4
6
4
6
2
4
55
18
18
212
8
8
7
7
13
6
19
6
2
8
16
162
4
3
14
183
	 ACCURACY 	
Ufl _______ P DAB A B T 1 T TV 1 TMTT*

AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
L4 LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP
0 -17 +11 -11 +10 -12 +11
0 -14 +11 -12 +10 -11 +12
0 -13 +15 -13 +14 -13 +12
0 -03 +15 -04 +11 -0^ +07
0 -13 +06 -09 +04 -07 +04
0 -15 +12 -11 +10 -11 +10
0 -16 +10 -11 +09 -11 +09
0 -17 +15 -15 +15 -12 +08
0 -17 +12 -13 +11 -11 +09
2 -13 +12 -09 +08 -09 +06
2 -13 +12 -09 +08 -09 +06
0 -03 +14 +02 +15 +07 +14
0 -67 +26 -61 +43 -24 -21
0
7 777 777 777 777 777 777
0 -36 +12 -30 +10 -35 +24
0 -25 +22 -26 +24 -24 +21
0 -09 +14 -05 +10 -11 +14
0 -27 +04 -26 +07 -26 +04
0 -18 +05 -17 +09 -12 +05
0 -19 +24 -16 +17 -21 +19
0 -05 +12 -02 +18 +00 +15
0 -33 +28 -18 +08 -18 +09
0 -21 +35 -17 +28 -14 +21
0 -25 +31 -16 +11 -13 +07
0 -27 +23 -22 +20 -20 +17
3 -14 +15 -16 +14 -14 +12
3 -14 +15 -16 +14 -14 +12
5 -18 +15 -15 +14 -14 +12
0 -23 -01 -18 +03 -17 +05
0 -23 -01 -18 +03 -17 +05
0 -25 +22 -19 +23 -19 +22
0 -25 +22 -19 +23 -19 +22
0 -11 +04 -11 +06 -13 +06
0 -23 +05 -18 +08 -18 +04
0 -15 +05 -12 +06 -14 +05
0 -17 +19 -17 +19 -19 +22
0 -21 +28 +07 +14 -11 +17
0 -21 +16 -20 +17 -19 +18
0 -18 +17 -18 +19 -17 +18
11 -21 +29 -11 +17 -11 +15
0 -08 +04 -11 +05 -07 +04
1 -01 +01 -06 +04 -11 +09
0 -16 +12 -17 +11 -20 +14
12 -21 +28 -12 +16 -12 +15

LEVEL 4
LOU UP









-05 +01
-05 +01















-13 +05
-13 +05
-09 +04











-14 +07

+00 +12

-14 +07
                                                    (continued)
                                     D-9

-------
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   XRG06    35   7
                           TABLE  D-2 (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
16001
16002
16003
**IA
17001
XXKS
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
XXMO
28003
XXNB
XRG07
06001
XXCO
27001
XXMT
35001
xxND
46001
XXUT
XRG08
03100
03200
03300
XXAZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
x*CA
12120
xxHI
54100
XXQU
XRG09
13001
**ID
0
1
1
2
0
0
4
2
4
1
1
12
0
0
14
1
1
0
0
4
4
4
4
9
10
0
1
11
15
7
6
14
42
7
7
6
6
66
3
3
0
1
2
3
2
2
0
2
1
1
0
4
1
1
10
2
2
1
1
0
0
2
2
5
0
1
1
2
2
2
0
6
10
0
0
0
0
12
0
0

NO.
ANAL
213
2
2
17
21
8
8
30
22
10
8
4
74
2
2
105
8
8
8
8
16
16
24
24
56
40
2
8
50
68
36
19
80
203
7
7
7
7
253
12
12
TKCtiSJ
un
PlU .
PREC.
CHECKS
5,483
8
14
81
103
43
43
162
119
60
49
20
410
5
5
561
52
52
87
87
88
88
271
271
498
297
3
38
338
362
228
61
506
1,157
7
7
7
7
1,495
140
140
.un--

PR.LIMS
LOU
-10
-14
-03
-11
-11
-32
-32
-24
-11
-20
-14
-17
-19
-14
-14
-20
-25
-25
-09
-09
-10
-10
-08
-08
-12
-12
-10
-11
-12
-17
-19
-13
-18
-18
777
77?
777
77?
-17
-07
-07
UP
+ 06
+21
+ 04
+ 08
+ 09
+ 31
+ 31
+ 11
+ 08
+ 23
+ 10
+ 10
+ 13
+ 07
+ 07
+ 15
+ 16
+ 16
+ 18
+ 18
+ 04
+ 04
+ 07
+ 07
+ 11
+ 04
+ 04
+ 10
+ 05
+ 09
+ 04
+ 14
+ 07
+ 08
77?
777
77?
77 7
+ 08
+ 07
+ 07

NO.
AUDS
253
1
0
16
17
4
4
9
7
6
6
6
34
2
2
57
8
8
15
15
16
16
24
24
63
19
0
6
25
24
18
6
20
68
7
7
7
7
93
10
10

	 Atl.UKAl.T-- 	
BnnBiBTg TW
AUDS LEVEL 1
L4
12
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
15
15
0
0
12
12
27
6
0
0
6
0
0
6
0
6
7
7
7
7
12
8
8
LOU
-22


-17
-17
-39
-39
-56
-15
-13
-37
-04
-37
+ 01
+ 01
-31
-17
-17
-45
-45
-12
-12
-10
-10
-23
-18

-13
-18
-15
-12
-38
-30
-23
???
77?
777
777
-22
-10
-10
UP
+ 26


+ 12
+ 12
+ 11
+ 11
+ 30
+ 21
+ 30
+ 16
+ 04
+ 28
+ 09
+ 09
+ 23
+20
+ 20
+ 35
+ 35
+ 13
+ 13
+ 08
+ 08
+21
+ 08

+ 14
+ 10
+27
+ 12
+ 23
+ 19
+23
77?
77?
77?
77?
+20
+ 04
+ 04

LEVEL Z LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP
-13 +16


-21 +23
-21 +23
-30 +18
-30 +18
-34 +17
-02 +11
-08 +23
-14 +08
-06 +12
-22 +20
-fl4 +04
-04 +04
-21 +20
-15 +22
-15 +22
-13 +15
-13 +15
-13 +09
-13 +09
-09 +09
-09 +09
-12 +13
-15 +04

-12 +12
-15 +06
-14 +24
-13 +10
-20 +14
-21 +16
-18 +19
77? 77?
77? 77?
777 77?
77? 77?
-18 +16
-07 +05
-07 +05
LOU
-13


-22
-22
-21
-21
-26
-03
-08
-09
-08
-17
-23
-23
-19
-14
-14
-10
-10
-13
-13
-09
-09
-12
-15

-09
-14
-14
-14
-17
-22
-17
77?
777
77?
77?
-17
-08
-08
UP
+ 15


+22
+22
+ 11
+ 11
+ 13
+ 07
+ 17
+ 05
+ 17
+ 15
+ 18
+ 18
+ 17
+ 20
+ 20
+ 13
+ 13
+ 07
+ 07
+ 08
+ 08
+ 11
+ 05

+ 09
+ 06
+23
+ 13
+ 14
+ 16
+ 18
77?
777
777
777
+ 16
+ 07
+ 07
LOU UP
-14 +07


-13 +17
-13 +17










-13 +17


-10 +11
-10 +11


-06 +05
-06 +05
-08 +08
-10 +02


-10 +02


-14 +19

-14 +19




-13 +08
-04 +09
-04 +09
                                                     (continued)
                                      D-10

-------
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAMS
    38001     1
    **OR      1
    49001
    x*WA

    XRG10
 8
 8

12
                              TABLE D-2  (Continued)
                    AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
         	PRECISION	ACCURACY	
              NO.                    NO. 	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
          NO.  PREC.   PR.LIMS  NO.  AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL  3  LEVEL  4
          ANAL CHECKS  LOU  UP  AUDS  L4  LOU  UP LOU  UP LOU  UP  LOU UP
             8      54  -22 +16    13    0 -26 +09 -13 +12 -12 +17
             8      54  -22 +16    13    0 -26 +09 -13 +12 -12 +17
38
38

58
422  -08 +07
422  -08 +07

616  -10 +0.9
26    3 -09  +06  -08  +06  -07 +06 -10 +06
26    3 -09  +06  -08  +06  -07 +06 -10 +06

49   11 -17  +10  -10  +08  -09 +10 -07 +09
    NATION  341 226   2,531 36,887  -12 +11  1,791   166 -19 +17 -13 +13 -13 +12 -12 +08
                                         D-ll

-------
   TABLE  D-3.   CONTINUOUS  N02  PRECISION AND  ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES
                FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
                            AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
07001
XXCT
22001
XXMA
30001
x*NH
41001
XXRI
XRG01
31001
XXNJ
33001
XXNY
XRG02
OS001
XXDE
09001
xxDC
21001
21003
21005
XXMD
39001
39002
39003
XXPA
48001
48002
48003
48005
XXVA
50001
50002
xx«V
*RG03
01012
01014
XXAL
10001
10003
3
3
5
5
1
1
1
1
10
4
4
1
1
5
2
2
0
0
3
2
1
6
17
0
2
19
5
0
4
0
9
2
2
4
40
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
4
4
6
0
0
2
2
1
0
1
2
0
2
2
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
NO.
ANAL
12
12
28
28
7
7
4
4
44
20
20
24
24
44
8
8
8
8
19
5
8
32
72
8
16
96
20
10
15
10
55
8
8
16
215
7
3
3
4
3
-TKttlS
NO.
PREC.
CHECKS
67
67
277
277
7
7
51
51
395
130
130
119
119
249
50
50
60
60
130
19
64
213
452
53
92
597
134
71
94
71
370
50
88
138
1,428
7
11
11
50
11
1UN--
PR.
.LIMS
LOU UP
-14
-14
-13
-13
777
777
-05
-05
-13
-15
-15
-08
-08
-12
-11
-11
-08
-08
-18
-10
-07
-15
-10
-08
-16
-11
-08
-08
-25
-08
-14
-05
-04
-04
-12
777
-04
-04
-08
-42
+ 16
+ 16
+ 13
+ 13
977
777
+ 14
+ 14
+ 14
+ 12
+ 12
+ 11
+ 11
+ 12
+ 11
+ 11
+ 08
+ 08
+ 23
+ 08
+ 10
+ 19
+ 10
+ 08
+ 12
+ 11
+ 08
+ 08
+20
+ 08
+ 13
+ 08
+ 12
+ 11
+ 13
777
+ 05
+ 05
+ 26
+59
NO.
AUDS
4
4
12
12
7
7
4
4
20
8
8
90
90
98
8
8
8
8
14
3
9
26
18
19
4
41
10
5
15
5
35
8
8
16
134
7
2
2
5
3
NO
AUDI
L4
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
7
0
0
0
0

	 /
> LEVEL :
ACCURACY 	
-PROBABILITY
I LEVEL 2 IE'

LIMITS 	
I/EL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP
-07
-07
-14
-14
-23
-23
-14
-13
-13
-11
-11
-11
-09
-09
-11
-11
-31
-09
-03
-23
-19
-10
-02
-14
-17
-20
-17
-20
-17
-06
-06
-06
-16
777
-89
-89
-38

+ 12
+ 12
+ 15
+ 15
+ 18
+ 18
+ 15
+ 11
+ 11
+ 14
+ 14
+ 14
+ 12
+ 12
+ 05
+ 05
+ 22
-03
+ 10
+ 19
+ 21
+ 15
+ 12
+ 18
+ 12
+ 14
+ 10
+ 14
+ 11
+ 13
+ 14
+ 13
+ 16
777
+ 89
+89
-09

-07
-07
-14
-14
777
-18
-18
-13
-09
-09
-09
-09
-09
-10
-10
-03
-03
-15
-11
-04
-12
-17
-07
-01
-12
-15
-16
-11
-16
-15
-07
-04
-05
-12
777
-77
-77
-34

+ 04
+ 04
+ 14
+ 14
+ 15
+ 15
+ 12
+ 15
+ 15
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 06
+ 06
+ 09
+ 08
+ 07
+ 09
+ 16
+ 08
+ 05
+ 12
+ 03
+ 02
+ 10
+ 02
+ 07
+ 09
+ 11
+ 10
+ 10
777
+ 35
+ 35
-09

-11
-11
-11
-11
777
-10
-10
-10
-11
-11
-09
-09
-09
-06
-06
-04
-04
-11
-08
-06
-10
-18
-06
-01
-12
-12
-15
-11
-15
-15
-08
-05
-06
-12
777
-34
-34
-34

+ 05
+ 05
+ 11
+ 11
777
777
+ 11
+ 11
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 06
+ 06
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 06
+ 06
+ 07
+ 05
+ 08
+ 07
+ 16
+ 07
+02 -02 +04
+12 -02 +04
+ 00
+ 01
+ 12
+ 01
+ 08
+ 07
+ 06
+ 06
+09 -02 +04
777
+ 16
+ 16
-06

                                                 (continued)
                                   D-12

-------
                         TABLE D-3  (Continued)
                            AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
rv cr ut\ i in vj
ORGAN
STATE
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM NAMS
10011
10012
10013
10016
10017
10018
XXFL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
18003
*XKY
34003
XXNC
44002
44006
XXTN
2
2
1
1
2
0
10
0
0
6
1
0
7
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
	 CKtClSlOM —
NO.
NO. PREC. PR.
ANAL CHECKS
4
8
4
4
1
5
33
7
7
24
4
8
36
7
7
7
8
8
53
31
27
55
4
39
270
42
42
127
15
700
S42
7
7
7
473
473
LOU
-15
-18
-14
-21
-06
-20
-21
-30
-30
-17
-26
-12
-13
777
777
777
-19
-19
Lins
UP
+ 06
+ 26
+19
+ 12
+ 11
+ 14
+ 22
+ 31
+ 31
+ 12
+ 25
+ 08
+ 09
777
777
777
+ 13
+ 13
NO.
NO. AUDS
AUDS
3
3
8
3
1
3
29
4
4
24
3
5
32
7
7
7
0
0

	 A
LEVEL 1
L4 LOU UP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
7
7
0
0
-28
-13
-16
-73

-72
-44
-24
-24
-24
-24
-26
-24
777
777
777


-07
-04
+ 04
+ 33

-10
+ 12
+ 24
+ 24
+ 18
+ 06
+26
+ 18
777
777
777


ttUKAtT 	
PROBABILITY
LEVEL 2 LEV
1 TMTTC— — — — — —
EL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP
-38
-07
-16
-50

-70
-40
-18
-18
-18
-13
-05
-17
777
777
777


+ 08
-05
+ 05
+ 17

-07
+ 11
+ 06
+ 06
+ 16
-01
+ 11
+ 15
777
777
777


-35
-09
-10
-48

-77
-39
-06
-06
-19
-10
-02
-17
777
777
777


+ 05
-07
+ 03
+ 14

+ 01
+ 12
-04
-04
+ 15
+ 02
+ 11
+ 15
777
777
777


XRG04
        20
                                        67
                                              0 -37  +22 -32 +18 -29  +17
14001
14003
XXH
15001
15002
15008
xxiN
23002
xxMI
24001
xxr.N
36001
36007
36008
36009
36010
36014
36016
xxOH
51001
XXUI
3
6
9
6
1
1
8
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
4
2
2
16
28
44
7
7
4
4
9
9
9
9
4
4
8
8
2
4
3
33
8
8
108
134
242
7
7
22
22
48
48
127
127
20
21
48
39
11
13
9
161
49
49
-12
-19
-17
777
777
-09
-09
-20
-20
-19
-19
-11
-14
-13
-21
-07
-14
-12
-16
-12
-12
+ 04
+ 18
+ 13
777
777
+ 15
+ 15
+22
+ 22
+ 16
+ 16
+ 18
+ 09
+ 17
+ 24
+ 06
+ 10
+ 05
+ 17
+ 09
+ 09
7
10
17
7
7
5
5
4
4
8
8
2
4
6
6
4
4
2
28
4
4
0
0
0
7
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-08
-09
-08
777
777
-25
-25
-26
-26
-32
-32
-24
-20
-21
-21
-18
-33
-22
-29
-11
-11
+ 07
+ 09
+ 08
777
777
+ 20
+20
+ 31
+ 31
+ 14
+ 14
+ 67
+ 39
+ 13
+ 03
+ 13
+ 11
+ 10
+25
+ 24
+ 24
-02
-08
-06
777
777
-17
-17
-05
-05
-16
-16
+ 03
-14
-28
-23
-11
-11
-12
-19
-06
-06
+ 02
+ 07
+ 06
777
777
+20
+ 20
+ 01
+ 01
+ 04
+ 04
+ 19
+ 09
+ 29
+ 03
+ 05
+ 01
+ 05
+ 14
+ 14
+ 14
+ 00
-07i
-06
777
777
-21
-21
-09
-09
-10
-10
+ 08
-22
-13
-22
-09
-14
-13
-17
-05
-05
+ 03
+ 07
+ 06
777
777
+21
+ 21
-01
-01
+ 03
+ 03
+ 09
+ 15
+ 10
+ 03
+ 05
+ 01
+ 07
+ 10
+ 06
+ 06
XRG05
        22  12
                   107
                         649  -17  +15
                                        66
                                              0 -24  +20 -15 +12 -13  +09
04001     10       4     23  -24  +19     4    2 -22  +14 -14 +11 -15  +09 -15 +10
XXAR     10       4     23  -24  +19     4    2 -22  +14 -14 +11 -15  +09 -15 +10
                                                    (continued)
                                    D-13

-------
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAMS
   19001    14    Z
   x*LA     14    2
32001
32002
XXNM
37101
37102
37103
xxdK
45001
45002
45006
XXTX
XRG06
17001
xxKS
26001
26002
26003
26004
»x MO
*RG07
06001
xxco
35001
X*ND
46001
XXUT
XRG08
03200
03300
xxAZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
XXCA
12120
XXHI
29200
29300
XXNV
1
1
2
2
1
3
6
2
1
2
5
28
1
1
0
2
4
1
7
8
2
2
2
2
3
3
7
0
2
2
28
7
5
17
57
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
4
6
0
0
2
1
0
1
4
4
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
2
0
5
2
4
11
0
0
0
0
0
                             TABLE  D-3  (Continued)
                                 AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
    -PRECISION-
                                    -ACCURACY-
     NO.
NO.  PREC.    PR.LIMS
ANAL CHECKS   LOU  UP
 16    101  -14 +08
 16    101  -14 +08
      NO.	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
NO.  AUDS  LEVEL  1  LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
AUDS  L4  LOU UP  LOU  UP LOU  UP LOU  UP
  6    0 -07 +00 -08 +00 -10 +00
  6    0 -07 +00 -08 +00 -10 +00
                                                  0 -23 +02 -19 +08 -19  +10
                                                  0 -23 +02 -19 +08 -19  +10

                                                  0 -69 +41 -35 +10 -24  +07
                      118  3,118  -08  +08
                                            135
                             0 -25 +26 -14 +23 -13 +25
                             0 -25 +23 -15 +21 -13 +23

                             0 -30 +51 -13 +20 -13 +13
                             0 -15 +27 -15 +13 -22 +10
                             0 -07 +04 -03 +02 -03 +02
                             0 -29 +48 -13 +19 -13 +12

                             2 -30 +44 -14 +18 -14 +13 -15  +10
3
3
12
20
7
8
47
50
16
16
7
7
12
12
35
2
6
8
68
48
13
83
212
7
V
7
8
8
17
17
69
105
27
47
248
265
80
80
33
33
134
134
247
0
35
35
325
311
87
433
1,156
7
7
7
49
49
-52
-52
-14
-13
-41
-26
-21
-25
-24
-24
-07
-07
-10
-10
-15

-12
-12
-15
-07
-17
-09
-12
???
???
???
-04
-04
+ 10
+ 10
+ 12
+ 18
+ 20
+ 20
+ 19
+21
+ 26
+ 26
+ 10
+ 10
+ 16
+ 16
+ 20

+ 12
+ 12
+ 16
+ 09
+ 07
+ 14
+ 14
???
???
???
+ 09
+ 09
0
0
6
7
6
6
25
25
8
8
6
6
12
12
26
0
6
6
33
24
6
22
85
7
7
7
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
25
0
4
0
29
7
•>
7
3
3


-48
-46
-52
-50
-50
-50
-37
-37
-12
-12
-11
-11
-23

-09
-09
-22
-12
-13
-27
-21
777
777
777
-01
-01


+60
+ 31
+ 14
+20
+32
+ 32
+51
+51
+25
+ 25
+ 14
+ 14
+ 31

+ 06
+ 06
+20
+ 09
+ 16
+21
+ 17
•>•>•>
777
777
+ 01
+ 01


-12
-20
-24
-26
-20
-20
-11
-11
-05
-05
-07
-07
-10

-09
-09
-19
-10
-11
-21
-17
777
777
777
-10
-10


+ 10
+ 14
+ 06
+ 14
+ 11
+ 11
+21
+21
+ 16
+ 16
+ 06
+ 06
+ 15

+ 07
+ 07
+ 15
+ 09
+ 14
+ 21
+ 15
777
777
777
+ 15
+ 15


-06
-10
-06
-20
-11
-11
-13
-13
-04
-04
-06
-06
-10

-13
-13
-21
-09
-13
-22
-18
777
777
777
-06
-06


+ 01
+ 03
+ 02
+ 15
+ 06
+ 06
+ 19
+ 19
+ 13
+ 13
+ 04
+ 04
+ 12

+ 09
+ 09
+ 14
+ 09
+ 12
+21
+ 15
777
777
777
+ 02
+ 02








-13 +18
-13 +18




-13 +18



-20 +14

-13 +10

-19 +13



-06 +01
-06 +01
                                                        (continued)
                                        D-14

-------
                             TABLE D-3  (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAM5
   XRG09    62  13
            AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
	PRECISION	ACCURACY	
      NO.                    NO.	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 NO.   PREC.    PR.LinS  NO.  AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
 ANAL CHECKS  LOU   UP  AUDS  L4  LOU  UP LOU  UP LOU  UP LOU  UP
 228   1,240   -12 +13    96   32 -20 +16 -16 + 15 -17 + 14  -18  +13
   38001     1
   XXOR      1
   49001
   XXUA
         21   -16  +16
         21   -16  +16

         49   -26  +24
         49   -26  +24
   XRG10     1   2

   NATION  203  59
  13     70   -23  +22

 941  9,299   -13  +13
  9    0  -64  +42  -28  +15 -16 +07
  9    0  -64  +42  -28  +15 -16 +07

  4    0  -06  +06  -02  +02 -05 +04
  4    0  -06  +06  -02  +02 -05 +04

 13    0  -51  +36  -23  +14 -14 +07

680   45  -26  +27  -16  +15 -15 +12 -17 +13
                                        D-15

-------
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE


NO.
REGION SLAM
07001
**CT
20001
xxflE
22001
XXMA
30001
XXNH
41001
XXRI
47001
XXVT
XRGOl
31001
XXNJ
33001
xx MY
40001
XXPR
XRG02
08001
XXDE
09001
XXDC
21001
21003
21005
x*MD
39001
39002
39003
XXRA
48001
48002
48003
48005
XXVA
50001
50002
*xwv
3
3
2
2
5
5
3
3
1
1
2
2
16
7
7
11
11
0
0
18
3
3
1
1
7
4
3
14
18
2
1
21
6
0
4
0
10
3
1
4


NO.
HAMS
6
6
0
0
8
8
1
1
1
1
0
0
16
6
6
11
11
1
1
18
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
3
8
2
1
11
5
0
0
0
5
1
0
1
TABLE D-4.  OZONE PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES
            FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS

                   AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
__ 	 rKttlSlUN 	 	
NO.
NO.
ANAL
27
27
5
5
42
42
14
14
8
8
6
6
102
47
47
94
94
5
5
146
18
18
8
8
41
13
16
70
108
11
10
129
32
16
16
16
&0
11
4
15
PREC.
CHECKS
117
117
52
52
372
372
294
294
146
146
53
53
1,034
334
334
488
488
52
52
874
103
103
75
75
403
81
152
636
643
117
55
815
223
118
108
118
567
69
42
111
PR. L IMS
LOW
-08
-08
-08
-08
-17
-17
-16
-16
-OS
-08
-05
-05
-14
-10
-10
-10
-10
-06
-06
-10
-OS
-08
-08
-08
-09
-11
-07
-09
-13
-05
-07
-12
-08
-08
-13
-08
-09
-12
-07
-10
UP
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 12
+ 12
+ 11
+ 11
+ 06
+ 06
+ 09
+ 09
+ 11
+ 12
+ 12
+ 07
+ 07
+ 04
+ 04
+ 09
+ 13
+ 13
+ 10
+ 10
+ 11
+ 11
+ 06
+ 10
+ 12
+ 03
+ 13
+ 12
+ 05
+ 06
+ 09
+ 06
+ 07
+ 11
+ 11
+ 11
NO.
NO. AUDS
AUDS
13
13
16
16
21
21
24
24
9
9
6
6
89
25
25
169
169
6
6
200
9
9
8
8
46
14
16
76
26
37
4
67
13
7
12
7
39
11
4
15
L4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
7
0
7
27
0
0
0


	 AI

LEVEL 1
LOU
-16
-16
-04
-04
-09
-09
-10
-10
-07
-07
-02
-02
-10
-13
-13
-14
-14
-16
-16
-14
-10
-10
-04
-04
-13
-15
-08
-13
-15
-15
+ 00
-14
-07
-06
-03
-06
-06
-12
-15
-12
UP
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 06
+ 06
+ 12
+ 12
+ 06
+ 06
+ 04
+ 04
+ 10
+ 07
+ 07
+ 12
+ 12
+ 07
+ 07
+ 11
+11
+ 11
+ 09
+ 09
+13
+ 17
+ 09
+ 13
+ 14
+ 10
+ 04
+ 12
+ 13
+ 10
+ 05
+ 10
+ 10
+ 08
+ 09
+ 08
CCUR;
PROB,
*CY 	
ABILITY LIMI
LEVEL 2
LOU
-09
-09
-07
-07
-07
-07
-11
-11
-07
-07
-02
-02
-09
-07
-07
-13
-13
-09
-09
-13
-10
-10
-04
-04
-10
-15
-05
-10
-14
-12
-04
-13
-05
-04
-06
-04
-05
-12
-09
-11
UP
+ 06
+ 06
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 05
+ 05
+ 04
+ 04
+ 09
+ 11
+ 11
+ 11
+ 11
-01
-01
+ 11
+ 08
+ 08
+ 11
+ 11
+ 10
+ 18
+ 06
+ 11
+ 12
+ 06
+ 05
+ 09
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 07
+ 09
+ 07
+ 08
LEVEL 3
LOW
-07
-07
-08
-08
-10
-10
-10
-10
-09
-09
-01
-01
-09
-06
-06
-13
-13
-09
-09
-12
-08
-08
-07
-07
-08
-16
-04
-09
-14
-13
-02
-13
-04
-02
-06
-02
-04
-12
-09
-11
UP
+ 05
+ 05
+ 10
+ 10
+ 15
+ 15
+ 09
+ 09
+ 05
+ 05
+ 04
+ 04
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
+ 10
-02
-02
+ 10
+ 09
+ 09
+ 12
+ 12
+ 09
+ 17
+ 06
+ 10
+ 11
+ 07
+ 03
+ 09
+ 05
+ 05
+ 06
+ 05
+ 05
+ 12
+ 07
+ 10

TS 	 ---
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

















-11 -02
-11 -02
-11 -02












-04 +05
-03 +04

-03 +04
-04 +04



                                       (continued)
                          D-16

-------
                           TABLE  D-4 (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   XRG03
           53  22
01011
01012
01013
01014
01015
XXAL
10001
10003
10005
10007
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
**FL
11010
xxQA
18001
18002
18003
XXKY
25100
xx,*1S
34001
34002
34003
34004
xxNC
42001
XXSC
44001
44002
44003
44004
44005
44006
XXTN
XRG04
14001
14003
xxiL
3
1
0
0
0
4
3
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
1
7
0
0
12
1
0
13
2
2
6
1
1
1
9
3
3
1
0
1
2
0
0
4
42
20
8
28
0
2
2
0
0
4
0
2
0
0
2
1
2
0
0
2
2
2
13
4
4
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
4
4
1
2
1
0
2
0
6
34
10
1
11

NO.
ANAL
320
12
12
8
4
3
39
12
8
4
4
8
12
12
4
2
8
8
9
91
12
12
80
8
8
96
25
25
44
4
12
3
63
28
28
15
8
8
9
8
8
56
410
117
28
145
-rKtcisi
un
Nu .
PREC.
CHECKS
2,307
60
61
36
20
22
199
126
38
24
20
171
79
89
28
11
87
48
95
816
95
95
391
40
615
1,046
229
229
204
12
77
20
313
113
113
129
63
48
56
67
620
983
3,794
1,328
125
1,453
UN 	

PR.LIMS
LOU
-10
-13
-14
-16
-13
-07
-13
-09
-21
-15
-05
-10
-10
-08
-15
-03
-08
-06
-02
-10
-16
-16
-14
-20
-13
-14
-09
-09
-07
-06
-07
-11
-08
-16
-16
-08
-07
-07
-08
-06
-19
-15
-13
-15
-14
-15
UP
+ 10
+ 10
+ 13
+ 13
+ 19
+ 10
+ 13
+ 09
+ 13
+ 11
+ 05
+ 09
+ 10
+ 10
+ 11
+ 05
+ 13
+ 05
+ 01
+ 09
+ 08
+ 08
+ 12
+21
+ 11
+ 12
+ 14
+ 14
+ 06
+ 10
+ 08
+ 16
+ 08
+ 14
+ 14
+ 08
+ 07
+ 04
+ 06
+ 06
+ 16
+ 14
+ 12
+ 08
+ 18
+ 09

NO.
AUOS
214
7
4
6
4
3
24
6
6
6
5
14
6
14
6
3
7
7
7
87
4
4
54
3
5
62
21
21
33
3
25
3
64
113
113
13
12
12
13
15
4
69
444
30
13
43

	 AllUKAlT 	
BBABABTI » W

AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
L4
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
LOU
-12
-22
-23
-17
-33
-22
-22
-08
-05
+ 03
-23
-17
-30
-06
-24
-09
-07
-20
-09
-15
-19
-19
-21
+ 05
-16
-21
-08
-08
-10
-20
-11
-18
-12
-15
-15
-17
-08
-09
-07
-08
-19
-11
-15
-13
-10
-12
UP
+ 12
+ 17
+ 08
+ 18
+ 31
+ 33
+20
+ 05
+ 06
+23
+ 11
+ 15
+24
+ 05
+ 07
+ 14
+ 12
+ 17
+ 08
+ 14
-03
-03
+ 12
+ 05
+ 21
+ 13
+10
+ 10
+ 13
+ 03
+ 09
+ 19
+ 11
+ 13
+ 13
+ 06
+ 08
+ 08
+ 06
+ 07
+ 19
+ 09
+ 13
+ 09
+ 14
+ 11
LOU
-10
-26
-24
-18
-22
-05
-23
-03
-08
+ 00
-18
-12
-26
-11
-09
-07
-09
-08
-09
-11
-11
-11
-16
-06
-13
-15
-06
-06
-08
-02
-09
-03
-08
-09
-09
-11
-06
-07
-03
-07
-17
-08
-11
-10
-10
-11
UP
+ 10
+ 12
+ 08
+31
+ 20
+ 00
+ 19
+ 04
+ 09
+ 05
+ 00
+ 10
+ 16
+ 08
+ 00
+ 11
+ 13
+ 12
+ 05
+ 09
-04
-04
+ 10
+ 06
+ 14
+ 11
+ 04
+ 04
+ 06
+ 12
+ 10
+ 06
+ 08
+ 09
+ 09
+ 06
+ 05
+ 06
+ 03
+ 05
+ 18
+ 06
+ 09
+ 04
+ 08
+ 05
LOU
-10
-22
-23
-14
-20
-06
-20
-05
-06
-05
-19
-12
-25
-07
-11
-03
-08
-06
-13
-11
-06
-06
-15
-02
-14
-14
-07
-07
-08
+ 01
-10
-11
-09
-09
-09
-10
-05
-05
-06
-11
-16
-09
-11
-11
-12
-11
UP
+ 09
+ 13
+ 05
+27
+ 18
-02
+ 17
+ 05
+ 08
+ 05
-03
+ 07
+ 15
+ 04
+ 04
+ 09
+ 09
+ 07
+ 07
+ 08
-05
-05
+ 09
+ 03
+ 13
+ 10
+ 03
+ 03
+ 07
+ 15
+ 09
+ 05
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 04
+ 07
+ 05
+ 05
+ 07
+ 18
+ 07
+ 09
+ 04
+ 06
+ 04
LOW UP
-04 +04










-05 +08







-05 +08






















-05 +08



                                                     (continued)
                                      D-17

-------
                           TABLE D-4  (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED  ANALYZERS
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE

un
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM HAMS
15001
15002
15003
15008
15010
xxiN
23001
23002
XXMI
24001
XXMN
36001
36002
36003
36005
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36014
36015
36016
XXQH
51001
*XWI
2
2
0
2
0
6
4
3
7
4
4
1
3
1
1
0
0
5
2
2
0
0
0
0
15
16
16
6
0
1
0
0
7
7
1
8
2
2
2
0
0
0
2
2
2
1
2
1
0
2
1
15
4
4
NO. PREC.
ANAL CHECKS
44
9
5
12
4
74
39
16
55
28
28
12
12
2
1
11
8
27
12
12
7
1
8
4
117
58
58
215
48
19
69
16
367
175
97
272
308
308
68
60
10
11
50
39
162
69
74
36
5
46
22
652
336
336
PR.
Lins
LOU UP
-10
-11
-06
-11
-20
-11
-11
-12
-12
-12
-12
-11
-14
-13
-18
-08
-10
-10
-13
-08
-09
-07
-13
-08
-11
-11
-11
+ 11
+ 10
+ 10
+ 13
+ 14
+ 11
+ 10
+ 08
+ 10
+ 11
+ 11
+ 13
+ 15
+ 04
+ 28
+ 07
+ 09
+ 11
+ 12
+ 06
+ 04
+ 14
+ 12
+ 09
+ 11
+ 11
+ 11
NO.
AUDS
20
10
8
9
2
49
8
4
12
18
18
4
4
4
0
4
4
15
6
4
4
2
4
4
59
21
21

A f* **t in ft f*\*


AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
14 LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP LOU UP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-12
-13
-08
-20
-06
-13
-05
-15
-06
-13
-13
-16
-14
-17

-12
-21
-09
-22
-09
-15
-15
-01
+ 00
-13
-11
-11
+ 11
+ 13
+ 08
+ 16
-02
+ 12
+ 05
+ 12
+ 06
+ 17
+ 17
+ 15
+ 13
+25

+ 07
+ 12
+ 10
+ 09
+01
+ 12
+ 17
+ 04
+ 12
+ 12
+ 05
+ 05
-10
-15
-07
-14
-07
-12
-07
-06
-07
-09
-09
-13
-15
-23

-10
-16
-07
-19
-09
-18
-12
-08
-10
-13
-07
-07
+ 08
+ 07
+ 08
+ 12
-06
+ 08
+ 03
+ 08
+ 04
+ 09
+ 09
+ 04
+ 10
+ 00

+ 04
+ 05
+ 06
+ 06
+ 05
+ 10
+ 09
+ 05
+ 07
+ 07
+ 06
+ 06
-08
-12
-07
-14
-07
-10
-09
-06
-08
-07
-07
-13
-18
-20

-12
-16
-06
-22
-05
-17
-11
-09
-04
-14
-07
-07
+ 07
+ 03
+ 08
+ 11
-02
+ 07
+ 04
+ 02
+ 03
+ 05
+ 05
+ 00
+ 12
-05

+ 06
+ 04
+ 04
+ 03
+ 01
+ 10
+ 08
+ 06
+ 01
+ 06
+ 09
+ 09
XRG05
         76   47
                   477  3,388  -13 +10
04001
XXAR
19001
XXLA
32001
32002
XXNM
37101
37102
37103
XXQK
45001
45002
45006
XXTX
0
0
10
10
3
3
6
2
0
1
3
9
2
6
17
2
2
6
6
0
2
2
1
1
2
4
13
1
0
14
8
8
56
56
12
20
32
12
4
12
28
100
16
23
139
52
52
343
343
64
55
119
68
19
66
153
5,019
123
144
5,286
-02
-02
-10
-10
-13
-12
-13
-16
-18
-08
-14
-06
-10
-14
-07
+ 02
+ 02
+ 09
+ 09
+ 09
+ 03
+ 07
+ 08
+ 07
+ 04
+ 07
+ 10
+ 07
+ 06
+ 10
8
8
17
17
8
18
26
4
4
12
20
169
17
20
206
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
XRG06
         36   28
                   263  5,953  -08 +10    277
                                         202    0 -13 +11 -11 +07 -11  +07
                                               0 -03 +02 -04 +02 -04  +04
                                               0 -03 +02 -04 +02 -04  +04

                                               0 -16 +13 -10 +10 -10  +11
                                               0 -16 +13 -10 +10 -10  +11

                                               0 -12 +14 -10 +07 -10  +06
                                               0 -06 +05 -05 +03 -07  +03
                                               0 -08 +08 -07 +04 -08  +04

                                               0 -13 +11 -12 +08 -11  +06
                                               0 -30 +09 -05 +04 +01  +05
                                               0 -16 +21 -13 +20 -13  +21
                                               0 -20 +20 -13 +17 -12  +18

                                                 -17 +27 -14 +18 -17  +19
                                                 -15 +09 -12 +09 -13  +11
                                                 -08 +10 -10 +11 -12  +10
                                                 -17 +25 -13 +17 -16  +18
                                               0 -17 +22 -13 +15 -15  +16
                                                      (continued)
                                      D-18

-------
                          TABLE  D-4  (Continued)
                              AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
Kcrun I jnv
ORGAN
STATE
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM NANS
16001
16002
16003
XXIA
17001
xx. •>•>
-11
-05
-08
+ 17
+ 03
+ 06
+ 09
+ 13
+ 06
+ 06
+ 07
+ 10
+ 05
+ 05
•>•>•>
+ 05
+ 04
+ 05
3
5
6
14
66
41
9
32
148
155
155
,
8
3
11
49001
                     26
                          230  -06 +14
                                          16
                             0 -07 +04 -06 +04 -06 +04
                                                       (continued)
                                      D-19

-------
                              TABLE  D-4  (Continued)

                                 AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
REPORTING            	PRECISION	ACCURACY	
    ORGAN                  NO.                   NO.	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
   STATE  NO. NO.     NO.  PREC.    PR.LIMS  NO.  AUDS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL  4
   REGION SLAM NAMS    ANAL CHECKS  LOW   UP  AUDS  L4  LOU  UP LOW  UP LOW  UP LOU UP
   **WA      it    5      26     230  -06 +14    16     0  -07 +04 -06 +04 -06 +04

   *RG10     77      51     387  -11 +14    49    10  -18 +21 -15 +16 -14 +15 -11 +06

   NATION  397  215   2,391 21,342  -12 +11 1,920  215  -17 +15 -12 +10 -12 +10 -10 +06
                                        D-20

-------
 Explanation of Column Heading Abbreviations for Tables D-5, D-6, D-7, D-8
                              (Manual Methods)
     Column
No.

 1
 2

 3

 4

 5

 6
 7

 8

 9

10
11

12



13

14



15

16
Heading abbreviation

REPORTING ORGAN.

STATE

REGION

NO. SLAM

NO. NAMS

NO. OF SAMPLERS

NO. COLL. SITES

COLL. SAMPS < LIM
PR. LIMS

LOW

UP

NO. VAL COLL PAIRS

NO. AUDS


LEVEL 1

LOW

UP

LEVEL 2

LOW

UP

LEVEL 3

LOW

UP
            Explanation
Reporting organization number

Two letter state abbreviation

EPA regional office number (RGO#)

Number of SLAMS sites, not including NAMS

Number of NAMS sites

Number of samplers (sites)

Number of collocated sites

Number of paired data sets from collocated
samplers with either result less than the
tabulated values on Form 1:
     TSP:  20 yg/m3
     S02:  40 yg/m3
     N02:  30 yg/m3
      Pb:  0.15 yg/m3

Probability limits

Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits

Number of valid collocated data pairs

Number of accuracy audits performed and
reported



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits



Lower probability limits

Upper probability limits

   D-21

-------
        TABLE D-5.   TSP  PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL  VALUES  FOR
                      REPORTING  ORGANIZATIONS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE   NO.  NO.
  REGION SLAM  NAMS
   07001    18   23
   **CT     18   23
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
**NH
41001
xxRI
47001
XXVT
*RG01
31001
x*NJ
33001
x*NY
40001
XXPR
55001
xxvi
XRG02
08001
**DE
09001
XXDC
21001
21002
21003
21005
21006
**MD
39001
39002
39003
XXPA
48001
48002
48003
43005
9
9
7
7
14
14
6
6
5
5
59
15
15
99
99
7
7
5
5
126
6
6
5
5
14
5
2
4
2
27
63
11
11
85
32
1
16
0
1
1
17
17
1
1
6
6
1
1
49
10
10
27
27
7
7
0
0
44
3
3
4
4
6
0
1
1
1
9
33
7
4
44
17
1
0
2
MANUAL METHODS
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
167
167
40
40
93
93
65
65
50
50
24
24
439
66
66
764
764
55
55
•>
?
885
36
36
36
36
115
26
22
26
29
218
381
63
56
500
226
10
64
12
NO.
COLL.
SITES
12
12
15
15
8
8
7
7
9
9
8
8
59
6
6
65
65
8
8
7
7
79
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
40
12
10
12
34
12
8
8
8
COLL.
SAMPS PR.LIM5

-------
                             TABLE D-5 (Continued)
                                    MANUAL METHODS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAMS
   XXVA     49   20
50001
50002
XXWV
XRG03
01011
01012
01013
01014
01015
01016
XXAL
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
XXFL
11010
xxQA
18001
18002
18003
xxKY
25100
x*MS
34001
34002
34003
34004
XXNC
42001
XXSC
44001
44002
44003
44004
12
7
19
191
26
8
3
7
9
0
53
13
5
7
7
0
4
0
7
15
5
2
2
9
7
10
93
39
39
40
9
0
49
19
19
50
8
11
5
74
10
10
22
5
7
7
7
4
11
91
6
6
3
1
0
0
16
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
2
2
0
0
0
2
3
14
11
11
6
6
0
12
4
4
4
2
2
1
9
8
8
3
6
6
2
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
312
60
55
115
1217
172
25
20
36
48
28
329
44
36
44
32
24
34
16
80
68
36
32
16
39
48
52
601
196
196
232
64
28
324
113
113
204
40
52
24
320
183
183
170
44
60
36
	 F
NO. (
COLL. 5
SITES <
36
8
8
16
142
12
8
8
8
8
4
48
8
8
8
8
7
8
8
12
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
123
16
16
32
4
4
40
12
12
32
8
8
8
56
11
11
12
8
8
8
'RECISION 	
:OLL.
iAMPS PR.LIMS
:LIM LOU UP
23 -10 +11
0 -03 +09
0 -11 +15
0 -08 +13
64 -12 +13
2 -26 +05
0 -11 +15
0 -15 +11
11 -09 +06
0 -06 +08
4 -22 +16
17 -18 +12
11 -11 +17
0 -22 +34
0 -09 +08
1 -15 +08
7 -11 +14
1 -14 +14
10 -14 +13
0 -07 +08
0 -13 +08
2 -22 +22
1 -19 +22
2 -15 +15
2 -06 +10
2 -10 +14
0 -09 +12
39 -14 +16
3 -11 +14
3 -11 +14
11 -10 +16
0 -11 +14
2 -09 +15
13 -10 +16
5 -19 +18
5 -19 +18
26 -13 +13
3 -07 +12
6 -09 +10
5 -26 +43
40 -16 +19
4 -07 +13
4 -07 +13
3 -08 +04
0 -10 +14
0 -05 +06
0 -06 +08
NO.VAL
COLL.
PAIRS
520
98
109
207
1,872
156
100
94
194
112
52
708
112
89
109
111
90
101
108
139
106
103
90
104
107
104
106
1,579
201
201
426
59
48
533
156
156
314
102
109
94
619
121
121
166
98
113
92
— PR
NO. LEVE
AUDS LOU
100
16
20
36
608
44
360
8
8
13
6
439
53
7
7
13
14
13
6
65
80
36
17
6
12
14
98
441
50
50
101
43
12
156
29
29
227
15
43
8
293
228
228
183
52
90
54
    ACCURACY	
—PROBABILITY  LIMITS—
      1 LEVEL  2  LEVEL 3
     UP LOU UP  LOW  UP
       -05 +05

       -06 +07
       -05 +08
       -06 +08

       -07 +09

       -06 +08
       -04 +04
       -02 +05
       -05 +05
       -12 +11
       -04 +08
       -05 +05

       -06 +07
       -01 +09
       -08 +05
       -03 +02
       -04 +08
       -07 +07
       -06 +05
       -05 +12
       -09 +16
       -04 +03
       -14 +22
       -06 +05
       -04 +02
       -07 +10
       -04 +06
       -07 +11

       -07 +11
       -07 +11

       -05 +14
       -07 +08
       -16 +24
       -07 +14

       -07 +09
       -07 +09

       -06 +04
       -09 +08
       -05 +08
       -04 +13
       -06 +06

       -02 +02
       -02 +02

       -06 +11
       -04 +08
       -09 +14
       -06 +07
                                                         (continued)
                                         D-23

-------
                             TABLE D-5 (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   44005     7    4
   44006     0    0
   *XTN      48  21
   *RG04
           385  95
14001
14002
14003
**Il
15001
15002
15003
15005
15008
15009
15010
15100
XXIN
23001
23002
XXMI
24001
xxMN
36001
36002
36003
36004
36005
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36013
36014
36015
36016
xxQH
51001
**WI
XRG05
04002
xxAR
19001
XXLA
47
9
14
70
34
0
4
6
12
0
8
0
64
40
14
54
33
33
9
8
16
18
5
8
6
28
17
13
11
17
20
9
11
196
62
62
479
23
23
24
24
21
4
1
26
12
4
2
1
2
0
0
0
21
16
4
20
11
11
4
3
2
0
0
4
5
7
5
7
1
1
2
4
4
49
16
16
143
3
3
7
7
MANUAL METHODS
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
50
95
455
2521
300
68
63
431
152
20
32
32
66
20
24
88
434
224
79
303
16
16
64
44
87
72
21
58
60
136
118
77
37
74
51
16
60
975
16
16
2175
116
116
118
118
NO.
COLL.
SITES
8
4
48
354
16
8
8
32
8
8
8
8
8
8
6
10
64
16
6
22
8
8
8
8
12
8
8
8
8
8
23
8
8
8
4
8
8
135
8
8
269
12
12
8
8
COLL.
SAMPS

-------
                         TABLE  D-5  (Continued)



                                MANUAL METHODS
»\ t_r ur\ i i, n\j
ORGAN
STATE
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM NAMS
32002
XXNM
37101
37102
37103
xxQK
45001
45002
45003
45004
45005
45006
45007
XXTX
7
45
17
4
5
26
10
3
7
2
3
4
1
30
4
4
2
3
3
8
30
4
2
2
0
4
2
44
— 	 rxEii
NO. OF NO. COLL.
SAMP- COLL. SAMPS
LERS SITES 
-------
                             TABLE D-5  (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
   REGION SLAM NAMS
   XXUT      5   8
                                    MANUAL METHODS
52001
**WY
XRG08
03100
03200
033QO
XXAZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
x*CA
12120
XXHI
29100
29200
29300
XXNV
54100
x*GU
XRG09
02020
xxAK
13001
XXID
38001
XXQR
49001
x*UA
12
12
135
23
3
8
34
50
4
4
15
73
9
9
12
11
8
31
4
4
151
10
10
16
16
27
27
23
23
1
1
26
0
5
4
9
23
9
3
10
45
2
2
0
2
3
5
0
0
61
3
3
2
2
9
9
13
13
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
58
49
49
591
97
31
16
144
189
60
30
125
40*
44
44
24
58
23
105
i
i
697
33
33
71
71
148
148
114
114
NO.
COLL.
SITES
8
12
12
72
6
8
8
22
38
8
8
14
68
8
8
2
8
8
18
7
7
116
7
7
12
12
24
24
11
11
TKLl/i
COLL.
SAMPS

-------
        TABLE  D-6.   PB PRECISION  AND ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES FOR
                      REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE   NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   07001    16   0
   XXCT     16   0
   20001
   XXME

   22001
   XXMA

   30001
   **NH

   41001
   XXRI

   XRG01

   31001
   XXNJ

   33001
   40001
   x*PR

   XRG02

   08001
   XXDE

   09001
   XXDC

   21001
   XXMD

   39001
   39002
   39003
   **PA

   48001
   48003
   XXVA

   50001
   XXWV

   XRG03

   01011
   01012
   01013
   01014
   *XAL
 2
 2

 2
 2

 7
 7

 2
 2

29

 6
 6

 7
 7

 2
 2
15  11
23  10

 1   0
 0   0
 2   2
 0   0
 3   2
                                   MANUAL METHODS
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
64
64
18
18
18
18
30
30
18
18
148
24
24
48
48
20
20
92
8
8
8
8
24
24
116
58
20
194
8
12
20
56
56
310
4
14
0
8
26
NO.
COLL.
SITES
8
8
6
6
8
8
0
0
4
4
26
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
8
6
11
4
21
4
4
8
10
10
55
0
7
0
2
9
•PRECISION 	
COLL.
SAMPS

-------
                       TABLE D-6  (Continued)
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE
MANUAL METHODS
NO. NO.
REGION SLAM NAMS
10011
10012
10013
10017
10018
XXFL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
xxKY
25100
XXMS
42001
XXSC
44001
44002
44003
*XTN
XRG04
14001
14002
14003
XXIL
15001
15008
xxiN
23001
23002
XXMI
24001
XXMN
36001
35006
36008
36009
36010
XXOH
51001
x*WI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
4
8
1
1
10
7
1
8
9
6
15
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
2
6
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
14
0
2
0
2
2
2
4
0
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
9
2
2
NO. OF NO. COLL.
SAMP- COLL. SAMPS PR.
LERS SITES 
-------
TABLE D-6  (Continued)
      MANUAL METHODS
REPORTING
ORGAN
STATE
REGION
XXAR
19001
XXLA
32001
33002
XXNM
37101
37102
37103
XXOK
45001
45002
45003
45006
XXTX
XRG06
16003
XXIA
17001
x*KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
XXMO
28003
XXNB
XRG07
06001
xxco
27001
x*MT
46001
XXUT
XRG08
03100
03200
03300
XXAZ
05001
05004


NO.
SLAM
2
2
2
2
0
2
0
1
2
3
7
1
7
0
15
24
2
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
3
2
2
8
5
5
4
4
3
3
12
10
1
2
13
22
9


NO.
NAMS
0
2
2
0
2
2
1
1
0
2
8
2
0
0
10
16
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
3
2
2
6
2
2
0
0
2
2
4
0
5
0
5
2
4
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
8
7
7
8
8
16
4
8
10
22
73
7
25
8
113
159
16
16
8
8
2
4
0
6
12
27
27
63
37
37
8
8
20
20
65
40
25
1
66
52
60
NO.
COLL.
SITES
4
7
7
6
4
10
0
0
0
0
43
0
4
4
51
65
5
5
4
4
0
0
0
2
2
4
4
15
3
3
4
4
4
4
11
3
8
0
11
10
4
-rKtti
COLL.
SAMPS

-------
                             TABLE  D-6  (Continued)
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   05036     1   2
   05061    19   4
   **CA     51   12
                                    MANUAL METHODS
   29300
   xxNV

   XRG09

   02020
   XXAK

   13001
   XXID

   3S001
   XXOR

   49001
   XRG10
 2
 2

 5
 5

 7
 7

 7
 7

21
 2
 2

19

 0
 0

 0
 0

 2
 2

 2
 2
	 TKEtl
NO. OF NO. COLL.
SAMP- COLL. SAMPS
LERS SITES 
-------
   TABLE D-7.   MANUAL S02 PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES  FOR
                 REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
                                   MANUAL METHODS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE   NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   10001
   1000*
   10012
   10013
   1001*
   10017
   XXFL

   18002
   XXKY

   3*003
   XXNC

   XRGO*

   32001
   xxNM

   XRG06

   12120
   XXHI

   5*100
0   0
0   0
0   0
0   0
   XRG09    10   0

   NATION   16   0
	 PKECIblUN
NO. OF NO. COLL.
SAMP- COLL. SAMPS PR.
LERS SITES i
LIMS
UP
+ *6
+ 20
+*1
+ 39
+71
+ 12
+ 36
+ 18
+ 18
+ 95
+ 95
+ 70
+ 02
+ 02
+ 02
+27
+ 27
???
777
NO.VAL
COLL.
PAIRS
35
81
38
1*
10
16
19*
27
27
10*
10*
325
57
57
57
7
7
7
7
NO.
AUDS
12
21
23
7
31
60
15*
30
30
*8
*8
232
15
15
15
5*
5*
7
7
------HUt UK Ml, I---- 	 ---
—PROBABILITY LIMITS-
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW
-13
-16
-12
-11
-21
-*0
-29
-0*
-0*
-1*
-1*
-25
-06
-06
-06
-08
-08
777
777
UP LOU UP LOU UP
+ 10
+ 15
+ 0*
+ 00
+ 07
+ 18
+ 15
+ 07
+ 07
+ 03
+ 03
+ 1*
+ 08
+ 08
+ 08
+ 0*
+ 0*
777
777
-06
-11
-07
-07
-17
-28
-20
-02
-02
-09
-09
-17
+ 00
+ 00
+ 00
-03
-03
777
777
+ 05
+ 09
+ 02
+ 00
+ 05
+ 1*
+ 11
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 05
+ 11
+ 0*
+ 0*
+ 0*
+ 03
+ 03
777
777
-06
-10
-05
-06
-1*
-19
-15
-01
-01
-07
-07
-13
-08
-08
-08
-03
-03
777
777
+ 05
+ 07
+ 02
+ 00
+ 03
+ 08
+ 07
+ 0*
+ 0*
+ 06
+ 06
+ 08
+ 07
+ 07
+ 07
+ 02
+ 02
777
777
          2*    8     6 -31  +27      7     5*  -08 +0* -03 +03 -03 +02

         185    60   351 -56  +60    389    301  -22 +13 -15 +10 -11 +07
                                       D-31

-------
   TABLE D-8.   MANUAL  N02 PRECISION AND  ACCURACY ANNUAL VALUES FOR
                 REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
REPORTING
    ORGAN
   STATE  NO. NO.
  REGION SLAM NAMS
   48003     8   0
   XXVA      8   0
                                 MANUAL METHODS
   XRG03
            8
10001
10004
10012
10017
XXFL
18002
XXKY
34002
34003
34004
XXNC
XRG04
14002
14003
**U
*RG05
19001
XXLA
32001
XXNM
XRG06
16002
XXIA
28002
XXNB
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
7
6
13
13
14
14
0
0
14
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
   XRG07
   NATION   40
NO. OF
SAMP-
LERS
32
32
32
24
9
20
20
73
16
16
20
36
2
58
147
36
26
62
62
56
56
6
6
62
7
7
4
4
NO.
COLL.
SITES
8
8
8
8
6
8
8
30
2
2
20
8
2
30
62
8
8
16
16
8
8
4
4
12
7
7
2
2
-rKtu
COLL.
.91UN
SAMPS PR.

-------
                  APPENDIX E




COMPARISONS OF PARS AND PERFORMANCE AUDIT DATA
                     E-l

-------
                TABLE E-l.  PARS AND  PA DATA FOR CO, PB, TSP, N02 (MANUAL)
                           AND S02 (MANUAL) METHODS


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTE

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
                            DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983
DATE 10/24/85

REGION  01  STATE   07
                        CONNECTICUT
REP ORG  001   LAB   30600

c

I

I

POL. CD. AU
42101 CO
PARS (
12128 LEAD
PARS (
11101 HIV
PARS (
DITS
6
6)
6
15)
27
84)
	 rKi
LEVEL 1 LEVI
LOW UP LOW
+ 1
(-14) (+13) ( -3)
-4 +0 -4
( -5) ( +6) ( -4)
TOTAL -6
( -5)
JbAOlLl 1 T L in J. 1 b 	
-.1 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+2 -1 +3
( +4) ( -5) ( +2)
+ 0 -5 -3
( +4)
+ 4
( +5)
REGION  01  STATE   20   MAINE
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

6
2)
12
16)
9
61)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-62 +54
( +0) (+16)
-8 +11
( -6) ( +7)
TOTAL

	 rKUBABiLI 1 Y Lim 1 b 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-5
( -6)
-7
( -6)
-20
( -6)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+10 -1 +6
(+14) ( -7) (+13)
+3 -9 +6
( +2)
+ 11
( +8)
  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN  THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                      (continued)
                                          E-2

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  01  STATE  22  MASSACHUSETTS              REP ORG  001  LAB  304001

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS
C42101 CO
   PARS
(   13)
112128 LEAD    12
   PARS     (  38)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  -7   +16
(  -5)  (+10)

 -13    +7
(  -5)  ( + 4)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -1   +16
(  -3)  ( +8)

 -18   +10
(  -4)  ( +3)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  + 3    +9
(  -3)  ( + 4)
                                                      LEVEL  4
                                                     LOW     UP
                                      -48
       + 46
REGION  01  STATE  30  NEW  HAMPSHIRE
                                     REP  ORG   001   LAB   302001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

18
( 23)
LEVE
LOW
-12
( +0)
L 1
UP
+ 13
( +9)
	 rKuni
LEVEL
LOW
— X
( -5) (
AD 1 L 1 1
2
UP
+ 8
+ 8)
IT L i ni i a-
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -6) (
3
UP
+ 9
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


112128 LEAD    12
   PARS     (  12)
111101 HIV
   PARS
   10
(   44)
 -12    +4
(-12) (  +7)

 TOTAL
 -13    +6
(  -5) (  +4)

  -4    +0
(  -4) (  +6)
                                        -6
        + 1
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                         E-3

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  01  STATE  41   RHODE  ISLAND              REP ORG  001   LAB   305001
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

15
8)
12
23)
6
44)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-5 + 6
( -3) ( +3)
-8 -2
(-11) ( +8)
TOTAL

rKUBABlLlIT L 1 H 1 1 S -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-1
( -2)
-12
(-11)
-8
( -7)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+4 -3 +4
( +1) ( -3) ( +0)
+2 -3 -1
( + 10)
-2
( +4)
REGION  01  STATE   47   VERMONT
                REP  ORG   001   LAB  303001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

9
( 3)
41
( 33)
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -4) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 1
+ 2)


	 r KUDt
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -2) (
-5
( -5) (
\DILIIY Liniia 	
2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+ 1
+ 0)
+ 3
+ 3)
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-4

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)
             EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  01
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
	 rKUDHDiLJ. 1 T LJ.1'11 1 D 	
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
60 -32 +41 -5 +8 -3 +7
( 55) ( -5) (+10) ( -4) ( +6) ( -5) ( +5)
112128 LEAD    54
   PARS     ( 104)

111101 HIV     93
   PARS     ( 266)
 -11    +6
(  -7) (  +6)

 TOTAL
 -12    +5
(  -6) (  +5)

  -8    +5
(  -6) (  +6)
-22
+ 18
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-5

-------
                                  TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  02  STATE  31  NEW JERSEY                 REP ORG  001  LAB  308001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

30
( 12)
31
( 31)
LEVEL
LOW
-6
(-11) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 4
+ 8)


	 rKU
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -5)
-4
( -9)
BAD J. L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 7
( + 10)
+ 3
( +6)
T L J.n J. 1 b-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
( -4) (


3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 7)


REGION  02  STATE  33  NEW YORK
REP ORG  001  LAB  307001
 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
AUDITS

62
( 222)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

- r KUB/
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -1) (
4DJ.L1IT L 1 D 1 1 9 	
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


REGION  02  STATE  33  NEW YORK
REP ORG  001  LAB  407CQ3
PO

C42

112

L.CD.

101 CO
PARS
128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

75
( 77)
24
( 34)
LEVE
LOW
-45
( -7)
-10
(-13)
L 1
UP
+ 32
( +8)
+ 12
( + 10)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -3)
-10
(-15)
DAD J. L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 3
( +6)
+ 8
( + 15)
IT L im i
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -2)
-8

L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 1
( +2)
+ 10

* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION ORNTHE AVERAGES
                                                     Ccontinued;
                                         E-6

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  02  STATE  40   PUERTO  RICO               REP ORG  001   LAB   309001


POL. CD.

C42101 CO

I

PARS
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 8)
9
( 26)
LEVE
LOW
-24
(-29)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 22
( + 20)


L
r KU
EVE
LOW
-1
(-2
-1
( -
4
1)
4
9)
DAD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 14
( + 16)
+ 20
( +3)
T L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-10
(-11)


O
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 10
( +6)


  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-7

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
                      EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTE
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
REGION  02
               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

                 REGION AVERAGES
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

111
( 97)
LEVE
LOW
-37
(-10)
L 1
UP
+ 28
( + 10)
	 r Kuaf
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -6) (
\D1L1 1
2
UP
+ 5
+ 8)
T L i n i i a -
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 4
+ 3)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


112128 LEAD
   PARS     (
               34)
111101 HIV
   PARS
  102
(  279)
 -10   +12
(-15)  (+12)

 TOTAL
 -10    +8
(-16)  (+15)

  -5    +8
(  -3)  (  +5)
                                                    -8
                                             +10
  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-8

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EM5L  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983
REGION  03  STATE  08  DELAWARE
                                                REP  ORG   001   LAB  313002

                                    -PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS

112128 LEAD
   PARS
          AUDITS
             12
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP
        LEVEL 2
       LOW    UP
              LEVEL 3
             LOW    UP
                              LEVEL 4
                             LOW    UP
 -7
+ 3
-3
        + 5
-5
+ 3
          (   8)    ( -5)  ( +6)    (  -8)  (  +8)    (-10)  (  +7)
             12
       + 8
111101 HIV     23
   PARS     (  16)
                    TOTAL
REGION  03  STATE  21  MARYLAND
 POL.CD.
          AUDITS
111101 HIV    174
   PARS     C  77)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
REGION  03  STATE  21  MARYLAND
 POL.CD.
          AUDITS
111101 HIV    174
   PARS     (  13)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
        -9
      -3
               -11
      -2
          (   8)    (-18)  (+14)    (-16)  (  +4)
              -22    +6
             ( -9) ( +6)

                           REP ORG   001   LAB   312001

             	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
                      LEVEL 3
                     LOW    UP
                            LEVEL 4
                           LOW    UP
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

 -12   +11
(-10)  ( +9)
                                                REP  ORG   002   LAB  312001

                                    •PROBABILITY LIMITS	
        LEVEL 2
       LOW    UP

       -12   +11
      (-14) (+22)
              LEVEL 3
             LOW    UP
                              LEVEL 4
                             LOW    UP
ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCU
                                                              THE  AVERAGES
                                         E-9

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTE

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983
REGION  03  STATE  21  MARYLAND
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV     11
   PARS     (  13)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
REGION  03  STATE  21   MARYLAND
                                      REP  ORG  003  LAB  41200

                          •PROBABILITY LIMITS	
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  + 9   +87
(  -8)  ( + 4)
 LEVEL 3
LOW    UP
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
                                      REP ORG  005  LAB  41200
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUDABlLl 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
T L 1 i'l 1 1 D
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
111101 HIV      15
   PARS      (   12)
          TOTAL
REGION  03  STATE   21   MARYLAND
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV      18
   PARS      (   13)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
               -4    +8
              ( -6)  (+11)

                            REP  ORG  006  LAB  41200

             	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -3   +12
(-12) (+15)
 LEVEL 3
LOW    UP
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-10

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                                   TABLE E-l  (Continued)
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
             COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  03   STATE   39  PENNSYLVANIA               REP  ORG   001  LAB  3110C2
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

45
( 22)
12
( 24)
LEVEL
LOW
-13
(-12) (
-29
( -6) (
1
UP
+ 12
+ 9)
+ 7
+ 6)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-11
(-11)
-9
(-10)
D«D J. L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 13
( +5)
+ 3
( +6)
IT L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-8
( -7)
-11

D "~
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 11
( +4)
— 1

             STATE  39  PENNSYLVANIA
                REP ORG  002  LAB   411002
PO

C42

112

111

L.CD. AUDITS

101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

12
17)
12
14)
14
206)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-5 +2
( -9) ( +6)
-15 +9
(-20) (+14)
TOTAL

	 	 r KUDMD.L L i 1 T L i 1*1 1 1 3 — — -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-1
( -5)
— o
(-49)
-5
( -5)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+4 -2 +4
( +4) ( -4) ( +4)
-1 -9 +2
( +1)
+ 4
( +5)
* ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF THE AVERAGES
                                                      (continued)
                                          E-ll

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
                EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTE
             COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85




REGION  03   STATE
39
    DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983




PENNSYLVANIA               REP ORG   003   LAB  4110C
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
36
( 8)
12
( 9)
11
( 16)
STATE
AUDITS
33
( 8)
12
( 12)
25
( 60)
LEVE
LOW
-12
( -8)
-16
TOTAL
48 VIRG
LEVE
LOW
+ 0
( -5)
-3
(-12)
L 1
UP
+ 7
( +5)
+ 22

INIA
L 1
UP
+ 7
( +4)
+ 6
( +8)
TOTAL
	 rKutsA
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -7) (
-9
( -5) (
-3
( -8) (
PD O D i
KuB/
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -4) (
-4
( -5) (
-10
( -3) (
kt>i L
2
UP
+ 6
+ 7)
+ 0
+ 3)
+ 8
+ 6)
\BIL
2
UP
+ 4
+ 1)
+ 4
+ 6)
-1
+ 3)
J.IY L i n i i 3 -
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -6) (
-7

REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -4) (
-7

3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 5)
+ 4

001 LAB 31500
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 1)
+ 7

*  ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                       (continued)
                                           E-12

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983
REGION  03  STATE  48  VIRGINIA
                                      REP  ORG   002   LAB  415005
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03

POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

3
( 4)
6
( 8)
STATE

AUDITS

18
( 10)
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -1) (
TOTAL

48 VIRGIN


LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -4) (
1
UP
-2
+ 2)


IA


1
UP
+ 2
+ 5)
	 r K (jof
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
( -4) (
-11
( -3) (

D D n O j

LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -5) (
\D i L
2
UP
+ 0
+ 2)
+ 5
+ 2)

\BIL
2
UP
+ 5
+ 9)
i i T L i n i i a -
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
( -5) (


REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
( -4) (
3
UP
+ 1
+ 2)


003


3
UP
+ 3
+ 8)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP




LAB 415004


LEVEL 4
LOW UP


142602 N02
   PARS
(   28)
112128 LEAD    11
   PARS     (  30)

111101 HIV     11
   PARS     (  23)
(  -7) (  +8)

 -33   + 67
(  -6) (  +7)

 TOTAL
REGION  03  STATE  48   VIRGINIA
 POL.CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS
AUDITS
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP
    6      -4    +4
(    4)   ( -1) ( +2)
               -4    -4
             ( -1) ( +5)
                                        + 1
                     + 5
  -8    +2
(  +0)  (  +4)

  -6   +14
(  -2)  (  +6)

  -2    +0
(  -3)  (  +2)
                                      REP  ORG  005  LAB  415001

                          •PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 LEVEL 2
LOW    UP
                LEVEL 3
               LOW    UP
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
                -3    +4      -8    +5
              ( -4) ( +2)    ( -5)  ( +2)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES


                                                     (continued)
                                         E-13

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE 10/24/85

REGION  03  STATE
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
                            DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983
 POL. CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS

112128 LEAD
   PARS

111101 HIV
   PARS
            AUDITS
12
39)

15
16)
                   50  WEST  VIRGINIA
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -36   +21
(  -8)  ( -1)

  + 4   +13
(  -1)  ( +7)

 TOTAL
                                   REP  ORG

                       •PROBABILITY  LIMITS-
                                                           001  LAB  314001
                      LEVEL  2
                     LOW     UP

                      -5     +2
                    ( -6)  (  +1)
  -2
(  -6)
                                           +10
                                      -5     +8
                                    (  -5)  (  +7)
REGION  03  STATE  50  WEST  VIRGINIA
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -1    +0
(  -6)  ( +0)

 -14   +12
                                                                  LEVEL 4
                                                                 LOW    UP
                                                  REP ORG  002  LAB  314002
 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
30 TOTAL
( 20)
	 r KUBAtSi L 1 1 Y Linilb 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW UP LOW UP
-9 +6
( -4) ( +7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                         E-14

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
                      EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
REGION  03
               DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                 REGION AVERAGES
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS

171
( 85)
5
( 28)
LEVEL
LOW
-10
( -9) (

( -6) (
1
UP
+ 9
+ 7)

+ 7)
	 r KUCW
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -7) (
-8
( +0) (
AD 1 L 1 1
2
UP
+ 8
+ 5)
+ 2
+ 3)
IT L 1 PI 1 1 3-
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -6) (
-4
( +0) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 4)
-4
+ 4)
112128 LEAD    83
   PARS     (  136)
111101 HIV
   PARS
  527
(  493)
 -30   +30
(-10) (+11)

 TOTAL
 -11    +8
(-14) (+10)

 -13   +11
(  -7) (  +7)
                                       -11
+ 6
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                          E-15

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE  01  ALABAMA                    REP  ORG  Oil  LAB  319001


I
POL

111
.CD.

01 HIV
PARS
R


EGI
POL

ON 04
.CD.

AUDITS

14
( 44)
STATE 01
AUDITS

LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL

1
UP


ALABAMA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-8
( -6)
at
I


(
\a i L
2
UP
+ 6
+ 7)
	 P P rm A n T 1
rKUDADi i_
LEVEL 2
LOW

UP
1 1 Y L INI 1 b 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP


REP ORG 012
TTV 1 TMTTC
1 1 Y L i rl 1 1 b 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVE
LOW


LAB 4
LEVE
LOW
L 4
UP


19001
L 4
UP
C42101 CO      12      +1    +7       +3     +5       +1     +4
   PARS     (   6)   ( -2)  (+11)    (  -4)  (+10)

112128 LEAD     6      -8    -3       -4     +0       -6     -6
   PARS     (  12)   ( -5)  ( -1)    (  -1)  (  +1)

111101 HIV     12     TOTAL           +5     +7
   PARS     ( 360)                  (  -4)  (  +4)

REGION  04  STATE  01  ALABAMA                    REP  ORG   014  LAB  419004

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.     AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW     UP      LOW     UP     LOW    UP

112128 LEAD    12      -1    +5      -22   +70      -10    +10
   PARS     (  15)   ( -8)  (+10)    (  -9)  (  +7)

111101 HIV      4     TOTAL           -I     +4
   PARS     (   8)                  (  -4)  (  +4)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES


                                                    (continued)

                                        E-16

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE  01  ALABAMA                    REP ORG  015  LAB  419CQ5

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	^	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

111101 HIV      9     TOTAL           -8    +5
   PARS     (  13)                  (-11)  C+10)

REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP ORG  001  LAB  323005

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

142602 N02      5                     -5    +3      -3    -3
   PARS     (  12)   (-10) (+13)    (  -6)  (  +7)    (  -5) ( +6)

142401 S02      9      +6   +16       +3   +14      -1   +16      -4   +18
   PARS     (  12)   (-12) (+10)    (  -6)  (  +5)    (  -5) ( +4)

111101 HIV     36     TOTAL           -8   +11
   PARS     (  53)                  (  -6)  (  +6)

REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP ORG  002  LAB  323003

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

111101 HIV     15     TOTAL           -8    +8
   PARS     (   6)                  (  -1)  (  +8)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                  (continued)

                                      E-l 7

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTE

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP  ORG  003  LAB  3230C

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
 POL,CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL f,
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UF

111101 HIV     21     TOTAL          -15     -2
   PARS     (   6)                  C  -7)  (  + 4)

REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP ORG  004  LAB  3230C

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UF

142602 N02      5                     -8     +3       -4    -4
   PARS     (   9)    ( -3)  (  +8)    (  -3)  (  +5)    (  -2)  ( +6)

142401 S02     10     -48   +69       -6     -1       -7    +8      -6    +C
   PARS     (  21)    (-15)  (+15)    (-10)  (  +9)    (  -9)  ( +6)

111101 HIV     12     TOTAL           -4     +7
   PARS     (  13)                  (  -2)  (  +1)

REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP ORG  005  LAB  3230C

                      	.	.	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2       LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    Ur

111101 HIV     10     TOTAL           -9     -1
   PARS     (  14)                  (  -4)  (  +7)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)

                                       E-18

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 19S3
REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA
                                      REP ORG  006  LAB  325006

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS	.-	
 POL. CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV     26
   PARS     (  13)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
REGION  04  STATE  10  FLORIDA
                      LEVEL 3
                     LOW    UP
                             LEVEL  4
                            LOW     UP
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -5    +7
(  -6) ( +6!
                                      REP ORG  007  LAB  323G10

                          •PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL. CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV      3
   PARS     (   5)
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

TOTAL
REGION  04  STATE   10   FLORIDA
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -1    +4
(  -6) ( +5:
                      LEVEL  3
                     LOW     UP
                             LEVEL  4
                            LOW     UP
                                      REP ORG  Oil  LAB  423003
 POL. CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS

112128 LEAD
   PARS
AUDITS
                30
                12
111101 HIV     66
   PARS     (  65)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUQABiLi 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
T L i ri i 4 3 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
           -7
+ 9
-2
+ 7
           + 0   +12
-1
              +4
            (   12)    (  -4)  (+10)    (  -4)  (  +4)
          TOTAL
        -6    +7
      C -4) (+11)
                              -1
                      +7
            (  25)    (  -8)  (  +8)    (  -3)  (  +8)   C -5) ( +8)
                                    + 3
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-19

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  04  STATE   10   FLORIDA                   REP ORG  012   LAB   423004
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
27
( 6)
10
( 24)
5
( 23)
12
( 12)
43
( 80)
STATE
AUDITS
30
C 25)
10
( 7)
12
( 11)
30
( 36)
LEVE
LOW
-23
(-18)
( -2)
+ 3
(-11)
-8
(-14)
TOTAL
10 FLOR
LEVE
LOW
-9
( -6)
-4
(-10)
-7
( -3)
TOTAL
L 1
UP
+ 18
( + 9)
( +5)
+ 3
( +4)
-3
( -1)

IDA
L 1
UP
+ 5
( +6)
+ 10
( +01
+ 10
( +8)

	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-7
(-24)
-9
( -1)
+ 2
( -6)
-13
(-11)
-10
( -8)
-_ — — D D n
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -4)
+ 4
( -6)
— ?
( -5)
-6
( -3)
BABl L
L 2
UP
+ 11
( + 15)
+ 2
( +4)
+ 2
( +2)
-4
( +0)
+ 13
( + 14)
BAB1L
L 2
UP
+ 1
( +4)
+ 8
( +0)
+ 1
( + 11)
+ 5
( +2)
1 1 Y L1N1 1 b
LEVEL
LOW
-7
(-28) (
-8
( -1) (
+ 3
( -5) (
-11

REP ORG
ITY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -4) (
+ 2
( -6) (
-1

3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 12
+ 15)
+ 1
+ 4)
+10 -3 -3
+ 1)
-3

013 LAB 423016
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 2
+ 5)
+11 +2 +7
+ 0)
+ 3

  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-20

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

             COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  04   STATE  10  FLORIDA                    REP  ORG  014  LAB   423C05
POL. CD.
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
AUDITS
10
( 31)
23
( 17)
STATE
AUDITS
9
( 4)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
-9
(-20)
TOTAL
10 FLOR
LEVE
LOW
TOTAL
10 FLOR
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
+ 12
( +7)

IDA
L 1
UP

IDA
L 1
UP
	 f KUBAtS J. L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-4 +18
(-16) ( +5)
-5 +5
(-14) (+21)
D D n D A D T 1
	 rKUbADl L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-3 +6
( -5) ( +4)
_— D D fin A n T 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
i i Y L i n i i :> 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
+ 1 +14
(-13) ( +2)

REP ORG 015
IT V I T M T T C
IT L i n 1 1 b
LEVEL 3
LOW UP

REP ORG 016
TTV 1 TMTTC
11Y L 1 rl i 1 o
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
+ 0 +9

LAB 423015
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

LAB 423008
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42101  CO        6     -18     +8      +0    +4       +3   +12
   PARS     (    4)   (-16)  (+15)    (  -3)  ( +4)    (  -5) ( +5)

111101  HIV     14     TOTAL           -4    +1
   PARS     (   12)                  (  -4)  ( +2)


* ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)

                                         E-21

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE   10   FLORIDA                    REP  ORG  017  LAB  423001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
I1110I HIV
PARS
AUDITS

27
( 7)
10
( 61)
10
( 60)
12
( 14)
27
( 14)
LEVE
LOW
-5
(-44)

( -7)
-2
(-39)
+ 0
( -5)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 1
(+42)

( + 13)
+ 40
( + 17)
+ 9
( +7)


	 --r KU
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -3)
-19
( -5)
-42
(-26)
-5
( -6)
-10
( -7)
£>At5 i L 1 i
L 2
UP
+ 1
( +9)
+ 7
( +7)
+ 22
( + 13)
+ 10
( +6)
+ 3
( +9)
IT L ini i
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -3)
-12
( -4)
-35
(-19)
-2



V, 	
L 3
UP
+ 1
( +4)
+ 11
( +5)
+ 15
( +7)
+ 7



LEVEL A
LOW UP




-16 +13





REGION  04   STATE   10   FLORIDA
REP ORG  018   LAB   423C02
POL. CD.

C42I01 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

12
( 5)
6
( 12)
LEVE
LOW
-23
(-26)
-5
( -8)
L 1
UP
+ 3
( + 14)
+ 5
( +3)
LEVE
LOW
-3
(-26)
-6
( -2)
OHO 1 L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 5
( + 13)
+ 0
( +1 )
T L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-1
(-24)
-5

3 	
L 3
UP
+ 1
( + 11)
-2

LEVEL 4
LOW UP




  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                      (continued)
                                          E-22

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE  11  GEORGIA                    REP ORG  010  LAB  321001

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42101 CO      12      -9     +6       -3    + 4      -2    + 4
   PARS     (   9)   (-23) (  +5)    (  -6)  (  +2)    (  -4) ( +2)

112128 LEAD    12     -29   +10       -7    +0      -3    -1
   PARS     (   9)   ( -9) (  +0)    (  -4)  (  +1)

111101 HIV     15     TOTAL           -7    +2
   PARS     (  50)                  (  -6)  (+10)

REGION  04  STATE  18  KENTUCKY                   REP ORG  001  LAB  316001
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r K UD/
LEVEL
LOW
\D J. L 1 1
2
UP
T L 1 H 1 1 3
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


111101 HIV     26     TOTAL           -3    +13
   PARS     ( 101)                  (  -4)  (+13)

REGION  04  STATE  18  KENTUCKY                   REP ORG  001  LAB  3160C7

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL 2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42101 CO      39      -4   +86      -44    +60      -74   +71
   PARS     (  24)   (-16)  (+14)    (  -7)  ( +6)    (  -6)  ( +5)

112128 LEAD    12     -26   +27      -17     + 9      -19   +13
   PARS     (  12)   (-15)  (+24)    (-13)  ( +8)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)

                                         E-23

-------
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  04  STATE  18  KENTUCKY                   REP ORG  002  LAB  416001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
AUDITS

21
( 2)
5
( 30)
LEVE
LOW
-8
(-23)
+ 3
( -4)
L 1
UP
+ 7
( + 11)
2
( +6)
	 r KUB>
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -5) (

( -2) (
Ml 1 i. i I
2
UP
+ 6
+ 7)

+ 5)
i Y L 1 Hi 1
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -3)

( -1 )
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 11
( +6)

( + 3)
112128 LEAD    12      -9    +5       -4     +2
   PARS     (  12)    ( -7)  (+14)    (-12)  (+12)

REGION  04  STATE  25  MISSISSIPPI                REP ORG  100  LAB  322002
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 4)
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
(-10) (
1
UP
+ 4
+ 9)
rnuot
LEVEL
LOW

( -5) (
\D 1 L J. 1
2
UP

+ 7)
IT L i ni i d-
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 2
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


112128 LEAD     6      +3    +14      -17   +20      -3    +4
   PARS     (  17)    (-16)  (+20)    (-12)  (+13)

111101 HIV     18      TOTAL           -9    +8
   PARS     (  29)                  (  -6)  (  +7)

REGION  04  STATE   34  NORTH CAROLINA            REP ORG  001  LAB  318001

                       	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2       LEVEL 3        LEVEL  4
                       LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP      LOW     UP

111101 HIV     62      TOTAL          -14   +12
   PARS     (  227)                  (  -5)  (  +4)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES


                                                      (continued)

                                          E-24

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
                       EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE   34   NORTH CAROLINA             REP ORG  001  LAB   318004
PO

C42

REG
L.CD.

101 CO
PARS
ION 04
POL. CD.

C42

111


101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

12
( 13)
STATE
AUDITS

12
( 8)
27
( 15)
LEVEL
LOW
-12
(-14) (
34 NORTH
LEVEL
LOW
-24
(-12) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 12
+ 8)
CAROL
1
UP
+ 9
+ 7)


	 r KUB>
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -6) (
INA
_««_DD nn
____(- ^ (jm
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -3) (
-6
( -8) (
\tt I L
2
UP
+ 7
+ 4)

2
UP
+ 3
+ 4)
+ 2
+ 8)
IIY L i n i i 3-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -6) (
REP ORG
TTV 1 TMTTC
ill L J. rl 1 1 b
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -2) (


3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 4
+ 3)
002 LAB 418003
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 3
+ 3)


REGION  04   STATE   34  NORTH CAROLINA
                                      REP ORG   003   LAB  418006
POL. CD-

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS

30
( 59)
10
( 54)
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -9) (

( -4) (
1
UP
+ 4
+ 7)

+ 7)
	 r KUB/
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -1) (
-6
( +0) (
•\DILi
2
UP
+ 3
+ 4)
+ 2
+ 5)
T L i n 1 1 3 •
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -3) (
-9
( -1) (
3
UP
+ 3
+ 3)
+ 9
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP




111101 HIV
   PARS
   68
(   43)
TOTAL
  -5    + 5
(  -5) ( +7)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                      (continued)
                                         E-25

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                                  TABLE E-l (Continued)
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEf'
             COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  Oft   STATE   34  NORTH CAROLINA             REP ORG   004   LAB  418GOJ
POL. CD.
142602 N02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
4
( 5)
12
( 8)
STATE
AUDITS
18
( 47)
12
( 17)
13
( 228)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 27)
10
C 183)
LEVEL
LOW
( -2) (
TOTAL
42 SOUTH
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-22) C
-1
C -3) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 24)

CAROL
1
UP
+ 4
+ 11)
+ 8
+ 8)

44 TENNESSEE
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-26) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 3
+ 35)

r KUOAD i L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-28 -10
(-12) (+17)
-14 +10
( -4) (+12)
INA
— D D f"l D A D T 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-4 +5
( -8) ( +6)
-3 +6
( -3) ( +4)
+ 5 +7
( -2) ( +2)
r»r»rin»r»Ti
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-18 +6
(-14) (+19)
-5 +2
( -5) (+10)
J.IT Li riilS 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
(-20) (+23)

REP ORG 001
TTV 1 TMTTC- — — — — —
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-3 +6
( -7) ( +5)
-15 +12

REP ORG 001
TTV 1 TMTTC
III L i ri 1 1 b
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-9 +6

LEVEL 4
LOW UP


LAB 32000]
LEVEL 4
LOW UP



LAB 31700.
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


* ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                       (continued)
                                          E-26

-------
                                  TABLE E-l  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE  44  TENNESSEE                  REP ORG  002  LAB  417004
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

22
33)
6
12)
5
52)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-7 +16
(-10) ( +5)
-11 +15
(-15) (+16)
TOTAL

	 r K U B A D 1 LI 1 T LJ.FH 1 S 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-4
( -5)
-4
(-14)
-10
( -4)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+13 -1 +5
( +5) ( -4) ( +5)
+0 -26 +18
( + 10)
+ 3
( +7)
REGION  04  STATE  44  TENNESSEE
               REP ORG   003   LAB   417003
POL. CD. AUDITS


C42101 CO

I

I

PARS (
12128 LEAD
PARS (
11101 HIV
PARS (

30
28)
6
60)
38
90)
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
(-17) (
-9
( -5) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 6
+ 8)
-6
+ 3)


	 rKUDADiLl 1
LEVEL 2
LOW
-2
(-14)
-4
( -5)
-5
( -8)
UP
+ 5
( +8)
+ 2
( + 3)
+ 1
( + 13)
I T Lll'll 13 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-1
( -3)
-8


-
UP LOW UP
+ 5
( +3)
+ 20



* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                        E-27

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983
REGION  04  STATE  44  TENNESSEE
 POL.CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS

111101 HIV
   PARS
AUDITS
    6
(   11)

   18
(   54)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  -9    +9
C  -6)  ( +6)

 TOTAL
                                      REP  ORG  004  LAB  417002

                          •PROBABILITY LIMITS	
  LEVEL  2
  LOW     UP

  -3   +10
 ( -2)  (  +3)

  -5     +6
 ( -5)  (  +6)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -8   +17
C  -4)  ( +3)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
REGION  04  STATE  44  TENNESSEE
                                      REP ORG  005  LAB  417001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 9)
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -8) (
1
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
	 r KUB/
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -6) (
\DiLl
2
UP
+ 6
+ 4)
IT L irii i :>-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 8
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


111101 HIV
   PARS
   17
(   46)
 TOTAL
REGION  04  STATE  44  TENNESSEE
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV      17
   PARS      (   46)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 TOTAL
  -8     +1
 ( -6)  (  +6)

               REP  ORG   006  LAB  417001

	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
   LEVEL  2
  LOW     UP

   -8     +1
 (  -6)  (  +8)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-28

-------
                                   TABI.F K-l (Corit i-
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
              EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  S V C 7 F.
             COMPARISON  REPORT  OF QADH5  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE  10/24/85                DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                                 REGION  AVERAGES

REGION   04
PO

C42

142

L .CD.

101 CO
PARS
602 N02
PARS
142401 S02

PARS
AUDITS

358
( 325)
44
( 165)
59
( 184)
LEVE
LOW
-26
(-15)

( -8)
-45
(-25)
L 1
UP
+ 34
( + 10 )

( + 13)
+ 43
( + 15)
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-16
( -7)
-18
( -8)
-15
(-17)
D AD i L I !
L 2
UP
+ 20
( +7)
+ 8
( + 11 )
+ 19
( + 10)
T L 1 1 1 I I
LEVE
LOW
-22
( -6)
-9
( -5)
-13
(-13)
^
L 3
UP
+ 25
( +5)
+ 6
( + 7)
+ 19
( +7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP




-S +12

112128 LEAD    150
    PARS      (  254)

111101 HIV     720
    PARS      (1935)
 -14    +13
(-13)  (+14)

 TOTAL
 -32    +25
(  -9)  (  +8)

  -9     +9
(  -5)  (  +7)
-11
+ 8
  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE INCLUDED IN  THE CALCULATION  OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                         (continued)
                                           E-29

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  14   ILLINOIS                   REP ORG  001   LAB   323001
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
C42101 CO 21 -16 + 27
PARS ( 9) ( -8) ( +6)
	 rKUtSABlLi 1 Y Li Hi 1 b 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-6 +10 -4 + 7
( -7) ( +7) ( -7) ( +5)
112128 LEAD    12
   PARS     (  12)

111101 HIV     10
   PARS     (  69)
                       -7     +2
                      ( -7)  (+13)

                      TOTAL
REGION  05  STATE  14   ILLINOIS
 POL. CD.
AUDITS
142602 N02     10
   PARS     (  25)

112128 LEAD    10
   PARS     (  12)

111101 HIV      9
   PARS     (  15)
                        LEVEL  1
                       LOW     UP
                      ( -7)  (  +5)

                       -5     +2
                      C -7)  (+13)

                      TOTAL
                                     -10    -2     -10    -1
                                    (  -6)  (  +7)

                                      -3    + 4
                                    (  -7)  (  +6)

                                                  REP ORG  002   LAB   426002

                                       PROBABILITY LIMITS -----------------
                                      LEVEL 2
                                     LOW    UP

                                      -7    +4
                                    (  -8)  ( +6)

                                     -14    +5
                                    (  -4)  (+11)

                                     -10    +6
                                    (-13)  (+11)
                                                    LEVEL 3
                                                   LOW    UP

                                                   -10   +11
                                                  (  -9) ( +6)
                                                                   LEVEL  4
                                                                  LOW     UP
  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-30

-------
                                TABLE E-l  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION  AGENCY   EMSL PR EC ISI ON/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                     4   ILLINOIS                   REP  ORG  003  LAB  4113003

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
REGION  05  STATE
 POL.CD.
            AUDITS
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP
               LEVEL  2
              LOW     UP
                                                     LEVEL  3
                                                    LOW     UP
                               LEVEL 4
                              LOW    UP
C42101 CO       15      -18   +15     -12   +14
   PARS      (   11)    (-17)  (  + 9)   ( -9)  ( +6)
                                                     -4    +12
                                                   (  -9)  (  +5)
142602 N02
   PARS
             (   29)    (-12)  (+11)
112128 LEAD^    12
                        -4   +15
   PARS      (   12)    (  -6) (+12)

111101 HIV       5      TOTAL
   PARS      (   20)
                                      -5    +6
                                    (-15) (+10)

                                      -6    +4
                                    (  -9) ( +8)

                                      -8    -3
                                    (  -7) ( +4)
                              -7    +7
                            (-18) (  +9)
                              -7
                                    + 1
REGION  05   STATE   15  INDIANA
                                                   REP ORG  001  LAB  329002
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

12
( 9)
LEVE
LOW
-18
(-38)
L 1
UP
+ 2
(+22)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-4
(-11)
DAD 1 L i I
L 2
UP
+ 3
( + 11 )
T L i ri i i
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -6)
3
L 3
UP
+ 3
( + 10)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


112128 LEAD    12
   PARS     (  17)
                        -6
                              + 4
REGION  05  STATE   15  INDIANA
  -2    +2
(  -9) (+10)
                              -6
                                    + 9
                                                   REP ORG  002  LAB  429002

                                       -PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
 POL. CD.
            AUDITS
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP
                                      LEVEL 2
                                     LOW    UP
                LEVEL  3
               LOW     UP
                                             LEVEL  4
                                            LOW     UP
111101 HIV       6
   PARS      (   10)
                       TOTAL
               + 1     +5
              ( -2)  (  +5)
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES


                                                    (continued)
                                        E-31

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

             COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  05   STATE   15  INDIANA                    REP ORG  003   LAB   425007

I
POL
.CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
REGI
POL
I
ON 05
.CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
REGI
POL
ON 05
.CD.
AUDI
TS
27
( 16)
STAT
AUDI
1
( 1
E
TS
1
0)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
TOTAL
15 INDI
LEVE
LOW
TOTAL
L 1
UP

ANA
L 1
UP

15 INDIANA
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
	 r KUB;
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -6) (

r K UD/
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -1) (
— P D OP i
LEVEL
LOW
=>tii L
2
UP
+ 5
+ 4)
\BIL
2
UP
+ 3
+ 4)
\BIL
2
UP
1 1 Y L ini 1 b 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP

REP ORG 005
IT V 1 T M T T C
IT Llnllb 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP

REP ORG 008
IT V 1 T M T T C
IT L i Pi 1 I 3
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL
LOW

LAB 42
LEVEL
LOW

LAB 42
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP

9005
4
UP

9004
4
UP
C42101 CO       18       -9    +3      -6     +5       -7    +7
   PARS      (   11)    (  -8) (  +8)   ( -4)  (  +8)    (  -3)  (  +3)

111101 HIV       6      TOTAL          -8     +8
   PARS      (   16)                  ( -3)  (  +5)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)

                                        E-32

-------
                                TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  05  STATE   15   INDIANA                   REP ORG   009   LAB  42SOOS
POL. CD. AUDITS
111101 HIV 15
PARS ( 8)
REGION 05 STATE
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO 30
PARS ( 8)
112128 LEAD 12
PARS ( 50)
REGION 05 STATE
POL. CD. AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
23 MICHIGAN
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-7 +6
( -9) ( +7)
-59 +41
( -7) ( +6)
23 MICHIGAN
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 f KUBAtii L 1 1 Y LinilS 	 -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-4 +6
( -4) ( +5)
REP ORG 001 LAB 326001
— rKUDADlLllY Linllb — ~ —
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-5
( -5)
-52
( -7)
+7 -7 +7
( +2) ( -7) ( +3)
+35 -53 +37
( +3)
REP ORG 002 LAB 426001
DDflDADTI TTV 1 TMTTC 	 —
- — — rKUBADlLlIT L 1 rl 1 1 o
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
C42101 CO       15      -14   +15      -6    +9       +0     +8
   PARS      (    9)    (-15) (+11)   ( -3)  ( +8)    (  -3)  (  +6)

112128 LEAD     12       -8   +12      -8    +8       -6     +5
   PARS      (   21)    (  -2) (  +4)   ( -3)  ( +4)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)

                                        E-33

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  05  STATE  24  MINNESOTA                  REP ORG  001  LAB  324001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

42
( 21)
LEVE
LOW
-15
(-20)
L 1
UP
+ 11
( + 17)
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-5
(-12)
DAB J. L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 10
( + 11)
IT L 1 II i 1 3
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-12) (
3
UP
+ 8
+ 8)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


112128 LEAD    12
   PARS     (  12)

111101 HIV     20
   PARS     ( 117)
 -28   +15
(  -6) (  + 3)

 TOTAL
  -2    + 2
(  -6)  (  +4)

  -6    +3
(  -6)  (  +5)
-3
+ 4
REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO
                            REP ORG   001   LAB   327001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
	 	 	 fKUDABlLlIT Lll'l 1 1 D ~ 	 ~
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
18 -1 +8 -2 +9 -3 +9
( 5) ( -8) (+14) ( -6) (+10) ( -5) ( +7)
112128 LEAD     12
   PARS      (   27)
 -32   +45
(-11) ( +7)
  -9    +1
(  -5) (  +2)
-6
-4
REGION  05   STATE   36   OHIO
 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
    PARS
                             REP  ORG   002   LAB  327003
AUDITS

23
( 11)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

	 rKUB/
LEVEL
LOW
_ Q
(-11) (
\B1L1IY L 1 n 0. 1 D 	
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 2
-2)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


  ZERO  PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-34

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO                      REP  ORG   003   LAB   327005

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL  4
                      LOW    UP     LOW     UP      LOW   UP      LOW     UP

111101 HIV     24     TOTAL           -5     + 4
   PARS     (  25)                  (  -6)  (  +6)

REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO                      REP  ORG   005   LAB   327006
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUBABiLl 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
i r L j. ni i r> 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


111101 HIV     20     TOTAL         -10    +6
   PARS     (  11)                  (-11)  ( +7)

REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO                       REP  ORG   006   LAB  427001

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL 2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL  4
                      LOW    UP     LOW    UP      LOW    UP      LOW    UP

C42101 CO      12      -4    +5       -3    +6       -6    +8
   PARS     (   4)   (-21) (+10)    (-14)  ( +8)    (  -8)  (+11)

111101 HIV     65     TOTAL           -5    +4
   PARS     (  16)                  (  -6)  ( +6)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                  (continued)

                                      E-35

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  36   OHIO                      REP ORG  007   LAB   427002
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 4)
32
( 14)
LEVEL
LOW
-31
(-15) (
TOTAL

1
UP
H4
+ 7)


	 r KUD/
LEVEL
LOW
-11
( -5) (
-7
( -2) (
\01 L J. 1
2
UP
+ 7
+ 2)
+ 3
+ 2)
IT L i n I I b-
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -9) (


3
UP
+ 5
+ 4)


LEVEL 4
LOW UP




REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO
               REP ORG   008   LAB   427003
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

30
( 4)
38
( 37)
LEVE
LOW
-2
(-18)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 12
( + 15)


	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
+ 0
(-17)
-5
( -8)
DAD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 8
( + 14)
+ 4
( +6)
IT L j. n i i 3-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
(-15) (


3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 9
+ 8)


REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO
               REP ORG   009   LAB   427004
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

18
( 2)
15
( 36)
LEVE
LOW
-10
(-14)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 5
( + 10)


LEVE
LOW
-5
(-18)
-10
(-14)
DMD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 4
(+14)
+ 4
( +8)
IT L 1 I'l 1 1 0 -
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-10) (


3
UP
+ 4
+ 2)


LEVEL 4
LOW UP




* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-36

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO                       REP ORG  010  LAB  427005

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.
C42101 CO
   PARS

111101 HIV
   PARS
AUDITS
   12
    4)

   11
   27)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -11    +2
(-10)  (+12)

 TOTAL
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -4    + 4
(-10) ( +7)

 -19   +18
(-13) ( +8)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -4    + 2
(  -6)  ( +0)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO
                                      REP ORG  012  LAB  427007
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 4)
42
( 16)
LEVE
LOW
-11
(-11 )
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 0
( + 19)


	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -7)
-7
( -8)
HABJL L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 9
( + 14)
+ 1
( +5)
T L 1 PI 1 1
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -4)


s
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 11
( + 9)


REGION   05   STATE   36   OHIO
 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
                                      REP ORG  013  LAB  427010
AUDITS

19
( 19)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

	 fKuat
LEVEL
LOW
-7
(-12) (
\01L1IY Llnlli 	
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


  ZERO  PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-37

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO                      REP ORG  014   LAB   427008
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

3
( 2)
14
( 25)
LEVE
LOW
-28
( -9)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
-28
( +3)


	 TKUDrtDlLJ. 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+32 +32
( +0) ( +0)
+ 0 +2
(-20) (+14)
T L 1 1 1 1 1
LEVE
LOW
+ 18
( -2)


o
L 3
UP
+ 18
( +2)


LEVEL 4
LOW UP




REGION  05  STATE   36   OHIO
               REP ORG   015   LAB  427009
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

12
( 4)
14
( 17)
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -8) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 1
-5)


	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-1
( -7)
-8
( -8)
DrtD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 0
( -2)
+ 1
( + 10)
IT L 1 n 1 1 S -
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -7) (


3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 2
+ 0)


REGION  05   STATE   36   OHIO
                REP  ORG   016  LAB  427012


C

I

POL. CD.

42101 CO
PARS
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

5
( 4)
24
( 19)
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -4) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 6
+ 3)


	 fKUUf
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -9) (
-5
( -4) (
\Q1L1 1
2
UP
+ 5
+ 5)
+ 3
+ 3)
IY Liniia 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 -1
( -7) ( +1)


* ZERO  PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-38

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  51  WISCONSIN                  REP ORG  001  LAB  325001

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

111101 HIV     42     TOTAL           -9    + 7
   PARS     (  84)                  (  -3)  (  +4)

REGION  05  STATE  51  WISCONSIN                  REP ORG  001  LAB  325002

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42101 CO      54      -4    +10       -2    +8      -1    +6
   PARS     (    5)    (-11)  (+20)    (  -5)  (  +6)    ( -3) ( +0)

112128 LEAD      6      -4     +8       -1    -1      -1    +1
   PARS     (  24)    ( -2)  (  +2)    (  -3)  (  +2)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)

                                       E-39

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
                           DATA  SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

                              REGION  AVERAGES
REGION  05
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS

329
( 120)
19
( 54)
LEVE
LOW
-13
(-16)

(-10)
L 1
UP
+ 13
( + 13)

( +8)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-7
( -8)
-6
(-12)
tSABi L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 11
( +8)
+ 5
( +8)
i Y L ini i :>-
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -8) (
-8
(-14) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 8
+ 6)
+ 8
+ 8)
112128 LEAD
   PARS
              100
            ( 187)
111101 HIV    492
   PARS     ( 638)
 -39   +50
(  -8) (  +8)

 TOTAL
 -37   +43
(  -6) (  +5)

  -7    +6
(  -9) (  +7)
-38
+ 43
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-AO

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                      EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  06  STATE  04  ARKANSAS                   REP ORG  002  LAB  332001
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r KUB/
LEVEL
LOW
\D 1 L 1 1
2
UP
T L 1 11 1 1 3 -
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
112128 LEAD     6
   PARS     (  23)

111101 HIV     14
   PARS     ( 116)
          -14    -8
         (-30) (+47)

          TOTAL
 -17    -6
(  -4) (+19)

  -3    +8
(  -5) (  +3)
-14
+ 0
REGION  06  STATE   19   LOUISIANA
                                      REP ORG  001  LAB  334001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS

12
( 3)
10
( 1)
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-13) (


1
UP
+ 1
+ 1)


	 TKUB/
LEVEL
LOW
-1
(-10) (
-8

\Ui L 1 I
2
UP
+ 2
-1)
+ 4

T L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
+ 1
( -3)
-10

O ~"
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 3
( -1)
+ 11

111101 HIV      13
   PARS      (  128)
          TOTAL
  -5   +17
(  -5) ( +5)
  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-41

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  06  STATE  32   NEW  MEXICO                REP ORG  001  LAB  330001


POL. CD.

C42101 CO

I

I

R


PARS
12128 LEAD
PARS
11101 HIV
PARS
EGION 06
POL. CD.

C42101 CO

R


PARS
EGION 06
POL. CD.

C42101 CO

PARS
AUDITS

9
( 9)
12
( 30)
9
( 201)
STATE
AUDITS

9
( 19)
STATE
AUDITS

12
( 2)
LEVE
LOW
-6
(-10)
-2
( -6)
TOTAL

32 NEW
LEVE
LOW
-29
(-10)
L 1
UP
+ 0
( + 14)
+ 2
( +4)


MEXICO
L 1
UP
+ 16
( +7)
37 OKLAHOMA
LEVE
LOW
-24
( + 10)
L 1
UP
+ 23
( + 16)
	 TKU
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -3)
-7
( -4)
— 6
( -5)
bABI
L 2
UP
+ 1
( + 10
+ 5
( +4
+ 15
( +6

rKUDAol
LEVEL 2
LOW
-4
( -7)
UP
+ 4
( +4

r K UD AD 1
LEVEL 2
LOW
-9
( +4)
UP
+ 10
( + 13
LI 1 Y Lini 1 b
LEVEL
LOW
-2
) ( -5) (
-2
)

>
REP ORG
LTTV 1 TMTTC
i i Y L I n 1 1 b
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
) ( -8) (
REP ORG
LTTV I TMTTC
III L 1 ri 1 1 O
LEVEL
LOW
-5
) (-20) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 0
+ 6)
+ 5



002 LAB 430001
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 2
+ 3)
101 LAB 331002
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 14)
112128 LEAD    12      -5    +1      -11     -3     -21   +13
   PARS     (  10)   ( -6)  ( +4)    (  -7)  (  +3)

111101 HIV      2     TOTAL           -2    +14
   PARS     (  14)                  (  -7)  (+13)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES

                                                   (continued)

                                      E-42

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24X85               DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  06  STATE   37   OKLAHOMA                  REP ORG  102  LAB  431001
POL. CD.
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
AUDITS
12
( 12)
13
( 14)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 10)
12
( 24)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-13 +11
(-14) ( +4)
TOTAL
37 OKLAHOMA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-15 +17
(-29) (+40)
-4 +1
( -3) ( +5)
45 TEXAS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-15
( -8)
-10
( -8)
._ — — _DD n
•— — r K U
LEVE
LOW
-9
( -8)
-6
( -3)
.— .— PDn
LEVE
LOW
BAB 1 L
L 2
UP
+ 5
( +3)
-1
( +6)
BABIL
L 2
UP
+ 8
( + 10)
+ 1
( +6)
BABIL
L 2
UP
1 1 T Lill I 1 3 	 • 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-9 -1

REP ORG 103 LAB 431002
ITVITMTTC «, « __
1 T L 1 rl I 1 D 	 — — 	 """" 	 ~" — 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-12 +14
( -1) ( +5)
-9 +1
REP ORG 001 LAB 333001
I TV 1 TMTTC ___ ___ ___ 	
IT L JL ri i 1 O — — — — — — — — — 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
C42101 CO      36     -12    +10      -11     +7      -9    +7
   PARS     (  72)    (-20)  (+22)    (-13)  (+14)   (-16) (+14)

111101 HIV     37     TOTAL           -9     +4
   PARS     ( 613)                  (  -6)  (  +6)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)

                                        E-43

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  06  STATE  45   TEXAS                      REP ORG  002  LAB  433002
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 8)
12
( 24)
33
( 67)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 2)
6
( 12)
51
( 92)
STATE
AUDITS
11
( 23)
LEVEL
LOW
-18
(-19) (
-11
(-10) (
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( +2) (
-5
(-15) (
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 1
+ 13)
+ 4
+ 2)


1
UP
+ 30
+ 14)
+ 0
+ 11)


1
UP

	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-14
(-18)
-57
(-15)
+ 0
( -9)
-— D on
r K U
LEVE
LOW
-4
( -8)
-7
( -5)
-16
( -7)
- D D n
r K U
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -3)
BABi
L 2
UP
+ 6
( + 11
+ 49
( +2
+ 10
( + 14
BABI
L 2
UP
+ 25
( +4
-1
( +7
+ 5
( +8
BABI
L 2
UP
+ 4
( +4
L 1 \ Y LJ.ru Ib 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-12 +6
) (-12) (+17)
-15 +14
)
)
REP ORG 003 LAB 433001
1 TTV 1 TMTTC 	
LI IT L 1 rl I 1 S 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-3 +23
) ( +0) ( +3)
-22 +6
)
)
REP ORG 005 LAB 433005
LTTVITMTTC —
llYLlnllb
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
)
  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES


                                                   (continued)

                                       E-44

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  06  STATE   45   TEXAS                     REP  ORG   006   LAB  433008


POL. CD.

C42101 CO

I

R


PARS
12128 LEAD
PARS
EGION 06
POL. CD.

AUDITS

18
( 6)
5
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS

LEVEL
LOW
-15
(-18) (
+ 0
( +0) (
45 TEXAS
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
+ 9
+ 6)
+ 0
+ 8)
	 rnuof
LEVEL
LOW
-3
(-12) (
-4
( -2) (
\a L L
2
UP
+ 6
+ 5)
-3
+ 2)
n n n n A n T i
l
UP
	 rHUDHDJ. t-
LEVEL 2
LOW
UP
i i T L i n i i i -
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -8) (
-3

REP ORG
I TV 1 TMTTC-
1 T L 1 ri 1 1 O
LEVEL
LOW
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 4
+ 6)
+ 3

007 LAB 433010
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
111101 HIV     10
   PARS     (  38)
                       TOTAL
  -4    -1
(  -2) ( +0)
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-45

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                      EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
REGION  06
               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

                 REGION AVERAGES
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS

126
( 131)
10
( 1)
LEVE
LOW
-16
(-20)


L 1
UP
+ 12
( + 21)


	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-9
(-11)
-8

BAB J. L i
L 2
UP
+ 9
( + 11)
+ 4

IT L ini i
LEVE
LOW
-8
(-12)
-10

V, 	
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 8
( + 11)
+ 11

112128 LEAD    77
   PARS     ( 140)
111101 HIV
   PARS
  193
(1306)
 -10    +5
(-18)  (+18)

 TOTAL
 -24   +15
(-10)  (+10)

 -11   +12
(  -6)  (  +6)
                                      -14
+ 8
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-46

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  07  STATE   16   IOWA                      REP ORG  001   LAB   436001

POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS

AUDITS
11
( 9)
23
( 16)
STATE
AUDITS
15
( 11)
18
( 23)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 5)
12
( 24)
15
( 48)

LEVE
LOW
-15
(-17)
TOTAL
16 IOWA
LEVE
LOW
-21
(-13)
TOTAL
16 IOWA
LEVE
LOW
-14
(-19)
-15
(-20)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 2
( + 14)


L 1
UP
+ 16
( +8)


L 1
UP
+ 13
( +0)
+ 8
( + 19)

DDOnAOTI
"• 	 PRUBAD 1 L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-4 +4
( -4) ( +1)
-19 +20
( -8) ( +8)
nnr^r>AnTi
	 PKuBABl L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +12
( -9) (+10)
+ 4 +6
( -6) ( -3)
D D n D A D T 1
— — 	 r K UD AD 1 L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-4 -1
( -7) ( +5)
-6 -2
( -7) (+10)
-2 +7
( -2) ( +7)
TTV 1 TMTTC _________ — — — .-. — _ -j _ _
1 1 Y L 1 PI 1 1 b
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-4 +6
( -2) ( +3)

REP ORG 002 LAB 436002
1 1 Y L 1 n 1 1 b
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
+ 0 +9
(-15) (+10)

REP ORG 003 LAB 336001
TTV 1 TMTTC
III L 1 n 1 1 D
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-4 +10
( -3) ( +2)
-8 -1

  ZERO  PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-47

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  07  STATE  17   KANSAS                     REP OR6  001  LAB  437001
AUDITS


(

47
18)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

-• 	 r«u
LEVE
LOW
-19
(-11)
at
I

H
(
\OiLllY LirUlb 	 	
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
H3
+ 9)
LEVEL 4
DW UP


 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
REGION  07  STATE  17   KANSAS
                                                  REP ORG  001  LAB   ,37002


POL. CD.

C42101 CO

I

PARS
12128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

21
( 9)
6
( 22)
LEVE
LOW
-44
(-10)
— ft
(-20)
L 1
UP
+ 63
( +7)
-5
( + 11)
	 rKuat
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
-10
(-21) (
^Dl Li 1
2
UP
+ 3
+ 3)
-8
+ 1)
1 Y Llrll I b-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -4) (
-8

3
UP
+ 3
+ 3)
-1

LEVEL 4
LOW UP




REGION  07  STATE  26  MISSOURI
                                                  REP ORG  001  LAB   33800]
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 2)
37
( 18)
LEVEL
LOW
_ "7
( +4) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 5
+ 4)


	 r KUBABJ. Li 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 3 +5
( -1) (+11)
-3 +7
( -5) ( +2)
T L ini i
LEVE
LOW
+ 3
( +2)


L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 11
( +2)


  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-48

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  07  STATE  26  MISSOURI                   REP ORG  002  LAB  438004
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

30
5)
12
39)
7
12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-3 +14
(-15) (+10)
-6 +7
( -2) ( +4)
TOTAL

	 rKUBABiLl | y |_ 1 PI i li> 	 ' 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
+ 1
( -4)
-5
( -1)
-7
( -9)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+7 -1 +5
( +5) ( -4) ( +3)
+0 -5 +5
( +3)
+ 9
( +5)
REGION  07  STATE  26  MISSOURI
               REP ORG  003  LAB  438003
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
	 t-KUBABi Ll 1 T Lini 1 5 	
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
6 -6 +7 -2 +3
( 4) (-17) (+37) (-11) (+26) (-13) (+22)
REGION  07  STATE
 POL.CD.
112128 LEAD
   PARS

111101 HIV
   PARS
               REP ORG  004  LAB  438002
AUDITS


(

(

6
3)
8
9)
LEVE
LOW
-50
( -9)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 39
( -1)


	 r KUDAO i L i i T LJ.ni is 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW
-3
( -5)
-9
( -6)
UP LOW UP
+3 -8 +11
( -1)
-3
( +5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP




  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-49

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEf
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  07  STATE   26   MISSOURI                   REP ORG  004   LAB   438006
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
15
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
13
( 21)
STATE
AUDITS
3
( 6)
13
( 8)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-10 -2
(-56) (+70)
28 NEBRASKA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
28 NEBRASKA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-22 -22
( -5) ( + 3)
TOTAL
	 r KUBAB i L
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +1
(-19) (+17)
D D O Q A D T 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-27 +10
(-27) (+26)
DDnDADTI
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 6 +6
( -1) ( +1)
-27 +10
(-36) (+15)
i i T L i n i i o -
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-15) (
REP ORG
I TV 1 TMTTC
IT L 1 n 1 i b
LEVEL
LOW

REP ORG
TTV 1 TMTTC.
J. 1 Y L J. PI i i O
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
( -1) (

3
UP
+ 2
+ 5)
001
3
UP

002
3
UP
+ 4
+ 1)

LEVEL 4
LOW UP

LAB 33500:
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

LAB 3350C
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 *  ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION of THE AVERAi
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-50

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
           EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85




REGION  07  STATE  28
    DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983




NEBRASKA                  REP  ORG   003   LAB  435003
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

12
5)
12
35)
44
21)
LEVEL
LOU
-19
(-10) (
-5
(-20) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
+ 2
+ 9)


	 rKUBABlLi 1 Y L in 1 Ib 	 ' 	 -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
— 4
( -7)
-13
( -7)
-15
( -8)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+3 -4 +7
( +2) ( -7) ( +0)
+5 -8 +2
( +9)
+ 20
( +7)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-51

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
REGION  07
      DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

        REGION AVERAGES
	 rKUBABI L i
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2
LOW UP LOW UP
C42101 CO 125 -27 +27 -5 +8
PARS ( 61) (-22) (+21) ( -9) ( +9)
IY tiniib 	
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-4 +7
( -9) ( +7)
112128 LEAD    48
   PARS     ( 123)

111101 HIV    225
   PARS     ( 194)
 -16   +11
(-16) (+11)

 TOTAL
 -10    +3
(-13)  (+10)

 -16   +14
(-13)  (+11)
-9
+ 4
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-52

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  08  STATE  06  COLORADO                   REP ORG  001  LAB  344001
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVE
LOW
H2101 CO 51 -26
PARS ( 24) (-10)
L 1
UP
+ 15
( + 20)
REGION 08 STATE 27 MONTANA
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-11
( -3)
__ oon
— r K U
LEVE
LOW
D(HD J. L 1
L 2
UP
+ 11
( +8)
BABILI
L 2
UP
IT L 1 I'i 1 1 D 	
LEVEL 3.
LOW UP
-6 +8
( -3) ( +7)
REP ORG 001
TV 1 TMTTC— — —
IT L 1 n 1 1 c>
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
( +0) ( +3)
LAB 339002
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42101 CO
   PARS
12
 2)
1.12128 LEAD    12
   PARS      (  15)
 -46   +73
(  +4) (+20)

 -12    +3
(  -4) (  +8)
  -9   +19
(  -9)  (+19)
  -5   +15
(-17) (+23)
                     -10
        + 2
 -14
+ 10
REGION  08  STATE  27  MONTANA
                                   REP  ORG   003  LAB  439002
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS

6
( 4)
LEVE
LOW
-7
( +7)
L 1
UP
+ 15
( + 10)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-8
( +3)
DMD i L 11
L 2
UP
+ 15
( +5)
IT L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-6
( -3)
3 	
L 3
UP
+ 10
( +7)
LEVEL
LOW


4
Uf


  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-53

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  08  STATE  27  MONTANA                    REP  OR6  004  LAB  439003
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
• 	 fKUttt
LEVEL
LOW
\ai L i i
2
UP
IT L i n i i 3-
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
UP
 POL. CD.    AUDITS


111101 HIV     24     TOTAL           -8     +1
   PARS     (  16)                  (  -8)  (  +7)

REGION  08  STATE   35  NORTH  DAKOTA               REP ORG  001  LAB  341001
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUUAtSJ. L 1 I
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
! T LJ.ni is 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


111101 HIV      18      TOTAL           -9     -1
   PARS     C   20)                  (  -6)  (  +1)

REGION  08  STATE   43   SOUTH  DAKOTA              REP ORG  001  LAB  342001

                       „	„__.	PROBABILITY LIMITS--	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2       LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                       LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP

111101 HIV       5      TOTAL           -6     +1
   PARS     (   86)                  (  -2)  (  + 2)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)

                                       E-54

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  08  STATE  46   UTAH                       REP ORG   001   LAB   340001
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

63
31)
6
10)
9
12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-3 +7
( -5) ( +8)
-9 +8
( -9) ( +7)
TOTAL

	 I-KUDAB1L1 1 Y LJ.ni IS 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-2
( -5)
-6
(-19)
-4
( -4)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+3 -2 +3
( +6) ( -6) ( +5)
-5 -4 +0
( +9)
+ 1
( +2)
  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-55

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
       EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
REGION  08
DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983




  REGION AVERAGES
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

132
61)
18
25)
56
134)
LEVEL
LOW
-23
( -8) (
-11
( -7) (
TOTAL

1
UP
+ 23
+ 15)
+ 5
+ 9)


-rKUBADlLlIT LIl'l lid ~
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-8
( -4)
-9
(-32)
-9
( -5)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+10 -5 +7
( +7) ( -5) ( +7) ( +0) ( + 2)
+1 -11 +7
( + 22)
+ 0
( +5)
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-56

-------
                                TABLE E-l  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  09  STATE   03   ARIZONA                   REP  ORG   100  LAB  347001
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

21
6)
12
23)
8
28)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-11 +5
(-33) (+14)
-5 +19
( -6) ( +7)
TOTAL

	 rKUBABJ.L.1 1 T L1H1 1 3 	 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-2
( -4)
-2
( -5)
-2
(-13)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+2 -1 +1
( +2) ( -1) ( +2) ( +0) ( +0)
+4 -1 +6
( +4)
+ 6
( +9)
REGION  09   STATE   03  ARIZONA
REP ORG  200   LAB   447001
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

39
6)
12
15)
27
15)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-18 +11
(-15) ( +9)
-3 +19
( -4) ( +8)
TOTAL

	 rKUBABlH 1 T Lini IS 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-9
( -5)
-3
( -1)
-23
( -8)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+9 -9 +9
( +5) ( -5) ( +5)
+7 -6 +9
( +7)
+ 5
( +6)
* ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-57

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  09  STATE  03  ARIZONA                    REP ORG  300  LAB  447002
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

15
4)
12
6)
10
16)
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -5)
-25
(-12)
TOTAL

L 1
UP
+ 5
( +1)
+ 26
( +9)


	 rKUBABiLi 1 Y Lin I 1 b 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-5
( -3)
-22
( -1)
-18
(-10)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+6 -1 +1
( +1) ( -2) ( +0)
+40 -24 +44
( + 3)
+ 12
( +9)
REGION  09  STATE  05  CALIFORNIA
REP ORG  001  LAB  345002
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
59 TOTAL
( 78)
	 r KI
LEVE
LOW
-13
(-11)
JDMD 1 L 1 1 T LlHlia 	
IL 2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 9
( + 10)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
REGION  09  STATE  05  CALIFORNIA
REP ORG  001  LAB  345003
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

30
( 38)
18
( 11)
LEVE
LOW
-13
(-12)
-30

L 1
UP
+ 10
( + 13)
+ 22

™" """— f K \J
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -8)
-3
(-15)
DAD J. L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 4
( +7)
+ 9
( + 12)
IT L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
— 1
( -8)
-6

3
L 3
UP
+ 2
( +6)
+ 14

LEVEL 4
LOW UP




* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-58

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA  SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  09  STATE   05   CALIFORNIA                REP ORG  001  LAB  445016

POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
I
R
12128 LEAD
PARS
EGION 09
POL. CD.
AUDITS
33
( 38)
6
( 11)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
-35
(-12)
-4
05 CALI
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
+ 28
( + 13)
-3
FORNIA
L 1
UP
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-20
( -8)
-3
(-15)

r K U
LEVE
LOW
BAD 1 L
L 2
• UP
+ 35
( +7)
+ 2
( + 12)
BABIL
L 2
UP
1 1 T L J.Hi 1 b
LEVEL
LOW
-12
( -8) (
-2
REP ORG
ITY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 21
+ 6)
+ 0
004 LAB 445001
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
C42101 CO       6       -2     +3       -1     +3      +0    +2
   PARS     (  32)    (  -9)  (  +8)    (  -3)  (  +2)    (  -2) ( +1)

112128 LEAD     6       -7     +8      -12    +19      -2    +5
   PARS     (  12)    (  -9)  (  +5)    (  -8)  (  -2)

111101 HIV      3     TOTAL           -7     +6
   PARS     (  43)                  (  -5)  (  +4)

REGION  09  STATE  05   CALIFORNIA                 REP ORG  036  LAB  445005

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL. 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42101 CO      36       -4     +8       -2     +7      -3    +6
   PARS     (  10)    (-22)  (  +6)    (  -6)  (  +1)    (  -4) ( +1)   ( -6) ( +2)


* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                  (continued)

                                      E-59

-------
                              TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                      EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  09  STATE  05  CALIFORNIA                 REP  ORG  061  LAB  445002

I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
REGION 09
POL. CD.
AUDITS
8
( 34)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL
1
UP

05 CALIFORNIA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-12
(-12)

r K U
LEVE
LOW
BABJL L
L 2
UP
+ 4
( + 10)
BABIL
L 2
UP
i i Y LI mis 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP

REP ORG 061
TTV 1 TMTTC—
ill Llrlllo
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL
LOW

LAB 44
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP

5018
4
UP
C42101 CO
   PARS
   42
(   24)
112128 LEAD     12
   PARS      (   12)
 -15   +31
(  -3)  (+15)

 -10    +0
(-15)  (+13)
  -3   +11
(  -2)  (+11)

 -10    +3
(  -3)  (  + 6)
REGION  09  STATE   12   HAWAII
 POL.CD.
111101 HIV
   PARS
  -2    +7
(  -3)  (  +8)

  -2    +2
                                     REP ORG   120   LAB   348001
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
13 TOTAL
( 23)
	 rK\.
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -5)
JHAD1L1IY Llnlla 	
EL 2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 3
( +2)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-60

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY Rt.OR,.NG SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983
REGION  09  STATE  29  NEVADA
REP ORG  200  LAB  446001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 09
POL. CD.
AUDITS
21
( 8)
44
( 64)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
-9
( -9) (
TOTAL
29 NEVADA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
+ 9
+ 7)


1
UP
	 r K UDf
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -5) (
-14
( -7) (
D D nn /
r KliDl
LEVEL
LOW
\a i L
2
UP
+ 2
+ 3)
+ 8
+ 4)
\EIl
2
UP
IIT n n i i :>-
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -2) (

REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 1
+ 2)

300 LAB 446002
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
C42101 CO       9     -16    +10       -8    +5      -7    +2
   PARS     (   8)    ( -1)  (  +1)    (  -7)  (+13)   ( -2) ( +4)    ( -1)  (  + 3)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-61

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)





ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983




  REGION AVERAGES
REGION  09
POL. CD. AUDITS

C42

112

111


101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (

252
174)
78
90)
172
301)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-18 +19
(-13) (+13)
-19 +19
( -8) ( +8)
TOTAL

	 fKUBABlLi IY LJ.rU Ib 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-10
( -7)
-12
( -8)
-15
( -9)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+14 -7 +9
( +8) ( -6) ( +5) ( -5) ( +3)
+16 -12 +18
( +8)
+ 10
( +7)
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-62

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
             EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM
             COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION   10   STATE  02  ALASKA                     REP  ORG   020  LAB  451001

I
R
PO
11
L
.CD.
101 HIV
PARS
EGI
POL
C42
R
ON 10
.CD.
101 CO
PARS
EGION 10
POL. CD.
AUDITS
5
( 15)
STATE
AUDITS
39
( 13)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL
02 ALASKA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP


1
UP
-10 +2
(-13) (+10)
38 OREGON
LEVEL
LOW

1
UP
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-3
(-13)
Don
r K u
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -2)
_ D D n
r K U
LEVE
LOW
DAD 1 L
L 2
UP
+ 11
( +6)
BABIL
L 2
UP
+ 3
( +3)
BABIL
L 2
UP
i\i L i n i i t> 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP

REP ORG 020
IT V 1 T M T T C
IT L 1 Pi 1 I D —
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-2 +1
( -3) ( +2)
REP ORG 001
IT V 1 T M T T C
IY L 1 n I 1 b
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL
LOW

LAB 451
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

002
4
UP

LAB 353001
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
111101 HIV      42
   PARS      (  397)
TOTAL
 -13    +8
(  -5) ( +5)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-63

-------
                               TABLE E-l  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

REGION  10  STATE  38  OREGON                     REP ORG  001  LAB  453001
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

47
( 68)
12
( 12)
LEVE
LOW
-17
(-17)
-6
( -4)
L 1
UP
+ 12
( +9)
+ 4
( + 10)
	 r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -6) (
-2
( -2) (
ABi L i 1
2
UP
+ 13
+ 4)
+ 3
+ 5)
IT L 11*11 1 b-
LEVEL
LOW
_ O
( -5) (
-2

3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 4
+ 2)
+ 6

            STATE  49  WASHINGTON
               REP ORG   001   LAB   3520C1
POL. CD.

1 11101 HI\
PARS
AUDITS

73
( 38)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-9
( -5)
B « D i L 1 1 T LID lib 	
L 2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 10
( +8)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


REGION  10  STATE  49   WASHINGTON
               REP ORG   001   LAB   452006
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS

9
( 40)
12
( 8)
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
-21
( -5) (
1
UP
+ 0
+ 5)
+ 1
+ 7)
LEVE
LOW
-1
( -6)
-16

DrtD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 1
( +3)
+ 10

IT L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -4)
-21

L 3
UP
+ 2
( +2)
+ 12

LEVEL 4
LOW UP




  ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-64

-------
                               TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADH5 ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85              DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  10

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2       LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                       LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42101 CO      95      -14     +8       -9    +9      -3    +3
   PARS     ( 121)    (-13)  (  +8)    (  -5)  (  +3)    (  -4) ( +1)

112128 LEAD    24      -17     +7      -11    +8     -14   +12
   PARS     (  20)    (-11)  (+15)    (  -8)  (+10)

111101 HIV    120      TOTAL          -10    +9
   PARS     ( 450)                  (  -5)  (  +5)
                                                   (continued)

                                       E-65

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                       EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
             COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 10/24/85
                DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                  NATIONAL AVERAGES
POL. CD.

C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 502
PARS
AUDITS

1759
(1230)
78
( 248)
59
( 184)
LEVE
LOW
-24
(-15)

( -9)
-45
(-26)
L 1
UP
+ 22
( + 13)

( + 12)
+ 43
( + 15)
	 r K
LEV
LOW
-10
( -8)
-15
( -8)
-15
(-18)
UdAB 1 L 1
EL 2
UP
+ 13
( +8)
+ 7
( + 10)
+ 19
( + 11)
i Y L i ni I
LEVE
LOW
-14
( -7)
-9
( -7)
-13
(-14)
J
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 16
( +6 ) ( -4) ( -i 3)
+ 7
( +8)
+19 -6 +12
( +7)
112128 LEAD    656
   PARS      (1113)
111101 HIV
   PARS
 2700
(5996)
 -23   +23
(-12) (+12)

 TOTAL
 -25   +22
(-10 )  (  +9 )

 -11   +10
(  -7)  (  +7)
                                        -20
+ 19
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                        E-66

-------
                                 TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

             COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE  10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

                                   REGIONAL SUMMARY

POL.CD.  742101   CARBON MONOXIDE
REGION

01
PARS
02
PARS
03
PARS
04
PARS
05
PARS
06
PARS
07
PARS
08
PARS
09
PARS
10
PARS
AUDITS

60
( 55)
111
( 97)
171
( 85)
358
( 325)
329
( 120)
126
( 131 )
125
( 61 )
132
( 61 )
252
( 174)
95
( 121 )
LEVE
LOW
-32
( -5)
-37
(-10)
-10
( -9)
-26
(-15)
-13
(-16)
-16
(-20)
-27
(-22)
-23
( -8)
-18
(-13)
-14
(-13)
L 1
UP
+ 41
( + 10)
+ 28
( + 10)
+ 9
( +7)
+ 34
( + 10)
+ 13
( + 13)
+ 12
( + 21 )
+ 27
(+21 )
+ 23
( + 15)
+ 19
( + 13)
+ 8
( +8)
r KU
LEVE
LOW
-5
( -4)
-4
( -6)
-6
( -7)
-16
( -7)
-7
( -8)
-9
(-11 )
-5
( -9)
-8
( -4)
-10
( -7)
-9
( -5)
BrtB I L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 8
( +6)
+ 5
( +8)
+ 8
( +5)
+ 20
( +7)
+ 11
( +8)
+ 9
( + 11)
+ 8
( +9)
+ 10
( +7)
+ 14
( +8)
+ 9
( +3)
Y L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-3
( -5)
-3
( -3)
-5
( -6)
-22
( -6)
-5
( -8)
-8
(-12)
-4
( -9)
-5
( -5)
-7
( -6)
-3
( -4)
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 7
( +5)
+ 4
( +3)
+ 7
( +4)
+ 25
( +5)
+ 8
( +6)
+ 8
( + 11)
+ 7
( +7)
+ 7
( +7) ( +0) ( +2)
+ 9
( +5) ( -5) ( +3)
+ 3
( +1 )
  ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                      (continued)

                                         L-67

-------
                                TABLE  E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

             COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR 1983

                                  REGIONAL  SUMMARY

POL.CD. ?42602    NITROGEN DIOXIDE
REGION

03
PARS
04
PARS
05
PARS
06
PARS
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
5
( 28) ( -6) ( + 7)
44
( 165) ( -8) (+13)
19
( 54) (-10) ( +8)
10
( 1 )
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-8
( +0)
-18
( -8)
-6
(-12)
-8

DAD 1 L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 2
( +3)
+ 8
( + 11)
+ 5
( +8)
+ 4

i Y L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-4
( +0)
-9
( -5)
-8
(-14)
-10

L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
-4
( +4)
+ 6
( +7)
+ 8
( +8)
+ 11

* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)

                                        E-68

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

                                  REGIONAL  SUMMARY

POL.CD. 742401    SULFUR DIOXIDE
REGION      AUDITS
   04           59      -45   +43     -15    +19      -13   +19      -8    +12
   PARS      (  184)    (-25)  (+15)   (-17)  (+10)    (-13) (  +7)


* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r K\JD^
LEVEL
LOW
\D 1 L 1 1
2
UP
IT L 1 rl 1 1 D ~
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
                                                   (continued)

                                       E-69

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION  AGENCY
                 EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON  REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85
POL.CD. T12128
          DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983




                REGIONAL  SUMMARY
LEAD
REGION
01
PARS
02
PARS
03
PARS
04
PARS
05
PARS
06
PARS
07
PARS
08
PARS
09
PARS
10
PARS
AUDITS
54
( 104)
24
( 34)
83
( 136)
150
( 254)
100
( 187)
77
( 140)
48
( 123)
18
( 25)
78
( 90)
24
( 20)
LEVE
LOW
-11
( -7)
-10
(-15)
-30
(-10)
-14
(-13)
-39
( -8)
-10
(-18)
-16
(-16)
-11
( -7)
-19
( -8)
-17
(-11 )
L 1
UP
+ 6
( +6)
+ 12
( + 12)
+ 30
( + 11)
+ 13
( + 14)
+ 50
( +8)
+ 5
( + 18)
+ 11
( + 11)
+ 5
( +9)
+ 19
( +8)
+ 7
( + 15)
	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-12
( -6)
-10
(-16)
-11
(-14)
-32
( -9)
-37
( -6)
-24
(-10)
-10
(-13)
-9
(-19)
-12
( -8)
-11
( -8)
BAtJO. L i 1
L 2
UP
+ 5
( +5)
+ 8
( + 15)
+ 8
( + 10)
+ 25
( +8)
+ 43
( +5)
+ 15
( + 10)
+ 3
(+10)
+ 1
( +9)
+ 16
( +8)
+ 8
(+10)
Y L i n 1 i
LEVE
LOW
-22
-8
-11
-11
-38
-14
-9
-11
-12
-14
L 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 18
+ 10
+ 6
+ 8
+ 43
+ 8
+ 4
+ 7
+ 18
+ 12
* ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                       E-70

-------
                                TABLE E-l (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                  EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM
             COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 10/24/85               DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983
POL.CD.  T11101
HI VOL
                                   REGIONAL SUMMARY
REGION

01
PARS
02
PARS
03
PARS
04
PARS
05
PARS
06
PARS
07
PARS
08
PARS
09
PARS
10
PARS
AUDITS

93
( 266)
102
( 279)
527
( 493)
720
(1935)
492
( 638)
193
( 1306)
225
( 194)
56
( 134)
172
( 301)
120
( 450)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

TOTAL

	 r K u
LEVE
LOW
-8
( -6)
-5
( -3)
-13
( -7)
-9
( -5)
-7
( -9)
-11
( -6)
-16
(-13)
-9
( -5)
-15
( -9)
-10
( -5)
DAD1L1 1 T LJ.ni ID 	
L 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+ 5
( +6)
+ 8
( +5)
+ 11
( +7)
+ 9
( +7)
+ 6
( +7)
+ 12
( +6)
+ 14
( + 11)
+ 0
( +5)
+ 10
( +7)
+ 9
( +5)
  ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                     (continued)
                                        E-71

-------
                  TABLE E-2.  PARS AND PA DATA FOR S02 CONTINUOUS METHODS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED  FOR YEAR  1983
REGION  01  STATE  20  MAINE
                                     REP OR6   001   LAB   301001
AUDI


( 1
TS

4
6)
LEVE
LOW
+ 8
C -5)
L 1
UP
+ 8
( + 13)
	 fKU
LEVE
LOW
+ 8
( -7)
D A B 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 9
( + 15)
IT uini i
LEVE
LOW
+ 8
( -4)
b 	
L 3
UP
+ 8
( + 12)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  01  STATE  22  MASSACHUSETTS
                                      REP  ORG   001   LAB  304001
AUDITS
12
( 21)
	 • — rKUBABiLl 1 T Lini 1 b 	
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
+0 +5 -2 +10 +1 +7
(-12) ( +9) (-12) ( +9) (-12) (+11)
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  01  STATE   30   NEW  HAMPSHIRE
                                      REP  ORG   001   LAB  302001
                                      •PROBABILITY LIMITS-
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
AUDITS
    4
(  50)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  -5    -5
(  -9) ( +6)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -8    -3
(  -9) ( +8)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -6    -6
(-10)  ( +7)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
REGION  01  STATE  41   RHODE  ISLAND
                                      REP  ORG   001   LAB  305001

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
    4
(  12)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 +12   +12
(-13) ( +7)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  + 3    +3
(  -9) ( +7)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  + 2    +2
(  -7) ( +7)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
     ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGE
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-72

-------
                                 TABLE E-2  (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  01  STATE  47   VERMONT                   REP ORG  001   LAB   303001



 POL.CD.    AUDITS


C42401 S02      8       -8   +17       -5    + 9      -4    +7
   PARS     (   7)    (  -8)  ( +9)    (  -9)  (  +8)   ( -7) ( +7)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE  AVERAGES
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-— r KUDAB 1 L 1 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
T u i n i i 3 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-73

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  01
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
	 r KUDJ
LEVEL
LOW
*n i L JL i
2
UP
T L 1 n 1 1 3-
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


CA2A01 S02      32       -7    +15      -6   +11      -6   +11
   P4RS     (  106)    (-10)  (  +9)    (-10) ( +9)   ( -9)  ( +9)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGE!
                                                     (continued)
                                         E-74

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983
REGION  02  STATE  33  NEW YORK
                                      REP  ORG   001   LAB  307001
 POL.CD.
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 . 	 T KUD«D 1 L 1 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
T LIP! 113 	 '
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42401 S02     12      -3   +22      -5    +15       +2    +19
   PARS     C 249)   ( -9)  (+12)    ( -6)  (+10)    (  -9)  (+10)
   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-75

-------
                                 TABLE E-2 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  02



 POL.CD.    AUDITS


C42401 502     12      -3   +22       -5   +15       +2   +19
   PARS     ( 249)   ( -9)  (+12)    (  -6)  (+10)    (  -9) (+10)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAG
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 fKUBABlLi 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
IT L ini i a 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
                                                     (continued)
                                        E-76

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  03  STATE  21  MARYLAND                  REP ORG   001   LAB   312001



 POL.CD.    /
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  03  STATE  21  MARYLAND
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  03  STATE  39  PENNSYLVANIA
ITS

21
34)
LEVE
LOW
-24
(-20)
L 1
UP
+ 20
( + 17)
	 TKU
LEVE
LOW
-12
( -9)
Dfi.0 i L i
L 2
UP
+ 16
( + 10)
IT L ini i
LEVE
LOW
-6
( -8)
j, 	
L 3
UP
+ 10
( +8)
LEVEL
LOW
-3

4
UP
+ 6

                                     REP ORG  005  LAB  412002
AUDITS
4
( 4)
	 rKUDKOiLi. I T LlHl 1 D 	
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-11 -11 -6 +0 -5 -5
(-19) (+17) (-19) (+12) (-17) (+14)
                                     REP ORG  001   LAB   311002

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
(  30)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -17   +18
(-14)  (+13)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -4    +4
(-12)  ( +8)
             LEVEL 3
            LOW    UP
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
REGION  03  STATE  39  PENNSYLVANIA
           (-10) ( +8)

           REP ORG  002  LAB  411002

PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
AUDITS
   22
(  67)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -12   +14
(-10) ( +8)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -8    +9
(  -5) ( +5)
             LEVEL 3
            LOW    UP

             -8   +10
           (-10) ( +8)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
-13
+ 17
   * ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-77

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983
REGION  03  STATE   39   PENNSYLVANIA
                                      REP  ORG   003  LAB  411001
POL .CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL .CD.
AUDITS
12
( 8)
STATE
AUDITS
8
( 10)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 4)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
-12
(-21 )
48 VIRG
LEVE
LOW
+ 0
( -8)
48 VIRG
LEVE
LOW
+ 4
(-10)
48 VIRG
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
+ 9
( +4)
INIA
L 1
UP
+ 5
( +3)
INIA
L 1
UP
+ 4
( +2)
INIA
L 1
UP
	 	 r K UD/
LEVEL
LOW
-8
(-17) (

r K UD/*
LEVEL
LOW
+ 2
( -6) (
-— D D n n i
r K U D f
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
( -9) (
_____ o D n n i
r KUa)
LEVEL
LOW
\O I L
2
UP
+ 3
+ 4)
^BIL
2
UP
+ 4
+ 1)
^BIL
2
UP
+ 3)
\BIL
2
UP
i i T L i n j. i b-
LEVEL
LOW
-7
(-17) (
REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 3
( -8) (
REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-11) (
REP ORG
ITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
+ 3
+ 5)
001
3
UP
+ 5
+ 1)
002
3
UP
+ 4
+ 3)
003
3
UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-7 +3
LAB 315001
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

LAB 415005
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

LAB 415004
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42401 502
   PARS
   16
(   11)
  + 2   +17
(-11) (  +5
  -1   +13
(-12) (  +9)
  -2   +10
(-12) (  +8)
     ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGE!
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-78

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983
REGION  03  STATE  50  WEST VIRGINIA
                                     REP ORG  001   LAB   314001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
AUDITS
8
( 19)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
-11
( -4)
50 WEST
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
+ 23
( + 11)
VIRG
L 1
UP
	 	 rKuuf
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -3) (
INIA
_— o D n c t
LEVEL
LOW
!.B1
2
UP
+ 1
+ 6
\El
2
UP
LIIY L ini 1 3-
LEVEL
LOW
mm *}
) ( -4) (
REP ORG
LITY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
+ 0
4-5)
002
3
UP
LEVE
LOW
( +3)
LAB 3
LEVE
LOW
L 4
UP
( +3)
14002
L 4
UP
C42401 S02
   PARS
   12
(   24)
  + 3   +11
(-11)  (+14)
  + 4    +7
(  -9) (+10)
  + 5    +7
(  -7) (  +9)
     ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-79

-------
                                TABLE E-2  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  03

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL 2       LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                       LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42401 S02    116      -13   +17       -7   +10      -6    + 9      -7    +8
   PARS     ( 211)    (-13)  (+12)    (  -9)  ( +8)    (  -9) ( +8)   ( + 3)  ( +3)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-80

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983
REGION  04  STATE  01  ALABAMA
                                                  REP ORG  012  LAB  419001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 502
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 502
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
AUDITS
4
( 3)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 4)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
+ 8 +8
(-34) ( -9)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
+ 1 +1
( -5) (+10)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-23 +46
(-30) (+32)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 r KUBMOJ.
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 6 +13
(-25) (+13
_ — — — D D n Q A O T
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 2 +3
( -1) (+10
- — _ __ DDnnAUT
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 9 +24
(-25) (+40

LEVEL 2
LOW UP
Li IT Lin 113 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
+ 9 +9
) (-22) ( +1)
REP ORG 001
1 TTV 1 TMTTC«.._ »
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
+ 0 +0
) ( -7) ( +7)
REP ORG 002
1 TTV 1 TMTTC _____
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
) (-29) (+41)
REP ORG 003
ITTV 1 TMTTC _«.
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

LAB 323005
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

LAB 323003
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

LAB 323004
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
C42401 502
   PARS
8     -86   +57
4)   (-14) ( +0)
                                    -76   +42
                                   (-19)  (+20)
  + 4    +5
(-14)  (+14)
   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-81

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


-ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON  REPORT  OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  04  STATE   10   FLORIDA                   REP OR6  004  LAB  323008
AUDITS

4
( 4)
LEVE
LOW
-29
(-71)
L 1
UP
-29
(+41)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -3)
DAD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 0
( + 30)
IT L ini 1
LEVE
LOW
-2
( -9)
3 	
L 3
UP
-2
( + 52)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  04  STATE   10   FLORIDA
                                     REP ORG   007   LAB   323010
AUDITS

4
( 4)
LEVE
LOW
-23
(-40)
L 1
UP
-23
( + 16)
LEVE
LOW
-21
(-37)
DAD 1 L J. 1
L 2
UP
-20
( + 22)
IT L in i i
LEVE
LOW
-21
(-40)
o
L 3
UP
-21
(+26)
LEVEL
LOW


4
UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  04   STATE   11   GEORGIA
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
    8
   12)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  + 5    +5
(-25) (+29)
                                     REP ORG

                          •PROBABILITY  LIMITS-
                                     010  LAB   321001
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -3    +2
(-24)  (+24)
REGION   04   STATE   18   KENTUCKY
  LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
 LOW    UP     LOW    UP

 -14    +4
(-15) (+23)

REP ORG  001  LAB  316001
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS

12
( 41)
LEVE
LOW
_6
(-26)
L 1
UP
+ 5
( + 14)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-11
(-20)
DAD i L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 9
( + 10)
IT L in j. i
LEVE
LOW
-13
(-19)
»>
L 3
UP
+ 12
( +7)
LEVEL
LOW


4
UP


     ZERO  PROBABILITY  LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-82

-------
AUDITS

8
( 3)
LEVE
LOW
-12
( -3)
L 1
UP
+ 13
( +8)
	 r KUOI
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( +0) (
AD I L 1 1
2
UP
+ 4
+ 8)
IT L I H JL 1 3-
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( +0) (
3
UP
-5
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


AUDITS
8
( 11)
	 	 TKUOAD1L1 1 T Li Hi 1 a 	 ' 	
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +9 -1 +10 -3 +10
(-24) ( +1) (-23) ( +0) (-23) ( -1)
                                TABLE E-2  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  04  STATE  18  KENTUCKY                  REP  ORG   002   LAB   416001
 POL.CD.


C42401 S02
   PARS

REGION  04  STATE  25  MISSISSIPPI                REP  ORG   100   LAB   322001
 POL.CD.


C42401 S02
   PARS

REGION  04  STATE  34  NORTH CAROLINA             REP  ORG   003   LAB   418006

                      	-PROBABILITY LIMITS	—	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1       LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL  4
                      LOW    UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP      LOW     UP

C42401 502      4      +0    +0      -5     -2       -2    -2
   PARS     (   7)   (-28)  ( -9)    (-23)  (  -7)    (-21)  (  -6)

REGION  04  STATE  42  SOUTH CAROLINA             REP  ORG   001   LAB   320001
 POL.CD.


C42401 502
   PARS


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION  OF  THE  AVERAGES




                                                    (continued)


                                        E-83
AUDITS

16
( 115)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-24 +3
(-16) (+13)
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-13 +3
(-10) (+11)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-16 +5
( -9) (+10)
LEVEL
LOW


4
UP



-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  04

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42401 S02     86     -31   +25      -26   +23      -16   +11
   PARS     ( 213)    (-24)  (+16)    (-18)  (+15)    (-18)  (+15)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN  THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGE
                                                    (continued)


                                        E-84

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  14  ILLINOIS                   REP ORG   001   LAB   328001
AUDITS

12
( 22


)
LEVE
LOW
-22
( -9


)
L 1
UP
+ 15
( + 10)
LEVE
LOW
-18
( -7)
DAD 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
+ 15
( + 11)
IT L IPli 1
LEVE
LOW
-21
( -8)
:>
L


(
3
UP
+ 18
+ 12)
LEVEL
LOW



UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  05  STATE  15  INDIANA
                                     REP ORG  002  LAB  429002
AUDITS

4
( 10)
LEVE
LOW
-14
(-14)
L 1
UP
-14
( + 11)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-18
(-11)
DAD i L i 1
L 2
UP
-10
( + 10)
IT Lini i :>
LEVEL
LOW
-16
(-10) (
3
UP
-16
+ 12)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  05  STATE  15  INDIANA
                                     REP ORG

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS-
                                     008  LAB  429004
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
   12
   12)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -15    +5
(-13) (+15)
REGION  05  STATE  23  MICHIGAN
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
AUDITS
    8
   13)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

 -22    +9
(-16)  (+10)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

 -11    +3
(-13) (+14)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

 -10    +2
(-13) (+12)
                                     REP ORG

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS-
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

 -16    +9
(-11)  ( +9)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

 -12   +11
(-11)  ( +9)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
                                     001  LAB  326001
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF  THE  AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                       E-85

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)
                                  EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  23  MICHIGAN                   REP  ORG   002   LAB  426001
AUD


(
ITS

12
9)
LEVEL
LOW
-19
(-17) (
1
UP
+ 2
+ 15)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-12
(-15)
BAB 1 L 1 1
L 2
UP
-6
( + 15)
IT L IHl 1 3-
LEVEL
LOW
-11
(-12) (
3
UP
-6
+ 8)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  05  STATE  24  MINNESOTA
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  05   STATE   36   OHIO
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION   05   STATE   36   OHIO
                                                  REP  ORG  001  LAB  324001
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
18 -10 -1
( 28) (-13) (+12)
	 rKUDADlLi 1 T L1HJL 1 D 	
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-8 -1 -10 +1 -3 -1
( -8) ( +8) ( -9) ( +6) ( -5) ( +1
                                                  REP  ORG   001   LAB  327001
AUDITS

8
( 4)
LEVEL 1
LOW
-18
( -3)
UP
+ 14
( + 14)
	 rKUBABl Li 1
LEVEL 2
LOW
-10
( +2)
UP
+ 17
( + 15)
i Y Lini i s 	
LEVEL 3
LOW
-12
( +7)
UP
+ 11
( + 14)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP


                            REP ORG

                -PROBABILITY LIMITS
                                                           002  LAB  327003
  POL.CD.
 C42401  S02
    PARS
            AUDITS
                12
                4)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  -3    +8
(-67)  (+26)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  + 0    +6
(-61)  (+43)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -4   +11
(-24)  (-21)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
    *  ZERO  PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGE
                                                    (continued)
                                         E-86

-------
                                TABLE E-2  (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983

REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO                       REP  ORG   007   LAB   427002
AUDITS
18
( 4)
LEVE
LOW
-23
(-25)
L 1
UP
+ 20
(+22)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-18
(-26)
DAD 1 L 1
L 2
UP
+ 12
IT L i n i i
LEVE
LOW
-25
(-24)
a 	
L 3
UP
+ 16
( + 21)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP

 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO
 POL.CD.
C42401 502
   PARS
REGION  05  STATE  36  OHIO
                                     REP ORG  009   LAB  427004
AUDITS
12
( 4)
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-14 +4 -8 +0 -9 +0
(-27) ( +4) (-26) ( +7) (-26) ( +4)
                                     REP ORG

                          -PROBABILITY LIMITS-
                                     015  LAB  427009
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
   12
    2)
  LEVEL 1
 LOW    UP

  -7   +14
(-21)  (+35)
  LEVEL 2
 LOW    UP

  -4    +7
(-17) (+28)
  LEVEL 3
 LOW    UP

  -7    +7
(-14)  (+21)
 LEVEL 4
LOW    UP
   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                       E-87

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  05

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW     UP     LOW    UP

C42401 S02    128     -17   +10      -15     +9      -15     +9      -3    -1
   PARS     ( 112)    (-19)  (+16)    (-15)  (+15)    (-16)  (+13)    (  -4) ( +0)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION  OF THE AVERAGE
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-88

-------
                                 TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS  & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1983
REGION  06  STATE  19  LOUISIANA
                                  REP ORG  001  LAB  334001

                       -PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS
C42401 S02
12
 LEVEL 1
LOW    UP

-26    -4
 LEVEL 2
LOW    UP

-13    -1
 LEVEL 3
LOW    UP

-18   +11
                                                  LEVEL 4
                                                 LOW    UP
   PARS     (   6)   (-25) (+21)   (-19)  (+23)    (-19)  (+22)

REGION  06  STATE  45  TEXAS                      REP  ORG   001   LAB   333001

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL  4
                      LOW    UP     LOW     UP      LOW    UP      LOW     UP

C42401 S02     16     -11   +24       -5     +8       -6    +8
   PARS     ( 173)   (-21) (+29)   (-11)  (+17)    (-10)  (+15)    (-12) (  +7)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION  OF THE  AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-89

-------
                                TABLE E-2  (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION AVERAGES

REGION  06

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW     UP      LOW     UP     LOW    UP

C42401 502     28     -29   +24      -12     +8      -12     +9
   PARS     ( 179)   (-20)  C+27)    (-10)  (+16)    (-10)  (+14)    (-11) ( +6)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN THE  CALCULATION  OF THE AVERAGE:
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-90

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING  SYSTEM
            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR  1983
REGION  07  STATE  16  IOWA
                            REP ORG   003   LAB   336001
POL. CD.
C42401 502
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42401 502
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 07
POL. CD.
AUDITS
4
( 21)
STATE
AUDITS
8
( 4)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVE
LOW
+ 3
(-17)
L 1
UP
+ 3
( + 12)
17 KANSAS
LEVE
LOW
-66
(-39)
L 1
UP
-50
( + 11)
26 MISSOURI
LEVE
LOW
-11
(-15)
L 1
UP
+ 9
( + 21)
26 MISSOURI
LEVE
LOW
L 1
UP
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
+ 2
(-21)
-— — OD n
LEVE
LOW
-54
(-30)
-_ — DD n
LEVE
LOW
-11
( -2)
D D n
LEVE
LOW
DAD J.
L 2
UP
+ 4
( + 23
BABI
L 2
UP
-43
( + 18
BABI
L 2
UP
+ 5
( + 11
BABI
L 2
UP
L1IT L ini 1 5
LEVEL
LOW
-1
) (-22) (
REP ORG
LITY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-54
) (-21) (
REP ORG
LITY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-5
) ( -3) (
REP ORG
LITY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
-1
+ 22)
001
3
UP
-41
+ 11)
002
3
UP
+ 1
+ 7)
005
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
(-13) (
4
UP
+ 18)
LAB 337001
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

LAB 438004
LEVEL
LOW

4
UP

LAB 438005
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
C42401 S02      4
   PARS     (   4)
 +12   +12
( -4) ( +4)
  + 3   +12
(  -6) (+12)
  + 4    +4
(  -8)  (+17)
     ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-91

-------
                                 TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  07

                      	PROBABILITY  LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL  1        LEVEL  2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW     UP      LOW     UP      LOW     UP     LOW    UP

C42401 S02     28     -73   + 44      -60   +32      -59    +31
   PARS     (  34)   (-21)  (+15)    (-19)  (+21)    (-19)  (+20)    (-12) (+17)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS  ARE  INCLUDED IN THE  CALCULATION  OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-92

-------
                                TABLE E-2  (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY  REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR  1983

REGION  08  STATE  27  MONTANA                    REP  ORG   001  LAB  339001
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS
15
( 30)
LEVE
LOW
-13
(-45)
L
(
1
UP
+ 32
+ 35)
	 r KU
LEVE
LOW
-9
(-13)
DAB
L 2
U
+ 1
( + 1
1 L I 1
P
6
5)
IT LI
L
LO
(-1
ni i
EVE
W
7
0)
3 	
L 3
UP
+ 13
( + 13)
LEVE
LOW
-5
(-10)
L 4
UP
+ 9
( + 11
REGION  08  STATE  35  NORTH DAKOTA
REP ORG  001  LAB  341001
AUDITS
12
( 16)
	 rKUDABl 1_ 1 i T uni 13 	
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-ft +5 -3 +0 -4 +0
(-12) (+13) (-13) ( + 9) (-12) ( +6)
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  08  STATE  46  UTAH
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REP ORG  001  LAB  340001
	 rKUDADlLl 1 T Lini 1 3 	
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
15 -8 +10 -5 +4 -5 +4
( 36) (-10) ( +8) ( -9) ( +9) ( -9) ( +8)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-4 +4
( -6) ( +5
   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-93

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  08
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUDABlLl 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
IT uni i a 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL ^
LOW UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


C42401 S02     42     -11    +19       -8    +9      -7    + 7      -5    +7
   PARS     (  82)    (-27)  (+23)    (-11)  (+11)   (-10) (+10)   ( -8)  ( +8)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGI
                                                    (continued)


                                        E-94

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  09  STATE  03  ARIZONA                   REP  ORG   100  LAB  347001
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
AUDITS

15
( 24)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-14 +21
(-18) C +8)
	 rKVDt
LEVEL
LOW
-6
(-15) (
*n i L i i
2
UP
+ 8
+ 3)
IT L 1 n 1 1 3 -
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-15) (
3
UP
+ 3
+ 5)
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-10) (
4
UP
+ 4
+4
REGION  09  STATE  05  CALIFORNIA
REP ORG  001  LAB  345001
AUDITS

11
( 24


)
LEVEL
LOW
-18
(-15


) (
1
UP
+ 16
+ 27)
	 r KUO
LEVEL
LOW
-12
(-14)


ADI L 1 1
2
UP
+ 16
( + 24)
IT L in i i a
LEVEL
LOW
-13
(-14) (
3
UP
+ 12
+ 23)
LEVEL
LOW


4
UP


 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REGION  09  STATE  05  CALIFORNIA
 POL.CD.
C42401 S02
   PARS
REP ORG  004  LAB  445001
AUDITS


(

4
18)
LEVE
LOW
+ 0
(-12)
L 1
UP
+ 0
( + 12)
	 TKU
LEVE
LOW
-1
(-13)
DABl L 1
L 2
UP
+ 0
( + 10)
IT L ini i
LEVE
LOW
+ 0
(-14)
j, 	
L 3
UP
+ 0
( + 13)
LEVEL
LOW


4
UP


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
                                                   (continued)
                                       E-95

-------
                                TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED  FOR  YEAR 1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  09
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
	 rKUBAOiLi 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
IT Li nil 3 	
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
 POL.CD.    AUDITS


C42401 S02     30     -14    +16       -9    +11      -7    +5      -5    +4
   PARS     (  66)    (-18)  (+19)    (-17)  (+16)    (-16) (+16)   ( -9) ( +3)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE  INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAG
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-96

-------
                                 TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS  &  PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

REGION  10  STATE  49  WASHINGTON                 REP  ORG   001  LAB  352001

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	

 POL.CD.    AUDITS     LEVEL 1        LEVEL 2        LEVEL  3       LEVEL 4
                      LOW    UP      LOW    UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42401 S02      4     -41   -41      -31    -3      -12   -12
   PARS     (  29)    ( -9)  ( +6)    (  -8)  ( +6)    (  -7)  (  +6)    (-10) ( +6)


   * ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED  IN THE CALCULATION  OF THE AVERAGES
                                                    (continued)


                                        E-97

-------
                                 TABLE E-2 (Continued)


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF  QADHS  ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                             REGION  AVERAGES

REGION  10

                      	PROBABILITY LIMITS	
 POL.CD.    AUDITS      LEVEL  1        LEVEL 2       LEVEL 3       LEVEL 4
                       LOW     UP      LOW    UP     LOW    UP     LOW    UP

C42401 502      4      -41   -41      -31    -3     -12   -12
   PARS     (  29)    (  -9)  (  +6)    ( -8)  ( +6)   ( -7) ( +6)   C-1Q)  ( +6)
                                                    (continued)
                                        E-98

-------
                                  TABLE E-2 (Continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY    EMSL  PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM

            COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS  ACCURACY  AUDITS & PARS
DATE 12/16/85           DATA SELECTED FOR  YEAR  1983

                                NATIONAL AVERAGES
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
LEVEL 2
LOU UP
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 
-------