f/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 2771 1
EPA/600/4-85/031
April 1985
Research and Development
Summary of
Precision and
Accuracy
Assessments for the
State and Local Air
Monitoring Networks
1982
-------
EPA/600/4-85/031
April 1985
SUMMARY OF PRECISION AND ACCURACY ASSESSMENTS
FOR THE STATE AND LOCAL AIR MONITORING NETWORKS
1982
by
E. Gardner Evans
Data Management and Analysis Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Raymond C. Rhodes
William J. Mitchell
John C. Puzak
Quality Assurance Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 2711
-------
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 endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
11
-------
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 Carolina,
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 Radiation, the Office
of Toxic 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. A previous report summarized the results for
1981. This report summarizes and evaluates the results for 1982.
'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 1982 are summarized and evaluated. Some comparisons are made with
the results previously reported for 1981 to determine the indication of any
trends. Some trends indicating improvement in the precision and accuracy
of monitoring data are given on a national and regional basis. The annual
average results from each reporting organization are given so that compari-
sons may be made from 1981 to 1982 and also with other reporting organiza-
tions.
A comparison of the precision and accuracy 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
-------
Page
CONTENTS
Foreword .............................
Abs tract ............................. iv
Figures ............................. vi
Tables .............................. vii
1. Introduction ...................... 1
2. National Results .................... 4
National Data Capture ................ 4
1982 Results from the PARS program ......... 4
National Precision Results Comparison ........ 6
National Accuracy Results Comparison ........ 7
National Frequencies ................ 7
3. Regional Results .................... 9
Regional Data Capture ................ 9
Regional Comparisons ................ 9
4. Results by Reporting Organizations ........... 16
5. Further Evaluation of PARS Data ............ 19
Comparison of National Averages and 50 Percentile
Values ....................... 21
6. Comparison of Results from the PARS and the Performance
Audit Program ..................... 28
7. Conclusions and Recommendations ............ 34
References ... .................... ..... 35
Appendix A - Glossary ...................... A-l
Appendix B - PARS ........................ B-l
Appendix Cl - Tabulation of PARS and Performance Audit Data . . . C-l
Appendix C2 - PARS and PA Data for S02 Continuous ........ C-65
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1. National Precision Averages from 1981 to 1982 6
2. National Accuracy Averages from 1981 to 1982 7
3. TSP Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981 to 1982 10
4. Ozone Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981 to 1982 ..... 11
5. Automated NC>2 Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981
to 1982 12
6. Automated SC>2 Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981
to 1982 13
7. Carbon Monoxide Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981
to 1982 14
8. Lead Precision and Accuracy by Region for 1981 to 1982 15
9. Cumulative Frequency Distributions, Precision, Manual Methods . . 23
10. Cumulative Frequency Distributions, Accuracy (Level 2), Manual
Methods 24
11. Cumulative Frequency Distributions, Precision, Continuous
Methods 25
12. Cumulative Frequency Distributions, Accuracy (Level 2),
Continuous Methods 26
13. Comparison of PA and PARS Results by Region 29
vi
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1. Requirements for Performing Precision Checks for
SLAMS Network 2
2. Concentration Levels for Conducting Accuracy
Audits of SLAMS Network 3
3. National Percent Data Capture for Required Precision
and Accuracy 4
4. National Precision and Accuracy Probability Limit Averages
for Manual Methods 5
5. National Precision and Accuracy Probability Limit Averages
for Automated Analyzers 6
6. Cumulative Frequency Distributions of Quarterly Probability
Limits for all Reporting Organizations (1982) 8
7. Total Number of Reporting Organizations Required to Report
Pollutant for the Year 1982 9
8. Percentage of SLAMS Sites with Complete Data in PARS
for the Year 1982 10
9. Number of Reporting Organizations Having Data in the PARS
Master File for the Year 1982 16
10. Cumulative Frequency Distributions of Annual Averages
P&A Data for All Reporting Organizations 17
lla. The 10 Most Improved Reporting Organizations for Precision . 18
lib. The 10 Most Improved Reporting Organization for Accuracy
at Level 2 18
12. Comparison of the 50-Percentile Frequency Distribution
Values with the National Averages 19
13. Values of Quarterly Probability Limits Considered as
Excessive 27
14. Summary Comparison of EMSL Performance Audits (PA) vs.
PARS Accuracy Audit Data for Year 1982 32
vii
-------
TABLES (cont.)
Number Page
Bl. TSP Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages for
Reporting Organizations B-l
B2. Manual S02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations B-7
B3. Manual N02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations . B-8
B4. Pb Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations ... B-9
B5. CO Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations B-12
B6. Automated S02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations B-16
B7. Automated N02 Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations B-20
B8. Ozone Precision and Accuracy Annual Averages
for Reporting Organizations B-23
Cl. PARS and PA Data for CO, Pb, TSP, N02 (Manual) and S02
(Manual) C-l
C2. PARS and PA Data for S02 Continuous C-65
viii
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to report the second year of data from
the Precision and Accuracy Reporting System (PARS). Federal regulations
promulgated on May 10, 1979, require quality assurance precision and accuracy
(P&A)* data to be collected. Collection started January 1, 1981, according
to requirements set forth in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A. These requirements
provide for more uniform Quality Assurance programs and specific 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&A data obtained by the efforts of the States and local agen-
cies. 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 Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory (EMSL) since the early 1970's.
These summarizations and evaluations of precision and accuracy data
serve the following purposes:
1. Quantitative evaluations of the quality of their monitoring data
are available to State and local agencies.
2. A comparison of the data from all the agencies can 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,1 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 measure
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 conditions
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. Further,
the quality assurance systems of the states were required to be documented
and approved by the EPA Regional Offices. Finally, the reporting organiza-
tions must also follow specific procedures when assessing the P&A of their
measurement systems and must report the P&A data to EPA quarterly. Starting
January 1, 1981, these regulations became effective for National Air Monitor-
ing Sites (NAMS), and beginning January 1, 1983, for all State and Local Air
Monitoring Stations.
The precision assessments were determined by performing repeated measure-
ments on ambient-level "calibration" gases at two-week intervals for continu-
ous methods, or by obtaining duplicate results from collocated samplers for
manual methods. Table 1 summarizes the requirements for performing 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
CO (continuous analyzer)
S02, N02, and 03
(continuous analyzer)
TSP, S02, and N02
(manual)
Pb
Precision Check Level
8-10 ppm
0.08 - 0.10 ppm
Collocated sampler
(Ambient concentration)
Duplicate strips
(Ambient concentration)
Frequency
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 ng/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 p.g/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&A data along with the routine monitoring
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 assur-
ance 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 CAPTURE
The second year of data collected by State and local agencies for P&A
has been compiled and summarized. Obvious improvements in the network opera-
tion have been made. Table 3 shows the improvement in data capture for the
nation.
TABLE 3. NATIONAL PERCENT DATA CAPTURE FOR REQUIRED PRECISION AND ACCURACY
Pollutant
CO
S02
N02
03
TSP
1981
77
82
56
83
94
1982
89
93
72
89
97
Relative
% Change
16
13
29
7
3
The automated N02 analyzers which tend to break down quite often had the
worst percent data capture for the first two years. However, these analyzers
had the largest increase in data capture from 1981 to 1982 of 29%, which
indicates a substantial improvement. CO had the next largest percent change,
an increase from 77% to 89%. S02 increased from 82% to 93%. TSP had the
lowest % change between years, but it had very little room for improvement in
collection of the precision and accuracy flow data.
1982 RESULTS FROM THE PARS PROGRAM
The measures of precision and accuracy are required to be computed and
reported by the States and local agencies as percentage values. For perci-
sion, 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 percent-
age of the true value. For both precision and accuracy, 95 percent prob-
ability limits are computed for the percentage values from the average and
standard deviations of the individual percentage values:
D ± 1.96 S
where D
S
1.96
the average of the individual percent differences;
the standard deviation of the individual percent differences;*
the multiplication factor corresponding to 95% probability.
-------
NOTE: 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.
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 presented
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.
Table 4 exhibits the national averages for each of the manual pollutants.
By examining the numbers of valid collocated data pairs (16,233) and the
number of audits (6461) performed for TSP, one can estimate the amount of
effort being spent in this country to obtain these data quality assessments.
TABLE 4. NATIONAL PRECISION AND ACCURACY PROBABILITY LIMIT AVERAGES
FOR MANUAL METHODS
Pollutant
TSP
Lead
Sulfur
Dioxide
Nitrogen
Dioxide
Precision
Number of
Valid Col-
located
Data Pairs
16,233
1,669
706
1,168
Probability
Limits (%)
Lower Upper
-12 +13
-15 +16
-38 +42
-29 +34
Accuracy
No. of
Audits
6,461
692
551
583
Probability Limits (%)
Level 1
Lower Upper
__ .
-11 +08
-13 +08
-07 +08
Level 2
Lower Upper
-07 +07
-07 +04
-09 +07
-07 +06
Level 3
Lower Upper
. »~.
-08 +05
-05 +06
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 predetermined
concentration levels for the chemical analysis performed in the samples for
lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. For the particulate matter, 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 particulate matter. Because
of the continual replacement of the manual S02 and N02 methods with continu-
ous methods, further discussion of the manual methods is limited. The detailed
results, however, are tabulated in Appendix B for each reporting organization.
The precision and accuracy limits for automated methods are presented in
Table 5. Apparent from the number of precision checks, for example 23,144
for S02, the effort expended for the collection of quality assurance preci-
-------
sion and accuracy data is appreciable, but necessary to assess data quality.
Details of the results are discussed in the analysis section.
TABLE 5. NATIONAL PRECISION AND ACCURACY PROBABILITY LIMIT AVERAGES
FOR AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
S02
03
CO
NO?
Precision
No. of
Precision
Checks
23,144
18,964
13,089
6,876
Probability
Limits (%)
Lower Upper
-14 +09
-10 +09
-09 +07
-13 +13
Accuracy
No. of
Audits
1,367
1,524
1,208
479
Probability Limits (%)
Level 1
Lower Upper
-16 +10
-12 +10
-11 +10
-21 +17
Level 2
Lower Upper
-12 +09
-09 +08
-06 +06
-14 +10
Level 3
Lower Upper
-12 +09
-09 +08
-06 +05
-12 +07
NATIONAL PRECISION RESULTS COMPARISON
While this report represents the second year of precision and accuracy
data, it is too early to determine reliably any trends analysis. However,
some tentative observations can be made. As can be seen in Figure 1, some
minor changes have occurred since the start-up in 1981. 03 and CO showed
the most overall change in precision with a decrease in the limit spread
for both upper and lower limits. For TSP and S(>2 the upper limits stayed
the same while the lower limit increased from-13 to -12, decreasing overall
variability only slightly. The spread or variability for NC>2 precision
probability limits remained the same but did exhibit an upward shift,
possibly eliminating a slight average bias which existed the first year.
NATIONAL AVERAGES FOR PRECISION
1981 - 1982
Figure 1. National Precision Averages for 1981 to 1982
-------
NATIONAL ACCURACY RESULTS COMPARISON
Accuracy for TSP, which is determined from an air flow measurement on the
high volume sampler, deteriorated slightly from 1981 to 1982. Figure 2 dis-
plays the national accuracy average for TSP and each of the three levels for
continuous 03, CO, 802, and
P
R
0
B
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
40-
30-
20-
10-
0-
L -10-
I
M -20-
I
I -30-
-40-
NATIONAL AVERAGES FOR ACCURACY
1981 - 1982
1 1 1
I
^
[] 1981
1982
Level
Figure 2. National Accuracy Averages for 1981 to 1982
For the continuous analyzers, it is obvious from Figure 2 that the first
level of each pollutant has a wider range than the other levels. This is to
be expected with low concentration values. Levels 2 and 3 are expected to be
similar to each other and show less variability than level 1, as expected.
Examination of Figure 2 demonstrates the improvements that have been made
across the country in the accuracy measurements. For each level of ozone,
the range of the limits have decreased from 1981 to 1982. The same trend
occurs for both S02 and CO. N02 improved dramatically for level 1 measure-
ments, while the range of the limits for Levels 2 and 3 remained basically the
same.
NATIONAL FREQUENCIES
Table 6 contains the 1982 frequency distribution for precision probabil-
ity limits and accuracy probability limits at level 2. 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. Only level 2 accuracy is presented because it is very similar to
-------
level 3, and level 1 tends to be inflated because of low concentration levels.
The narrower the distribution, the better the data quality assessment. For
example, for CO, 90% of the precision probability limits reported were witnin
-15% or +16%. If a reporting organization reported limits outside the -15
or +16 range, they knew they fell in the worst 10% percentile. It can be
seen from both Figure 2 and Table 6 that CO shows the tightest range of the
pollutants presented.
TABLE 6. CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY PROBABILITY LIMITS
FOR ALL REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS (1982)
Pollutant
Level
TSP
Precision
Frequency Percentiles
95 90
-27 -23
Accuracy(ACC)-17 -13
N02 Cont.
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
S02 Cont.
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
CO
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
S02
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
N02
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
03
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
Pb
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
-99 -77
-20 -11
-15 -12
-17 -14
-99 -99
-32 -25
-27 -20
-23 -17
-19 -15
-29 -26
-18 -14
-21 -14
-28 -24
-37 -30
-32 -24
-28 -23
-34 -22
-66 -45
-33 -27
-33 -24
-20 -17
-28 -23
-21 -18
-23 -17
-43 -33
-30 -24
-21 -15
Lower
75
-16
- 9
-39
- 8
- 6
- 6
-63
-17
-10
-10
-11
-15
- 9
- 8
-17
-22
-16
-16
-18
-26
-16
-15
-13
-16
-13
-12
-21
-16
-10
Limits
50 25
-10
- 6
-18
- 5
- 4
- 4
-24
-10
- 7
- 5
- 8
- 8
- 5
- 4
-13
-13
-11
-10
-11
-16
-11
- 9
- 9
-11
- 8
- 8
-11
- 8
- 6
- 7
- 3
- 9
- 3
- 2
- 2
H
- 8
- 3
- 3
- 5
- 4
- 2
- 2
-10
- 7
- 6
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 6
- 5
- 6
- 5
- 4
- 4
- 5
- 3
- 3
10
- 4
- 1
- 4
0
0
0
0
- 5
- 2
- 2
- 3
- 1
0
0
- 7
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 3
- 3
- 1
- 2
- 2
- 1
0
0
5
-2
0
0
0
1
1
0
-3
-1
-1
-2
1
2
1
-5
-1
0
0
-2
0
-1
-1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
5
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
-1
0
-3
-2
-1
1
-5
-3
-2
1
-7
-5
-5
2
0
-1
-1
1
-2
-4
10
4
1
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
- 1
0
0
2
- 1
0
0
3
0
- 2
- 4
3
0
0
0
2
0
- 1
Upper
25 50
7 11
3 6
10 25
4 7
3 5
4 5
9 22
4 6
3 4
2 4
3 6
4 9
3 6
2 4
5 8
3 8
4 8
4 8
6 10
5 13
2 7
0 5
6 8
5 9
3 7
3 6
5 10
3 7
1 4
Limits
75
16
9
65
10
7
6
91
12
9
6
10
16
9
8
12
15
13
13
18
25
15
11
12
14
11
11
20
10
8
90 95
25 33
14 19
90 99
15 23
12 17
9 14
99 99
19 24
16 22
14 17
16 18
22 29
13 17
12 16
17 20
24 28
19 22
18 23
23 28
39 43
27 35
21 32
16 19
21 27
16 22
16 18
32 51
22 26
10 16
-------
SECTION 3
REGIONAL RESULTS
REGIONAL DATA CAPTURE
For the year 1982, the numbers of required reporting organizations by
pollutant are listed in Table 7. Although the reporting organizations have
been submitting P&A data for the manual methods (Pb, S02, and N02) , these data
were not required by the regulations to be reported until 1983. As shown in
the table, Regions 4 and 5 have the largest number of reporting organizations.
TABLE 7. TOTAL NUMBER OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS REQUIRED
TO REPORT BY POLLUTANT FOR THE YEAR 1982
Automated
Region
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Nation
CO
C42101
2
3
5
9
11
5
2
2
8
2
49
S02
C42401
6
2
9
9
17
5
7
3
4
2
64
Methods
N02
C42602
1
2
5
2
7
4
3
1
3
1
29
03
044201
4
2
8
16
17
7
7
2
9
2
74
Manual Methods
TSP
111101
6
3
14
24
24
12
11
7
9
5
115
Pb
112128
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S02
142401
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N02
141602
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The breakdown of data completeness (defined as the percentage of report-
ing organizations which reported P&A data to EPA as required each quarter) is
given in Table 8. For TSP each region's data was 95% complete or better for
the year, except for Region 10 which was 88% complete. Considering that many
ozone sites do not operate in the winter months, the 89% data completeness is
a very respectable percentage.
REGIONAL COMPARISONS
In Figures 3 through 8, comparisons are given by Region for each
pollutant method of the precision and accuracy probability limits for 1981
and 1982. The results shown on these figures are the arithmetic average of
the upper 95% probability limits for all reporting organization-quarters in
-------
each Region and the arithmetic average of the lower 95% probability limits
for all reporting organization-quarters in each Region for each year.
About half of the reporting organizations in each Region had wider limits;
about half had narrower limits than shown.
TABLE 8. PERCENTAGE OF SLAMS SITES WITH COMPLETE DATA
IN PARS FOR THE YEAR 1982
Automated
Region
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Nation
CO
C42101
100
90
100
88
79
88
67
100
88
100
89
S02
C42401
97
100
98
83
92
94
74
80
86
100
93
Pollutants
N02
C42602
100
100
100
38
58
71
69
88
69
38
72
03
044201
83
100
96
82
87
92
77
100
88
100
89
Manual Pollutants
TSP
111101
100
98
100
99
95
76
95
99
96
88
97
PB S02
112128 142401
N02
141602
NOTE: Means no data was required
The average precision and accuracy for each Region is shown in Figures 3a
and 3b. The differences in precision and accuracy between 1981 and 1982 are
relatively small, except in a few instances. More Regions show improvement
than do not. Another year's data are needed to establish any definite trends.
However, it appears that Regions 10 and 2 show the most improvement.
Figure 3a. Precision
Figure 3b. Accuracy
38-
10-
8--
10-
38-
TSP PRECISION
1081-1082
1"
D82
J-, fritltf]
*** _ B~^
-
-
t" lifl
^ uu
** 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-40
Figure 3. TSP precision and accuracy for 1981 to 1982.
10
-------
No consistent changes are evident in the variability of the precision
or the accuracy results for TSP. The apparent biases in precision results
for Regions 1 and 2, however, have improved.
40-
38-
20-
10-
-10-
L -20-
I
M _30.
T -40-
S02 PRECISION
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
81
82
X
40-
30-
28-
10-
0-
-10-
-20-
-30-
-40'
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 1
1981-1882
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
\ T
X
A
V
G
P
R
0
B
A
B
I
L
40-
10-
-10-
-20-
-30-
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
§ <"
D 82
X
40-
30.
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
Uhln
--P
Figure 4. Ozone precision and accuracy.
0-^ - Region 7 showed the most improvement in Ozone Precision from 1981,
while Regions 3 and 10 had the next largest improvement. Region 2 had the
tightest probability limits of -10 and +08. Region 8, which had the tightest
limits of -13 and +05 in 1981 slipped to the widest limits of -13 and +10
in 1982. Using accuracy level 2 as an indicator, since level 1 is affected
by the low concentration levels and level 3 is very similar to level 2, we
11
-------
can see the overall improvement in the data. Region 7 made the most improve-
ment in tightening their limits to -08 and +5. Region 1 continued to have
the tightest limits at -06 and +06. Region 10 experienced the worst decline
in limits to -16 and +16. The poor performance in one State was the reason
for the decline.
x -
88-
68-
N02 PRECISION
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
x -*>
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL I
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
X
88-
ee-
p
5 «-
B
* 28-
D
I
T "'
Y -28-
L
I -40-
M
T-88.
S
X -68
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1981-1882
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
1iir
ii
iir
" X
N02 ACCURACY LEVEL 3
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
X -W
Figure 5. Automated
precision and accuracy by Region for 1981 to 1982,
12
-------
NQ? - NC>2 has only 29 reporting organizations nationwide that are required to
report PS.A data. Three Regions have only 1 reporting organization each.
Figure 5 depicts the large variability experienced by the reporting organi-
zations. For example, in 1982, Region 10 had the best precision limits at
-09 and +08, but during 17 audits had the worst accuracy limits obtained by
any Region. Regions 8 and 1 showed the most improvement in accuracy, while
Region 4 was next behind Region 10's worst.
Figure 6 shows the activity for continuous S02 analyzers. With the
exception of considerable improvement for accuracy in Regions 7 and 3, there
is steady improvement in both precision measurements and accuracy measure-
ments for S02-
A
v
G
p
R
0
B
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
L
I
M
I
T
S
30-
28-
18-
18-
28-
38-
S02 PRECISION
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
m
1
i
1 T
& &
f\
#
M
-
&
-
<
n
[
&
~
&
1
3
fl
[
i
81
82
4&
40-
30-
20-
10-
0-J
10-
20-
-30-
-40-
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL I
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
S~l
r
i
ii
U
i
tl
T-J
i
ffl
B
i
D
i
81
82
[
-
A
V
e
48-
10-
p
R
0
B
A
B
I
I
I
y -18-
L -20-
I
M -30-
S02 ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1981-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
3 81
D82
iiir
ir
n r
X
Figure 6. Automated S02 precision and accuracy by Regions for 1981 to 1982,
13
-------
CO - Carbon monoxide data for precision and the three levels for accuracy are
shown in Figure 7. Overall improvement is seen in both precision and accu-
racy for CO. For precision only, Region 8 showed a large decline in precision
measurements. However, the large negative bias in 1981 does not persist into
1982. For accuracy every Region shows improvement from the 1981 limits for
CO, with Region 6 showing the most dramatic improvement.
40-
A
V
e
30
P
R
0
B
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y -10
20-
10-
0-
I -20-
M
'-30-
8
X-40'
CARBON MONOXIDE PRECISION
1981-1882
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
at
82
A 48-
V
G
30-
P
0 2BH
B
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y -|0H
10-
0-
L
I -20-|
M
T-30H
S
-40-
CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 1
1881-1982
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
1^
81
82
40-
30-
20-
10-
CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 2
1981-1882
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
x -«
CARBON MONOXIDE ACCURACY LEVEL 3
1881-1882
AUTOMATED ANALYZERS
81
82
$»
Figure 7. Carbon Monoxide precision and accuracy by Regions for 1981 to 1982.
Pb - Lead precision and accuracy has not been required for the first two years
of the new regulations. It was required beginning in 1983. However, several
Regions collected P&A data in 1981 and all Regions had some data in 1982.
Figure 8 shows those Regions.
14
-------
180-
80-
90-
40-
20-
0-
-20-
-40-
-00.
B '
X -«
-B-
LEAD PRECISION
1081-1082
MANUAL METHODS
40
30
0-
-10-
-28-
-38-
LEAD ACCURACY LEVEL I
1981-1982
MANUAL METHODS
82
w
X
X -«
*P
Figure 8. Lead precision and accuracy by Region for 1981 to 1982
15
-------
SECTION 4
RESULTS BY REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Table 9 shows the total number of Reporting Organizations reporting data
to EMSL in 1982. By comparing the numbers between Tables 7 and 9, one can
see the extra effort exerted by some of the State and local agencies to provide
quality assurance information. There are an additional 59 reporting organiza-
tions for CO, 49 for continuous 807, 57 for continuous N02, 43 for ozone, and
30 for TSP. In addition, there are 78 reporting organizations reporting
precision and accuracy data for Pb, 34 for manual S02, and 37 for manual N02.
TABLE 9.
NUMBER OF REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS HAVING DATA IN THE PARS
MASTER FILE FOR THE YEAR 1982
Region
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Nation
CO
C42101
6
3
9
32
18
12
9
5
10
4
108
Automated
S02
C42401
6
3
11
35
22
11
10
4
7
4
113
Pollutants
N02 03
C42602 C44201
3
2
12
29
13
10
5
3
7
2
86
6
3
12
37
24
10
10
3
10
2
117
TSP
111101
6
3
16
37
33
14
12
9
10
5
145
Manual
PB
112128
3
2
4
29
11
9
8
2
6
4
78
Pollutants
S02
142401
0
0
0
27
2
2
0
0
2
1
34
N02
142602
0
0
1
28
2
3
0
0
2
1
37
Listed in Table 10 are frequency distributions of the annual arithmetic
averages for each reporting organization and pollutant.
To check on an individual reporting organization's annual average and
see how it compares to all the other reporting organizations, refer to
Appendix B for the individual reporting organization's average, then compare
those numbers with the frequencies listed in Table 11. For example, report-
ing organization 48002, whose TSP precision limits are -08 and +08 fall
within the 25 percentiles which means reporting organization 48002 is in the
best 25th percentile of all reporting organizations.
16
-------
TABLE 10. CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF ANNUAL AVERAGE
P & A DATA FOR ALL REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Pollutant
Level
TSP
Precision
Accuracy(ACC]
CO
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
S02
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
N02
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
03
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
ACC Level 3
Pb
Precision
ACC Level 1
ACC Level 2
Frequency
95
-28
-15
-16
-29
-15
-19
-26
-37
-28
-26
-35
-64
-49
-43
-18
-25
-19
-22
-45
-22
-15
Lower
90 75
-20 -16
-12 - 9
-14 -12
-22 -14
-13 -10
-13 - 8
-24 -17
-33 -21
-21 -16
-20 -15
-23 -17
-48 -28
-32 -18
-24 -16
-17 -13
-20 -16
-16 -12
-16 -12
-22 -22
-19 -16
-14 -10
Limits
50
-11
- 6
- 8
-10
- 6
- 5
-14
-15
-13
-11
-12
-20
-12
-10
9
-12
- 8
H
-10
- 7
- 7
25
- 8
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 3
- 3
-10
-10
- 8
- 8
- 8
-11
- 8
- 7
- 7
- 7
- 5
- 5
- 5
- 4
- 4
10
- 6
- 3
- 4
- 2
- 1
- 2
- 8
- 7
- 6
- 5
- 6
- 5
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 3
- 2
- 3
0
- 2
- 2
Percentiles
5
-5
-2
-3
-1
1
0
-8
-6
-3
-3
-4
-2
-2
-4
-3
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
5
4
2
1
-1
0
0
3
1
4
1
4
-9
-2
-3
4
1
1
-1
0
-3
-3
Upper Limits
10 25 50 75
6
3
2
3
2
1
4
2
1
2
6
0
0
0
5
4
1
1
2
0
0
8 11
4 6
5 7
5 8
4 6
3 5
6 8
6 10
5 9
5 9
8 10
6 15
3 6
1 5
6 9
6 9
4 7
4 6
5 12
3 6
1 4
16
10
10
14
8
8
12
14
12
12
16
21
16
12
12
12
10
10
20
10
7
90 95
24 29
14 15
13 16
21 22
11 13
11 13
15 19
21 25
15 17
15 20
21 29
27 49
21 25
18 20
15 19
19 24
15 20
13 17
33 41
16 18
17 12
Appendix B shows the annual arithmetic averages of the upper and lower
probability limits reported each quarter for each reporting organization.
For some calendar quarters the limits were more extreme than shown; for some
calendar quarters the limits were better than shown. Any user of monitoring
data from some specific site and time period should obtain, from the local
air monitoring agency, the precision and accuracy data for the specific sites
and time periods involved.
Many reporting organizations showed a large improvement in their data
from 1981 to 1982. Tables lla and lib show the 10 most improved reporting
organizations by pollutant for precision and accuracy, based on the decrease
in the range of the probability limits.
17
-------
TABLE lla. THE 10 MOST IMPROVED REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS FOR PRECISION
TABLE lib.
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Manual
Methods
TSP
04002
26002
01012
19001
36005
51001
39003
15003
36002
45003
Automated Methods
CO
29200
28003
42001
10012
06001
50001
26002
36006
36008
46001
0^
29200
36003
03200
23002
36001
46001
36009
44005
06001
01013
NO?
01014
10018
37102
26001
39003
10012
08001
45002
11010
39001
SO?
36003
10002
36007
01012
26001
26005
23002
25100
01013
37101
*tie 15101
16003
THE 10 MOST IMPROVED REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS FOR ACCURACY
AT LEVEL 2
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Manual
Methods
TSP
03300
28002
01015
10015
14003
50002
04002
27003
45004
51001
Automated Methods
CO
11010
32001
29200
14001
05036
48001
47001
16002
34001
37103
0-} | NO?
16001
15010
10012
48003
16003
14003
21005
08001
10016
45002
37101
08001
36014
48003
18002
26003
04001
38001
11010
36010
SO?
10016
36007
32002
26001
45002
36006
39003
37102
10002
37101
**08001 tie
23002
Some of the decreases in the ranges of the probability limits were quite
substantial as much as 67%. Although approximately half of the reporting
organizations actually showed increases, the increases were, in general, not
as large as the decreases.
18
-------
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 DISTRIBUTION
VALUES WITH THE NATIONAL AVERAGES
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
Lower
Limit
-12
- 7
-15
- 7
-29
-.7
-38
- 9
- 9
- 6
-10
- 9
-13
-14
-14
-12
Average
Upper
Limit
13
7
16
4
34
6
42
7
7
6
9
8
13
10
9
9
Range
25
14
31
11
63
13
80
16
16
12
19
17
26
24
23
21
50-Percentile
Lower
Limit
-10
- 6
-10
- 7
-18
- 4
-24
- 7
- 8
- 5
- 9
- 8
-11
-11
-13
-11
Upper
Limit
10
6
12
4
25
5
22
4
6
6
8
7
10
7
8
8
Values
Range
20
12
22
11
43
9
46
11
14
11
17
15
21
18
21
19
*All accuracy values for all pollutants are for Level 2.
19
-------
In all cases Che spreads (ranges) of the probability limits are somewhat
greater for precision than for accuracy and considerably so for the manual
S02 and manual N02 methods. These differences are consistent for both the
National averages and the 50-percentile values. These same relationships also
existed for 1981. This means that the short-term within-sampler variability
(precision) is larger than the variability of accuracy which includes varia-
tions 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.
TSP. 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 ^tg/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 NO?. 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 analytical
portion of the method; whereas the accuracy audit is a check only on the
laboratory analytical portion of the method. Further, the collocated 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 portions 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 chemical
analytical portion of the method. The accuracy audit data are obtained from
the chemical analysis of strips to which known amounts of water-soluble Pb
salts have been added and thus do not involve the other portions of the
measurement process, nor do they involve real-world particulates.
20
-------
Further, similar to the other manual methods (TSP, N02, and 802), 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 varia-
bilities of the precision estimates are due to differences in concentration
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, SO?, NO?, O^ (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
18 -.10 ppm for S02, N02, and 03.
and .08
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 ppra for CO
.15 -.20 ppm for S02, N02, and 03.
Level 3 35-45 ppm for CO
.35 -.45 ppm for S02, NC>2, 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.
COMPARISON OF NATIONAL AVERAGES 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
21
-------
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 values
(i.e., values in the tails of the distribution). (See Figures 9 through 12,
which are plots of the frequency distributions on probability plotting paper).
If the distributions were normal, the plots would appear as straight lines.
All of the distributions of the upper and lower probability limits are
generally symmetric about zero. The only exception is for the SC>2 continuous
method, for both precision and accuracy. This can be observed from the plots
on the normal probability paper, Figures 11 and 12. 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 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 relatively low concentra-
tions of SC>2 (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 concentra-
tions 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 direc-
tion. No satisfactory explanation can be provided at this time. However,
this consistent bias should be investigated and corrected, if possible.
A review of Figure 9 clearly shows the large variability of precision
data for the manual methods and, in particular, the presence of many extreme
values for the S02 and N02 methods. Figure 12 shows more variability of
the accuracy audit results from the continuous S02 and N02 methods than for
CO and 03.
Based on the plots of Figures 9 through 12, 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.
22
-------
i i i i i i i i i r
TSP
Pb
S°2
LOWER
LIMITS
-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
percent
Figure 9. Cumulative frequency distributions, precision, manual methods.
23
-------
TSP
Pb
A NO?
LOWER
LIMITS
UPPER
LIMITS
I
40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
percent
Figure 10. Cumulative frequency distributions, accuracy (level 2), manual methods.
-------
"1
CO
03
A N02
LOWER
LIMITS
A
m
UPPER
LIMITS
40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
percent
Figure 11. Cumulative frequency distributions, precision, continuous methods.
-------
CO
03
AN02 LOWER
* S02 LIMITS
m
*
UPPER
LIMITS
40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
percent
Figure 12. Cumulative frequency distributions, accuracy (level 2), continuous methods.
-------
TABLE 13. VALUES OF QUARTERLY PROBABILITY LIMITS CONSIDERED AS EXCESSIVE
Manual Methods
TSP
Pb
NO 2
SO 2
Continuous Methods
CO
03
N02
SO?
Precision Limits
± 30
± 45
± 60
± 70
± 19
± 20
± 31
± 24
Level
+ 28
± 22
± 28
± 29
± 28
± 50
± 33
Accuracy
1 Level
± 18
± 19
± 16
± 25
± 18
± 22
± 34
± 27
Limits
2 Level 3
± 15
± 20
± 18
± 20
± 32
± 25
27
-------
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 Ambient Air Audit
Program, conducted by the Quality Assurance Division (QAD) of the EMSL.
Blind samples are sent to laboratories that perform the State and local
agencies' analyses. The samples are analyzed and results are sent to QAD
where they are evaluated.
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 average audit results for the PA.
Comparisons of the national averages 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 averages,
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.
Comparisons of the PA and the PARS results by Region are shown in Figures
13a through f. The figures show considerable variation among Regions.
CO. For a given Region the width of the probability limits is nearly the
"same for PA and PARS, except for Region 2, where PARS is less than PA;
Region 8, where PARS is less than PA; and Region 3, where PARS is greater
than PA.
28
-------
i
If
12
10
8
6
4
2
o
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
-16
~~~
T
T
1
1
i -
i
*
TPA TPARS
J
J
L
1
L
,
r
-
1
T
*
T
i
*»
<
T
1
CO _
_
_
T _
TT T ~
T ~
j. X _
1 X _
i
23456
REGION
10
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
'
.
'
TSP _
«
T
i
T
i
X
»
I
T
1
«^»
T ]
i
rj n
j
1
J_
.
-T
i
-1-
T
i
X
T -
i _
I
i -
8
10
234 56
REGION
Figure 13b. Comparison of PA and PARS for TSP (level 2).
29
-------
dU
20
10
§ n
1
-10
-20
-30
TT
Ji
1 2 3
N02
I IT I
! .U *
i
TPA j PARS ~~
45 6 7 8 9 10
REGIONS
Figure 13c. Comparison of PA and PARS for manual NC^devel 3).
10
0
-10
-20
__
T
i
i
*^
20 1234
S02
^^
T
I1
5 6 7 8 9 10
REGIONS
Figure 13d. Comparison of PA and PARS for manual SC>2 (level 3).
JU
20
10
-10
-20
-30
40
.en
311
T
JL
1
J
1
j
1
2
'
T
i
a.
3
J
p
4
L
T
1
j
1
5
T
1
.J_
6
Pb
T -
< TT IT
fc 1
s \ i
I i 1
J.
7 8 9 10
REGIONS
Figure 13e. Comparison of PA and PARS for Pb (level 3).
30
-------
i/U
40
30
20
10
I o
0)
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
T
i
T 1
T1 T1
II ll
_ J- -*
1
1
1
1
J.
T
1
1
1
1
1
J,
T
i
i
1
l
-L.
I" I
S02
T ~~
1
1 _
1
1
'
±
PARS _
1 2345678 9 10
REGION
Figure 13f. Comparison of PA and PARS for continuous SC>2(level 3).
31
-------
TABLE 14. SUMMARY COMPARISON OF EMSL PERFORMANCE AUDITS (PA) vs
PARS ACCURACY AUDIT DATA FOR YEAR 1982
Pollutant &
Method Code
CO
PA
PARS
N02
PA
PARS
S02
PA
PARS
LEAD
PA
PARS
HIV
PA
PARS
S02 (Cont)
PA
PARS
Audits
1704
(1122)
127
( 526)
130
( 445)
377
( 529)
2860
(5475)
363
( 656)
National Averages
Probability Limits (%)
Level 1
Lower Upper
-17 +12
(-15) (+15)
-24 +21
(-11) (+12)
-32 +22
(-18) (+11)
-37 +35
(-16) (+11)
-27 +21
(-19) (+14)
Level 2
Lower Upper
- 7 +8
(- 7) (+ 8)
-20 +15
(- 8) (+ 9)
21 +20
(-12) (+ 8)
-24 +20
(-11) (+ 8)
-13 +12
(- 7) (+ 7)
-25 +21
(-17) (+13)
Level 3
Lower Upper
- 7 +7
(- 7) (+ 7)
-25 +19
(- 7) (+ 7)
-15 + 2
(-10) (+ 7)
-22 +14
-25 +21
(-16) (+13)
Level 4
Lower Upper
(- 3) (+ 3)
-23 +16
-13 + 9
-22 +20
(-16) +12)
Region 6 probability limits for both PA and PARS are considerably wider
than for other regions. Region 8's PA limits are wider than all other regions
except for Region 6.
Hi Vol. The width of the probability limits for PARS is, for all Regions
except 7, less than for PA. This may be explained by the fact that within
each reporting organization the flow rate checks are not as completely inde-
pendent from their internal standards as are the PA audits. Regions 2 and 9
have more variability than other Regions.
NO? (manual). The wide variability of the PA for Region 4 needs explanation.
Also, for Region 6 the considerable difference in PA and PARS limits should
somehow be explained.
SO? (manual). For PA results there is a definite negative bias for both
Regions 4 and 5. 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
32
-------
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 3, 4 , and 5 PA results have much more variability than for other
regions.
SO? (Continuous) - Regions 4 and 6 show considerably more variation of PA
results than other Regions. Region 4 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 1 which has less variability.
All Regions, except 2 and 3, show a slight negative bias for both PA
and PARS data, similar to the negative biases for the manual S02 method.
33
-------
SECTION 7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of PARS data for 1982 indicate some general improvement over
the data for 1981. However, considerable differences exist among Regions and
individual reporting organizations for most measurement methods. Investiga-
tions should be made to determine 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.
Further improvement in the data quality assessments, which are measures
of the monitoring data quality, can be achieved only through continuing
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 organizations
having excessively large variations of probability limits. Investigation
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 preci-
sion and accuracy results in order to identify specific procedures which
should be uniformly used throughout the Region and the Nation to further
improve the reliability of the monitoring data in the National Aerometrlc
Data Base.
34:
-------
REFERENCES
1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 58, "Ambient Air Quality
and Surveillance."
2. Lampe, R.L., B.F. Parr, B.I. Bennett, G. Pratt, and W.J. Mitchell.
"National Performance Audit Program: Ambient Air Audits of Analytical
Proficiency-1982." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, EPA
600/4-84-005. Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. January 1984.
3. 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.
35
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY
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 1982 were averaged and overall 95% probability limits
were calculated for each reporting organization, for each Regional Office,
and for the entire SLAMS network.
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
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 for this report.
Accuracy (Continuous Analyzers) the agreement between an analyzer result
and a known audit concentration. Accuracy estimates are obtained once per
year for each analyzer by introducing blind audit materials into the analy-
zer. The audit samples must span at least three concentration levels and,
whenever possible, must be traceable to NBS or other authoritative reference.
At least 25% of the analyzers in each reporting organization must be checked
each quarter. The percentage difference Eor 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 averages were
used to compile the annual averages presented here. They were calculated in
the same manner as described earlier for precision.
A-l
-------
Accuracy (Manual Methods) the agreement between an observed value and a
known or reference value. For NC>2 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. This value, expressed as a percentage, is not corrected for instances
where equipment failure prevented conducting the check, or for periods when
monitoring data were invalidated. Thus, it may not necessarily reflect the
overall capabilities or total effort of a reporting organization
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 performance
to that of all other participants. The use of audit materials for the manual
S02 audits (_f.reeze-dried SCU) , manual NO-, audits (NaN02 solution), and par-
ticulate SO^, NO^, and Pb audits (spiked filter strips) evaluates 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
TABLE Bl. TSP PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES FOR
REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
**NH
41001
**RI
47001
**VT
31001
**NJ
33001
**NY
40001
**PR
08001
**DE
09001
**DC
21001
21002
21003
21005
21006
**MD
39001
39002
39003
**PA
Required
No.
SLAMS*
019
019
009
009
008
008
016
016
005
005
005
005
023
023
099
099
005
005
006
006
005
005
014
005
002
004
002
027
061
Oil
012
084
Sites
No.
NAMS
025
025
001
001
017
017
001
001
006
006
001
001
009
009
027
027
007
007
003
003
004
004
006
000
001
001
001
009
033
007
004
044
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
157
157
106
106
105
105
112
112
135
135
99
99
109
109
242
242
34
34
107
107
113
113
88
109
101
117
106
521
122
139
115
376
-08
-08
-13
-13
-09
-09
-12
-12
-07
-07
-05
-05
-07
-07
-16
-16
-06
-06
-15
-15
-05
-05
-10
-08
-04
-06
-06
-07
-15
-10
-19
-15
Limits
Up
+09
+09
+13
+13
+14
+14
+08
+08
+11
+11
+08
+08
+07
+07
+10
+10
+03
+03
+15
+15
+12
+12
+09
+09
+04
+12
+05
+08
+18
+09
+16
+15
No.
Audits
148
148
32
32
40
40
32
32
17
17
28
28
12
12
38
38
36
36
15
15
10
10
46
12
13
11
12
94
121
212
12
345
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Low Up Low Up Low Up
-08
-08
-04
-04
-09
-09
-08
-08
-05
-05
-06
-06
-01
-01
-02
-02
-06
-06
-13
-13
-09
-09
-09
-05
-10
-11
-07
-08
-09
-04
-12
-08
+03
+03
+09
+09
+10
+10
+07
+07
+04
+04
+04
+04
+01
+01
+05
+05
+05
+05
+14
+14
+07
+07
+08
+01
+13
+11
+07
+08
+12
+05
+08
+08
*SLAMS - State and Local Air Monitoring Sites, not including National Air Monitoring
Sites (NAMS). Actually, NAMS are a subset of SLAMS. For example, for Reporting
Organization 07001, there is a total of 44 SLAMS, of which 25 are NAMS.
**Two-letter state abbreviations. _ 1
D-l
-------
TABLE Bl. (cont.)
Reporting
Organization
48001
48002
48003
48005
**VA
50001
50002
**WV
01011
01012
01013
01014
01015
01016
**AL
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
**FL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
18003
**KY
25100
**MS
Required
No.
SLAMS
032
001
016
000
049
012
007
019
026
008
004
006
009
000
053
013
005
006
008
000
004
000
007
015
005
002
002
009
008
010
093
040
040
040
008
000
048
014
014
Sites
No.
NAMS
017
001
000
002
020
007
004
Oil
006
006
003
002
000
000
017
000
000
001
000
000
000
000
004
002
002
000
000
000
002
003
014
Oil
Oil
006
006
000
012
004
004
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
157
106
157
111
531
43
94
137
200
99
86
145
110
16
656
114
98
92
113
100
117
117
130
113
114
108
91
110
96
114
1,627
229
229
425
50
14
489
148
148
-07
-08
-08
-09
-08
-03
-22
-12
-28
-18
-12
-10
-07
-35
-16
-10
-18
-10
-18
-16
-09
-15
-13
-10
-26
-08
-13
-11
-09
-09
-13
-16
-16
-20
-08
-37
-17
-17
-17
Limits
Up
+ 10
+08
+07
+09
+08
+15
+06
+10
+04
+22
+10
+08
+09
+28
+11
+10
+13
+03
+08
+16
+08
+16
+12
+10
+17
+10
+16
+08
+09
+11
+11
+11
+11
+17
+08
+58
+17
+13
+13
No.
Audits
51
9
23
9
92
12
10
22
40
298
8
8
112
0
366
38
5
15
10
17
12
4
80
22
29
14
7
14
13
90
370
52
52
85
21
0
106
27
27
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Low Up Low Up Low Up
-05
-02
-07
-01
-04
-10
-04
-07
-04
-04
-07
-04
-10
-06
-07
-03
-09
-05
-12
-03
-04
-10
-10
-03
-14
-21
-03
-04
-06
-07
-06
-06
-14
-03
-08
-10
-10
+04
+11
+04
+00
+05
+04
+07
+06
+09
+04
+04
+07
+17
+08
+04
+02
+04
+03
+11
+08
+03
+10
+14
+02
+18
+13
+04
+07
+07
+07
+05
+05
+18
+05
+11
+11
+11
B-2
-------
TABLE Bl. (cont.)
Reporting
Organization
34001
34002
34003
34004
**NC
42001
**sc
44001
44002
44003
44004
44005
44006
**TN
14001
14002
14003
**IL
15001
15002
15003
15004
15005
15006
15007
15008
15009
15010
**IN
23001
23002
**M1
24001
**MN
36001
36002
36003
36004
36005
36006
36007
36008
Required
No.
SLAMS
057
007
006
005
075
010
010
022
005
008
007
007
000
049
045
008
Oil
064
037
002
007
000
009
000
000
000
000
009
064
070
014
084
049
049
010
008
016
018
005
009
007
031
Sites
No.
NAMS
004
002
002
001
009
008
008
003
007
005
002
004
000
021
022
004
001
027
010
003
003
000
001
000
000
000
000
000
017
016
005
021
Oil
Oil
005
003
002
000
000
004
005
007
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
408
79
90
76
653
293
293
171
105
113
96
122
0
607
162
194
74
430
104
110
51
41
112
22
0
110
108
47
705
211
95
306
132
132
108
87
171
88
102
101
108
114
-13
-12
-09
-11
-11
-09
-09
-08
-17
-05
-07
-06
-09
-23
-09
-19
-16
-07
-03
-06
-05
-11
-13
-08
-07
-06
-07
-08
-10
-09
-13
-13
-06
-13
-19
-29
-13
-11
-10
-04
Limits
UP
+14
+11
+07
+31
+15
+11
+11
+06
+20
+09
+09
+06
+10
+25
+25
+10
+20
+12
+10
+09
+22
+15
+11
+06
+07
+14
+11
+15
+12
+13
+08
+08
+09
+14
+24
+11
+23
+03
+09
+13
No.
Audits
256
19
59
10
344
355
355
189
55
90
44
100
35
513
57
20
30
107
38
2
32
4
14
0
0
16
8
8
122
35
24
59
70
70
17
12
23
17
10
17
19
40
Accuracy
Level 1 Level
Low Up Low
-05
-19
-04
-02
-08
-03
-03
-09
-08
-05
-06
-06
-09
-07
-12
-10
-09
-10
-03
-02
-05
-02
+03
-10
-01
-03
-06
-03
-03
-04
-04
-10
-10
-07
-08
-09
-08
-11
-04
-03
-05
2 Level 3
Up Low Up
+04
+26
+09
+16
+14
+03
+03
+14
+08
+09
+05
+06
+13
+09
+09
+05
+10
+08
+06
+04
+08
+03
+07
+00
+02
+03
+02
+04
+08
+05
+07
+13
+13
+06
+03
+03
+15
+04
+08
+06
+04
B-3
-------
TABLE Bl. (cont.)
Reporting
Organization
36009
36010
36012
36013
26014
36015
36016
**OH
51001
**WI
04002
**AR
19001
**LA
32001
32002
**NM
37101
37102
37103
**OK
45001
45002
45003
45004
45005
45006
45007
**TX
16001
16002
16003
**IA
17001
**KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
Required
No.
SLAMS
022
Oil
012
019
016
009
010
203
066
066
023
023
028
028
041
007
048
018
006
005
029
014
002
005
004
004
006
002
037
006
002
030
038
012
012
014
006
005
004
006
Sites
No.
NAMS
005
007
001
001
002
004
005
051
016
016
003
003
007
007
000
004
004
002
003
003
008
030
004
002
002
000
004
002
044
003
003
008
014
008
008
003
003
003
003
002
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
312
98
103
120
117
53
118
1,800
120
120
177
177
106
106
212
122
334
85
111
89
285
182
114
111
109
90
7
119
732
60
0
114
174
104
104
0
0
0
0
0
-19
-10
-10
-10
-20
-15
-17
-14
-10
-10
-22
-22
-11
-11
-18
-13
-16
-16
-16
-08
-14
-15
-26
-13
-10
-15
-25
-02
-14
-47
-09
-10
-17
-17
-17
-15
-36
-20
-11
-06
Limits
Up
+17
+11
+14
+08
+08
+14
+10
+12
+10
+10
+28
+28
+16
+16
+12
+10
+11
+34
+08
+10
+18
+18
+15
+17
+24
+05
+35
+03
+15
+54
+11
+16
+22
+24
+24
+18
+47
+16
+13
+03
No.
Audits
39
29
17
20
19
18
24
321
16
16
105
105
144
144
257
23
280
20
12
27
59
502
52
72
33
33
62
39
793
16
15
48
79
33
33
20
10
15
6
12
Accuracy
Level 1 Level
Low Up Low
-05
-08
-09
-06
-06
+03
-04
-06
-04
-04
-07
-07
-06
-06
-05
-07
-06
-06
-04
-06
-05
-08
-09
-06
-14
-07
-08
-03
-08
-29
-03
-04
-13
-12
-12
-06
-06
-17
-02
-04
2 Level 3
Up Low Up
+07
+11
+06
+05
+03
+14
+03
+06
+07
+07
+06
+06
+04
+04
+06
+07
+06
+08
+03
+11
+07
+06
+07
+06
+21
+05
+13
+02
+08
+14
+06
+04
+08
+12
+12
+05
+05
+11
+07
+02
B-4
-------
TABLE Bl. (cont.)
Reporting
Organization
**MO
28001
28002
28003
*NB
06001
**CO
27001
27002
27003
27004
**MT
35001
**ND
43001
**SD
46001
**UT
52001
**WY
03100
03200
03300
**AZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
**CA
12120
**HI
29200
29300
**NV
02020
**AK
Required
No.
SLAMS
035
019
004
009
032
048
048
022
004
003
005
034
020
020
021
021
007
007
012
012
025
003
007
035
032
009
004
013
058
010
010
010
008
018
Oil
Oil
Sites
No.
NAMS
014
000
003
003
006
013
013
001
000
001
000
002
001
001
002
002
008
008
001
001
000
005
004
009
025
009
003
009
046
002
002
002
003
005
003
003
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
0
148
81
106
335
152
152
118
52
46
125
341
100
100
97
97
97
97
148
148
75
82
0
157
529
115
112
193
949
95
95
101
15
116
13
13
-17
-15
-11
-10
-12
-30
-30
-16
-08
-15
-20
-15
-11
-11
-09
-09
-10
-10
-12
-12
-11
-07
-08
-08
-27
-11
-12
-11
-15
-17
-17
-08
-06
-07
09
09
Limits
Up
+20
+29
+13
+09
+17
+32
+32
+22
+10
+19
+23
+18
+08
+08
+07
+07
+12
+12
+10
+10
+27
+20
+18
+21
+29
+08
+12
+14
+16
+09
+09
+07
-01
+03
+10
+10
No.
Audits
63
20
11
20
51
48
48
44
8
4
15
71
23
23
77
77
28
28
13
13
14
32
16
62
71
56
7
30
164
50
50
63
5
68
1
1
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Low Up Low Up Low Up
-07
-11
-11
-09
-10
-08
-08
-06
-03
-04
-17
-08
-09
-09
-04
-04
-05
-05
-03
-03
-15
-11
-10
-11
-12
-07
-17
-14
-11
-07
-07
-05
+02
-03
+06
+14
+10
+05
+09
+06
+06
+05
+07
+08
+21
+10
+06
+06
+04
+04
+05
+05
+06
+06
+09
+10
+15
+12
+10
+04
+07
+10
+08
+06
+06
+06
+10
+07
B-5
-------
Table Bl. (cont.)
Reporting
Organization
13001
13002
**ID
38001
**OR
49001
**WA
Required
No.
SLAMS
015
015
030
028
028
019
019
Sites
No.
NAMS
002
002
004
009
009
013
013
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
80
82
162
331
331
149
149
-08
-08
-08
-13
-13
-13
-13
Limits
Up
+07
+06
+06
+13
+13
+09
+09
No.
Audits
33
26
59
372
372
29
29
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-04
-06
-05
-05
-05
-03
-03
+03
+02
+02
+06
+06
+05
+05
Level 3
Low Up
B-6
-------
TABLE B2. MANUAL S02 PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10012
10013
10014
10017
**FL
18002
**KY
34001
34002
34003
34004
**NC
36009
36012
**OH
32001
**NM
12120
**HI
Required Sites
No . No .
SLAMS NAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
15
5
0
74
0
7
3
14
2
10
130
53
53
121
184
81
17
403
0
0
0
86
86
34
34
-25
-99
-27
-24
-08
-20
-73
-17
-30
-90
-90
-14
-41
-92
-10
-46
-02
-02
-29
-29
Limits
UP
+30
+99
+35
+36
+04
+16
+99
+27
+37
+99
+99
+14
+52
+77
+08
+43
+02
+02
+42
+42
No.
Audits
12
3
4
12
8
11
28
10
35
43
166
58
58
20
36
58
6
120
46
59
105
41
41
61
61
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-10
-03
-02
-12
-06
-19
-10
-07
-23
-28
-13
-10
-10
-11
-30
-16
-17
-19
-11
-08
-09
-09
-09
-08
-08
+07
+03
+04
+07
+09
+15
+06
+19
+11
+03
+09
+12
+12
+06
+18
+03
+05
+08
+04
+06
+05
+14
+14
+01
+01
-07
-01
-03
-10
-11
-25
-06
-05
-11
-17
-10
-03
-03
-12
-21
-09
-18
-14
-06
-05
-05
-04
-04
-04
-04
+04
+01
+06
+10
+09
+16
+04
+11
+05
+01
+07
+05
+05
+00
+12
+05
+23
+09
+04
+04
+04
+07
+07
+01
+01
Level 3
Low Up
-07 +04
-02 +00
-03 +06
-06 +06
-13 +10
-15 +06
-05 +02
-06 +16
-08 +05
-15 +02
-08 +06
-02 +04
-02 +04
-14 +02
-18 +12
-07 +06
-12 +16
-12 +08
-05 +04
-04 +03
-05 +04
-06 +05
-06 +05
-03 +01
-03 +01
B-7
-------
TABLE B3. MANUAL N02 PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
48003
**VA
10001
10004
10005
10006
10012
10017
**FL
18002
**KY
34001
34002
34003
34004
**NC
44003
**TN
36009
36012
**OH
19001
**LA
32001
**NM
45005
**TX
Required
No.
SLAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
96
96
80
56
5
23
12
83
259
58
58
128
238
88
42
496
25
25
0
0
0
105
105
85
85
44
44
-11
-11
-24
-21
-09
-15
-04
-06
-15
-78
-78
-22
-54
-13
-78
-43
-08
-08
-27
-27
+00
+00
-47
-47
Limits
Up
+14
+14
+27
+50
+13
+30
+06
+09
+24
+78
+78
+25
+66
+10
+83
+47
+13
+13
+17
+17
+00
+00
+84
+84
No.
Audits
28
28
12
11
8
11
25
58
125
56
56
17
50
57
12
136
29
29
44
59
103
11
11
46
46
49
49
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low. Up Low. Up
-06
-06
-02
-02
-05
+00
-03
-07
-03
-26
-26
-07
-13
-06
-08
-08
-07
-07
-03
-08
-05
-06
-06
-06
-06
-04
-04
+05
+05
+04
+12
+10
+03
+04
+10
+07
+23
+23
+03
+12
+10
+12
+09
+08
+08
+06
+04
+05
+03
+03
+09
+09
+08
+08
-04
-04
-01
-01
-08
-03
-03
-05
-03
-14
-14
-06
-12
-01
-12
-08
-05
-05
-04
-04
-04
-03
-03
-02
-02
-08
-08
+05
+05
+04
+09
+07
+04
+05
+06
+06
+14
+14
+02
+10
+06
+08
+07
+03
+03
+05
+03
+04
+01
+01
+04
+04
+09
+09
Level 3
Low . Up
-04 +05
-04 +05
-02 +05
-01 +08
-04 +06
-04 +04
-03 +04
-05 +05
-03 +05
-11 +05
-11 +05
-05 +00
-12 +11
-01 +06
-16 +14
-09 +08
-04 +-5
-04 +-5
-04 +06
-03 +05
-04 +05
-01 -01
-01 -01
-02 +02
-02 +02
-13 +05
-13 +05
B-8
-------
TABLE B4. Pb PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
22001
**MA
41001
**RI
33001
**NY
40001
**PR
08001
**DE
09001
**DC
48001
48003
**VA
01012
**AL
10011
10012
10013
10017
10018
**FL
18001
18002
**KY
34001
**NC
42001
**sc
44001
44002
44003
**TN
Required
No.
SLAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
0
0
9
9
42
42
24
24
16
16
48
48
30
30
26
74
100
67
67
20
58
34
6
102
220
6
2
8
49
49
41
41
7
29
82
118
-05
-05
-07
-07
-04
-04
+00
+00
-09
-09
-08
-08
-13
-15
-14
-07
-07
-08
-22
-04
-08
-22
-15
-55
+00
-37
-12
-12
-18
-18
-16
-29
-07
-16
Limits
UP
+10
+10
+08
+08
+06
+06
+00
+00
+15
+15
+08
+08
+09
+19
+15
+08
+08
+12
+15
+09
+00
+32
+17
+31
+00
+21
+31
+31
+21
+21
+32
+20
+07
+17
No.
Audits
31
31
7
7
23
23
4
4
0
0
7
7
7
7
6
16
22
11
11
9
14
9
3
8
43
6
3
9
5
5
18
18
0
7
60
67
Level 1
Low Up
-10
-10
-31
-31
-08
-08
-07
-07
-05
-07
-06
-08
-08
-02
-04
-01
-16
-03
-04
-02
-02
-04
-04
-01
-01
-11
-04
-06
-06
+04
+04
+33
+33
+07
+07
-03
-03
+02
+04
+04
+06
+06
+18
+04
+07
+17
+03
+08
+26
+26
+09
+09
+12
+12
+10
+08
+04
+07
Level 2 Level 3
Low Up Low Up
-07
-07
-16
-16
-09
-09
-09
-09
-04
-04
-07
-07
-10
-03
-05
-03
-03
-03
-04
-04
-15
-06
-05
+02
-01
+01
-01
-01
-10
-10
-03
-14
-05
-07
+05
+05
+08
+08
+00
+00
+18
+18
+02
+02
-02
-02
+04
+03
+03
+03
+03
+07
+01
+07
+13
+01
+05
+08
+11
+09
+01
+01
+11
+11
+04
+07
+02
+04
B-9
-------
TABLE B4. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
14001
14002
**IL
23001
23002
**MI
24001
**MN
36001
36006
36008
36009
36010
**OH
51001
**WI
32001
32002
**NM
37101
37102
37103
**OK
45001
45002
45003
45006
**TX
16003
**IA
17001
**KS
26002
**MO
28003
**NB
06001
**co
Required
No.
SLAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
15
27
42
20
47
67
1
1
16
16
16
16
16
80
44
44
56
35
91
35
25
26
86
9
84
29
31
153
29
29
21
21
17
17
58
58
43
43
-03
-10
-08
-16
-05
-07
-05
-05
+00
+00
+00
+00
+00
+00
-13
-13
-13
-20
-16
-45
-08
-21
-29
-10
-31
-08
-20
-20
-22
-22
-36
-36
-27
-27
-28
-28
-26
-26
Limits
Up
+16
+14
+15
+15
+05
+07
-05
-05
+02
+02
+02
+02
+02
+02
+11
+11
+15
+13
+14
+38
+17
+17
+26
+04
+41
+09
+21
+23
+38
+38
+58
+58
+22
+22
+16
+16
+33
+33
No.
Audits
3
3
6
14
4
67
8
8
22
17
22
22
22
105
27
27
34
0
34
3
6
23
32
7
18
0
6
31
13
13
37
37
0
0
45
45
3
3
Level
Low
-03
-05
-04
-09
-03
-06
-06
-06
-19
-18
-19
-19
-19
-19
-09
-09
-15
-15
+02
-03
-01
-18
-21
-09
-18
+00
+00
-29
-29
-22
-22
-06
-06
1
Up
+06
+04
+05
+01
+04
+03
-04
-04
+15
14
+15
+15
+15
+15
+03
+03
+04
+04
+07
+01
+03
+09
+06
+01
+06
+00
+00
+05
+05
+16
+16
-04
-04
Level
Low
-01
-01
-06
-10
-03
-07
-04
-04
-10
-09
-10
-10
-10
-09
-07
-07
-11
-11
-14
-01
-06
-07
-14
-06
-10
-10
-10
-17
-17
-10
-10
-10
-10
2 Level 3
Up Low Up
+04
+07
+06
+01
+04
+03
-03
-03
+07
+07
+07
+07
+07
+07
+01
+01
+08
+08
+00
+01
+00
+03
+01
+01
+02
+06
+06
-03
-03
+12
+12
+00
+00
B-10
-------
TABLE B4. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
27001
**MT
03100
03200
**AZ
05004
05061
**CA
13001
13002
**ID
38001
**OR
49001
**WA
Required
No.
SLAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
1
7
13
0
13
30
23
53
15
29
44
77
77
-45
-45
-05
-03
-04
-05
-09
-07
-24
-36
-32
-05
-05
-15
-15
Limits
Up
+66
+66
+11
+07
+10
+05
+02
+03
+20
+19
+19
+02
+02
+11
+11
No.
Audits
0
0
0
0
0
9
7
16
3
6
9
11
11
Level 1
Low Up
-08
-06
-07
-04
-04
-05
-05
-05
-05
+01
+09
+05
-02
-01
+10
+10
+08
+08
Level 2 Level 3
Low Up Low Up
-07
-04
-05
-08
-02
-04
-04
-04
_
-
-05
+05
+00
+12
+02
+05
+07
+07
_
-
B-ll
-------
TABLE B5.. CO PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
**NH
41001
**RI
47001
**VT
31001
**NJ
33001
**NY
40001
**PR
**DE
09001
**DC
21001
**MD
39002
39003
**PA
48001
48003
**VA
50001
50002
**WV
01012
**AL
Required Sites
No. No.
SLAMS NAMS
006
006
001
001
004
004
002
002
000
000
001
001
010
010
Oil
Oil
001
001
003
001
001
005
005
001
004
005
004
004
008
002
002
004
002
002
000
000
000
000
004
004
000
000
002
002
000
000
002
002
006
006
002
002
000
002
002
002
002
002
002
004
002
000
002
000
000
000
002
002
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
142
142
49
49
324
324
268
268
202
202
286
286
52
52
238
238
119
119
62
97
97
145
145
104
85
189
231
93
324
26
69
95
71
71
-05
-05
-06
-06
-10
-10
-09
-09
-06
-06
-05
-05
-13
-13
-08
-08
-10
-10
-08
-07
-07
-08
-08
-05
-13
-09
-08
-10
-09
-07
-16
-11
-15
-15
Limits
Up
+12
+12
+05
+05
+08
+08
+06
+06
+05
+05
+09
+09
+07
+07
+04
+04
+07
+07
+12
+03
+03
+11
+11
+08
+05
+06
+07
+06
+06
+07
+02
+04
+02
+02
No.
Audits
0
0
0
0
18
18
22
22
11
11
5
5
8
8
28
28
2
2
11
8
8
24
24
34
6
40
9
13
22
3
6
9
13
13
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-07
-07
-05
-05
-04
-04
-12
-12
-05
-05
-09
-09
-02
-02
-09
-02
-02
-20
-20
-13
-10
-11
-11
-04
-07
-06
-10
-09
-34
-34
+07
+07
+01
+01
+04
+04
+12
+12
+05
+05
+08
+08
-01
-01
+07
+03
+03
+14
+14
+08
+09
+08
+07
+08
+07
+10
+05
+06
+26
+26
-06
-06
-04
-04
-01
-01
-10
-10
-04
-04
-04
-04
-05
-05
-04
-04
-04
-15
-15
-06
-02
-04
-09
-08
-09
-10
-01
-03
-03
-03
+07
+07
+03
+03
+03
+03
+12
+12
+01
+01
+06
+06
+00
+00
+07
+02
+02
+14
+14
+02
+04
+03
+03
+07
+05
+10
+02
+04
+05
+05
Level 3
Low Up
-07 +07
-07 +07
-05 +04
-05 +04
-02 +02
-02 +02
-07 +10
-07 +10
-04 -01
-04 -01
-02 +02
-02 +02
-
-05 +08
-01 +02
-01 +02
-19 +15
-19 +15
-03 +01
-01 +02
-02 +01
-07 +02
-08 +05
-08 +04
-11 +08
-02 +01
-05 +03
-04 +11
-04 +11
B-12
-------
TABLE B5. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
10001
10003
10011
10012
10013
10016
10017
10018
**FL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
**KY
25100
**MS
34001
34002
34003
**NC
42001
**sc
44002
44003
44004
44005
**TN
14001
14003
**IL
15001
15004
15008
**IN
23001
23002
**MI
24001
**MN
Required
No.
SLAMS
001
002
003
003
003
002
003
003
020
004
004
007
001
008
001
001
004
002
003
009
002
002
003
003
001
008
008
008
003
Oil
000
000
001
001
004
003
007
008
008
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
002
002
002
000
001
000
007
002
002
000
002
002
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
002
002
000
004
004
001
001
002
002
000
000
002
000
002
002
002
002
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
55
50
672
111
132
53
118
141
1,322
186
186
133
39
172
43
43
40
34
134
208
226
226
148
111
10
53
322
376
70
446
62
2
13
77
0
120
120
375
375
-10
-12
-08
-14
-06
-16
-05
-08
-10
-11
-11
-09
-11
-10
-04
-04
-04
-07
-06
-06
-10
-10
-05
-12
-05
-07
-07
-10
-11
-10
-14
-12
-02
-10
-14
-14
-09
-09
Limits
Up
+08
+03
+07
+07
+07
+11
+06
+08
+07
+06
+06
+08
+05
+07
+04
+04
+02
+03
+06
+04
+10
+10
+06
-01
+05
+02
+03
+03
+08
+06
+15
+15
+01
+11
+05
+05
+08
+08
No.
Audits
6
6
24
7
23
6
6
6
85
9
9
25
6
31
5
5
7
8
59
74
39
39
29
26
2
9
66
10
11
21
5
0
3
8
6
6
12
23
23
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-12
+04
-04
-11
-07
+01
-11
-09
-06
-31
-31
-13
-09
-11
096
096
-19
-29
-07
-17
-27
-27
-06
-15
-11
-05
-09
-11
-16
-14
-05
-03
-04
-11
-10
-10
-14
-14
+07
+11
+08
+13
+09
+12
+21
+14
+11
+22
+22
+12
+03
+09
+09
+09
+17
+11
+05
+09
+11
+11
+06
+07
+21
+03
+06
+08
+04
+06
+15
+07
+12
+12
+05
+09
+21
+21
-17
+04
-03
-13
-05
+04
-03
+00
-04
-15
-15
-08
-10
-08
-02
-02
-07
-11
-03
-06
-06
-06
-03
-14
-12
-04
-07
-06
-08
-07
-03
-01
-02
-07
+02
-04
-06
-06
+09
+06
+05
+17
+06
+08
+12
+04
+08
+22
+22
+05
+08
+06
+05
+05
+07
+12
+04
+07
+04
+04
+07
+08
+19
+03
+07
+02
+07
+05
+13
+05
+10
+07
+05
+06
+13
+13
Level 3
Low Up
-18 +08
-08 +08
-04 +04
-04 +11
-03 +03
-01 +05
-02 +05
-02 +03
-05 +05
-11 +19
-11 +19
-10 +07
-02 +05
-07 +06
-04 +01
-04 +01
-07 +07
-08 +10
-02 +03
-05 +06
-03 +03
-03 +03
-05 +06
-17 +11
-11 +17
-03 +00
-08 +07
-01 +02
-10 +04
-06 +03
-02 +06
+00 +05
-01 +05
-08 +04
+00 +06
-05 +05
-06 +08
-06 +08
B-13
-------
TABLE B5. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
36001
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36014
36015
**OH
51001
**WI
04001
**AR
19001
19002
**LA
32001
32002
**NM
37101
37102
37103
**OK
45001
45002
45003
45006
**TX
16001
16002
16003
**IA
17001
**KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
**MO
Required
No.
SLAMS
001
000
001
005
000
000
001
001
002
Oil
005
005
000
000
001
000
001
004
005
009
002
000
002
004
002
000
001
000
003
002
001
001
004
003
003
000
002
004
003
009
Sites
No.
NAMS
002
002
000
002
002
002
000
000
000
010
002
002
000
000
002
000
002
000
000
000
000
002
000
002
005
002
000
001
008
000
000
000
000
000
000
001
002
000
000
003
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
70
19*
5
72
37
50
14
0
83
350
50
50
19
19
33*
12
45
61
115
176
15
19*
40
74
2,182
56
26
25
2,289
70
24
24
118
72
72
15*
137
35
60
247
+05
-10
-02
-07
-05
-10
-11
-07
-06
+00
+00
-03
-03
-13
-24
-15
-06
-04
-05
-13
-12
-05
-09
-09
-09
-08
-10
-09
-21
-07
-7
-11
-07
-07
-07
-16
-40
-09
-16
Limits
Up
+13
+11
+10
+07
+03
+09
+08
+04
+08
+18
+18
+05
+05
+13
+20
+14
+07
+05
+06
+12
+07
+07
+08
+05
+13
+02
+09
+07
+19
+05
+07
+10
+07
+07
+09
+12
+27
+14
+15
No.
Audits
4
7
1
6
6
4
2
2
6
6
3
3
3
2
5
8
20
28
4
8
10
22
43
8
4
4
59
7
12
4
23
7
7
6
6
7
6
25
Level
Low
-02
-17
-14
-14
-46
+05
-11
-03
-15
-04
-04
-01
-01
-14
-15
-15
-10
-06
-07
-26
-12
-11
-15
-20
-11
-10
-13
-14
-07
-06
-22
-12
-18
-18
-11
-07
-29
-18
-17
Accuracy
1 Level 2
Up Low Up
+12
+10
-05
+07
+18
+06
+05
+06
+08
+22
+22
-01
-01
+02
+13
+08
+05
+04
+04
-05
+18
+15
+12
+22
+21
+18
-06
+16
+18
+03
+03
+06
+10
+10
+12
+10
+12
+06
+10
+05
-14
-06
-12
-19
+00
-10
-06
-08
-04
-04
-02
-02
-14
-05
-10
-04
-04
-04
-45
-12
-05
-16
-11
+00
-06
-04
-06
-11
-08
-12
-10
-07
-07
-06
-04
-13
-09
-08
+08
+05
+04
+04
+17
+11
+07
+12
+08
+11
+11
-02
-02
+05
+03
+04
+06
+04
+05
-03
+11
+07
+06
+11
+07
+06
+10
+09
+07
+05
-01
+03
+07
+07
+03
+08
+04
-04
+03
Level 3
Low Up
+03 +12
-17 +08
-06 +08
-11 +04
-09 +13
-01 +11
-10 +05
-03 +09
-07 +09
-03 +05
-03 +05
-04 -04
-04 -04
-20 +10
-12 +09
-16 +10
-04 +06
-06 +05
-06 +05
-56 -02
-19 +14
-02 +03
-19 +06
-11 +10
-06 +07
-05 +09
-03 +01
-07 +07
-13 +06
-07 +04
-19 +10
-13 +07
-04 +01
-04 +01
-04 +06
-01 +05
-08 +02
-07 -01
-05 +03
B-14
-------
TABLE B5. (Cont.)
Required Sites
Reporting No. No.
Organization SLAMS NAMS
28003 002 000
**NB 002 000
Precision
No. Data Prob. Limits
Pairs Low Up
29 -16 +16
29 -16 +16
No.
Audits
0
0
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
Level 3
Low Up
06001
**co
27001
27003
27004
**MT
46001
**UT
03100
03200
03300
**AZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
**CA
12120
**HI
29200
29300
**NV
13001
13002
**ID
38001
**OR
49001
**WAS
Oil
Oil
001
001
001
003
009
009
003
025
001
Oil
025
Oil
005
019
060
000
000
000
001
003
002
002
004
005
005
010
010
002
002
000
000
000
000
002
002
000
003
002
004
003
004
002
003
012
002
002
002
001
001
000
000
000
002
002
002
002
44
44
41
59
72
172
283
283
57
414
56
249
414
415
140
523
1,492
153
153
46
68
114
29
32
61
332
332
550
550
-14
-14
-06
-10
-12
-09
-05
-05
-10
-05
-05
-09
-05
-04
-03
-03
-04
-16
-16
-05
-03
-04
-11
-12
-11
-03
-03
-07
-07
+08
10
+08 10
+14 j 6
+06
4
+16 I 4
+12
+04
+04
+03
+10
+11
+06
+10
+04
+07
+12
-08
+24
+24
+12
+01
+07
+01
+04
+02
+08
+08
+01
+01
14
24
24
6
24
3
16
24
33
5
24
137
137
8
4
12
4
3
7
57
57
39
39
+03
-14
+01
-02
-06
-06
-19
-08
-08
-16
-08
-11
-33
-03
-09
-12
-12
-01
-01
-01
-03
-06
-04
-18
-18
-07
-07
+24
+11
+16
+09
+04
+04
+08
+11
+02
+05
+11
+17
+37
+19
+17
+15
+15
+07
+01
+04
+05
+08
+06
+24
+24
+07
+07
+03
-10
-01
-01
-06
-06
-12
-07
-01
-05
-07
-03
-08
+01
-03
-03
-03
-02
-12
-06
-02
-02
-02
-09
-09
-04
-04
+13
+08
+08
+11
+02
+02
+03
+07
+05
+03
+07
+04
+09
+12
+08
+05
+05
+05
+06
+05
+05
+06
+05
+08
+08
+04
+04
-01 +10
-18 +11
-07 +16
-06 +12
-05 +02
-05 +02
-03 +04
-06 +05
-09 +05
-05 +03
-06 +05
-03 +03
-05 +05
-03 +08
-04 +05
-04 +03
-04 +03
+00 +03
-06 +02
-03 +03
+02 +04
-03 +06
-01 +05
-07 +03
-07 +03
-04 +02
-04 +02
B-15
-------
TABLE B6. AUTOMATED S02 PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
**NH
41001
**RI
47001
**VT
31001
**NJ
33001
**NY
40001
**PR
08001
**DE
09001
**DC
21001
21003
**MD
39001
39002
39003
**PA
48001
48003
**VA
50001
50002
**wv
Required Sites
No. No.
SLAMS NAMS
008
008
000
000
005
005
006
006
001
001
002
002
006
006
021
021
006
006
007
007
000
000
001
002
003
013
002
002
017
003
004
007
001
003
004
002
002
002
002
012
012
001
001
004
004
001
001
008
008
018
018
000
000
001
001
002
002
005
000
005
012
005
005
022
007
000
007
003
003
006
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
153
153
98
98
731
731
370
370
399
399
111
111
232
232
415
415
276
276
195
195
58
58
182
29
211
494
221
124
839
281
96
377
77
94
171
-10
-10
-07
-07
-07
-07
-19
-19
-10
-10
-10
-10
-11
-11
-06
-06
-11
-11
-10
-10
-12
-12
-12
-16
-13
-10
-11
-17
-12
-14
-10
-12
-09
-13
-11
Limits
Up
+05
+05
+05
+05
+12
+12
+15
+15
+07
+07
+04
+04
+13
+13
+07
+07
+06
+06
+14
+14
+06
+06
+12
+10
+11
+11
+05
+03
+06
+07
+07
+07
+08
+07
+07
No.
Audits
14
14
9
9
33
33
33
33
13
13
9
9
16
16
88
88
9
9
8
8
8
8
32
11
43
27
77
9
113
11
12
23
9
9
18
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-08
-08
-05
-05
-06
-06
-07
-07
-06
-06
-07
-07
-12
-12
-08
-08
-06
-06
-12
-12
-15
-15
-24
-35
-29
-14
-11
-17
-14
-14
-11
-12
-08
-11
-09
+04
+04
+02
+02
+03
+03
+05
+05
+12
+12
+02
+02
+08
+08
+11
+11
+05
+05
+15
+15
+16
+16
+10
-05
+02
+12
+09
+07
+09
+09
+08
+08
+11
+07
+09
-08
-08
-05
-05
-08
-08
-09
-09
-07
-07
-06
-06
-08
-08
-08
-08
-03
-03
-01
-01
-03
-03
-14
-24
-19
-15
-09
-14
-13
-13
-09
-11
-07
-08
-08
+03
+03
+05
+05
+05
+05
+05
+05
+13
+13
+01
+01
+09
+09
+11
+11
+10
+10
+10
+10
+10
+10
+08
-06
+01
+09
+08
+09
+09
+12
+13
+12
+08
+07
+07
Level 3
Low Up
-08 +06
-08 +06
-04 +06
-04 +06
-08 +06
-08 +06
-09 +06
-09 +06
-04 +12
-04 +12
-07 +04
-07 +04
-05 +07
-05 +07
-10 +12
-10 +12
-05 +13
-05 +13
-09 +18
-09 +18
-10 +07
-10 +07
-13 +11
-28 -01
-20 +05
-11 +10
-14 +12
-09 +07
-11 +10
-13 +09
-12 +14
-13 +11
-10 +10
-07 +06
-09 +08
B-16
-------
TABLE B6. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
01011
01012
01013
01016
**AL
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10007
10011
10012
10013
10015
10016
10018
**FL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
18003
**KY
25100
**MS
34001
34003
**NC
42001
**sc
44001
44002
44003
44006
**TN
14001
14003
**IL
Required Sites
No. No.
.SLAMS NAMS
002
001
002
000
006
001
002
002
001
000
000
003
003
001
000
001
002
016
010
010
008
000
000
008
002
002
004
000
005
003
003
002
001
000
000
003
010
005
015
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
001
002
002
000
000
000
005
001
001
000
004
000
004
002
002
001
000
001
001
001
000
000
001
000
001
on
003
014
Precision
No. Data. Prob.
Pairs Low
57
4
37
655
753
55
93
33
39
32
27
467
170
167
42
32
1,157
355
355
185
50*
1,295
1,530
217
217
98
26
124
752
752
181
29
24
2,153
2,387
852
141
993
-14
-45
-21
-15
-21
-12
-26
-11
-16
-23
-18
-11
-17
-12
-15
-09
-15
-17
-17
-20
-19
-16
-18
-26
-26
-07
-23
-15
-08
-08
-08
-13
-19
-14
-13
-17
-15
-16
Limits
Up
+06
+34
+13
+13
+14
+06
+15
+06
+07
+04
+12
+03
+08
+07
+06
+07
+07
+10
+10
+04
+13
+09
+08
+05
+05
+06
+13
+09
+06
+06
+08
+10
+12
+10
+10
+07
+15
+11
No.
Audits
6
1
6
2
15
6
7
7
6
4
7
19
7
15
1
6
6
91
14
14
29
5
4
38
8
8
18
12
30
75
75
10
6
8
46
70
19
18
37
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-18
-22
-21
-20
-25
-39
-33
-35
-17
-49
-18
-01
-20
-08
-19
-22
-23
-23
-20
-09
-15
-16
-22
-22
-16
-28
-23
-13
-13
-08
-07
-08
-18
-10
-17
-16
-16
-11
+13
+03
-01
+13
+13
+30
+22
+08
+14
+15
+13
+09
+05
-01
+11
+16
+16
+08
+15
+08
+10
+21
+21
+12
+08
+10
+10
+10
+04
+08
+07
+16
+08
+09
+10
+09
-19
-18
-13
-18
-15
-28
-16
-10
-13
-45
-13
-15
-14
-07
-20
-17
-19
-19
-17
+04
-16
-11
-18
-18
-18
-26
-23
-10
-10
-07
-07
-11
-12
-09
-14
-13
-14
-11
+09
+08
-01
+07
+07
+17
+06
+11
+33
+12
+15
+08
+14
-03
+11
+17
+17
+07
+11
+11
+09
+12
+12
+13
+07
+09
+08
+08
+05
+11
+15
+14
+11
+09
+06
+08
Level 3
Low Up
-18 -12
-16 +11
-13 +01
-17 -02
-20 +24
-25 +05
-09 +14
-17 +12
-07 +15
-40 +29
-10 +09
-10 +15
-13 +05
-02 +13
-14 -05
-15 +11
-18 +19
-18 +19
-18 +08
-05 +05
-14 +10
-14 +07
-17 +08
-17 +08
-17 +12
-28 +07
-23 +09
-10 +08
-10 +08
-08 +04
-08 +10
-10 +14
-12 +11
-09 +09
-16 +10
-13 +06
-14 +08
B-17
-------
TABLE B6. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
15001
15008
15101
**IN
23001
23002
**MI
24001
**MN
36001
36002
36003
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36013
36014
36015
36016
**OH
51001
**WI
04001
**AR
19001
19002
**LA
32001
32002
**NM
37101
37102
37103
**OK
45001
45002
45006
**TX
Required Sites
No. No.
SLAMS NAMS
002
003
000
005
001
004
005
003
003
000
002
001
000
000
006
000
001
002
002
003
000
000
017
001
001
001
001
009
000
009
012
000
012
005
001
001
007
006
001
001
008
005
000
000
005
007
004
Oil
008
008
002
003
000
003
002
003
005
001
000
000
001
003
002
025
013
013
001
001
001
000
001
000
001
001
000
000
001
001
004
000
000
004
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
206
74
90
370
143
127
270
639
639
35*
70
29
59
35*
186
74*
45
47
0
56
134
56
826
319
319
47
47
68
7
75
155
14*
169
25
0
47
72
4,521
33
66
4,620
-14
-08
-13
-11
-17
-24
-20
-10
-10
-15
-15
-14
-15
-08
-12
-23
-23
-11
-14
-09
-14
-14
-16
-16
-09
-09
-15
-26
-17
-12
-12
-12
-18
-12
-15
-08
-21
-19
-16
Limits
Up
+10
+05
+08
+07
+08
+08
+08
+09
+09
+04
+15
+14
+05
+07
+10
+12
+04
+06
+13
+09
+15
+09
+10
+10
+10
+10
+12
+15
+13
+11
+02
+04
+06
+03
+02
+05
+04
+06
+05
No.
Audits
14
9
22
45
11
8
19
38
38
4
4
2
6
8
8
3*
4
4
2
9
4
6
64
14
14
8
8
4
2
6
8
7
15
4
3
9
16
95
4
10
109
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-20
-11
-48
-20
-15
-17
-16
-18
-18
-20
-27
-23
-27
-13
-06
-01
-21
-27
-07
-13
-13
-37
-19
-14
-14
-10
-10
-15
-17
-15
-12
-16
-13
-50
-09
-22
-18
-23
-19
-19
+23
+03
+33
+17
+12
+11
+11
+13
+13
+07
+25
-10
+20
+13
+01
+09
-05
+32
-04
+07
+01
+14
+09
+14
+14
+03
+03
+09
+15
+11
+07
+06
+07
+30
+04
+13
+25
+14
+12
+18
-14
-11
-13
-13
-08
-06
-07
-11
-11
-21
-17
-15
-09
-07
-04
-01
-22
-16
-12
-10
-13
-30
-14
-11
-11
-05
-05
-11
-12
-11
-10
-16
-12
-43
-22
-07
-19
-11
-16
-18
-14
+15
+03
+04
+09
+13
+03
+08
+10
+10
+10
+17
-10
+13
+09
+04
+09
-04
+18
-04
+10
+04
+10
+08
+09
+09
+04
+04
+07
+13
+09
+06
+06
+06
+24
-01
+05
+10
+12
+10
+13
+12
Level 3
Low Up
-09 +10
-08 +04
-13 +05
-09 +07
-08 +14
-05 +04
-07 +09
-12 +08
-12 +08
-20 +09
-19 +22
-12 +09
-07 +13
-07 +04
-05 +05
-03 +06
-23 -02
-22 +24
-12 -05
-10 +12
-14 +09
-24 +02
-13 +09
-11 +06
-11 +06
-02 +04
-02 +04
-15 +06
-13 +14
-14 +08
-10 +07
-13 +05
-11 +06
-50 +28
-26 +01
-12 +09
-25 +13
-10 +12
-14 +11
-14 +10
-12 +11
B-18
-------
TABLE B6. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
16001
16002
16003
**IA
17001
**KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
**MO
28003
**NB
06001
**co
27001
**MT
35001
**ND
46001
**UT
03100
03300
**AZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
**CA
13001
13002
**ID
38001
**OR
49001
**WA
Required
No.
SLAMS
001
001
001
003
000
000
004
002
003
001
001
Oil
000
000
001
001
000
000
005
005
006
006
Oil
000
Oil
017
008
006
013
044
003
003
006
002
002
005
005
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
001
002
003
002
002
000
002
002
001
000
005
001
001
002
002
001
001
000
000
002
002
000
001
002
002
002
000
004
008
000
000
000
002
002
003
003
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
31
39
90
160
41
41
168
127
44
52
26
417
17*
17*
50
50
31
31
102
102
240
240
206
25
231
316
129
85
438
968
70
51
121
66
66
389
389
-09
-05
-14
-09
-30
-30
-27
-11
-22
-22
-28
-21
-16
-16
-15
-15
-14
-14
-08
-08
-09
-09
-09
-13
-11
-14
-14
-16
-20
-16
-13
-13
-13
-19
-19
-09
-09
Limits
Up
+06
+12
+09
+09
+01
+01
+27
+06
+26
+22
+22
+20
+10
+10
+19
+19
+08
+08
+04
+04
+06
+06
+11
+16
+14
+13
+02
+12
+10
+09
+10
+08
+09
+09
+09
+07
+07
No.
Audits
6
18
15
39
2
2
9
6
6
6
4
31
2
2
5
5
3
3
8
8
21
21
4
1
5
13
17
3
20
53
6
6
12
16
16
21
21
Accuracy
Level 1 Level
Low Up Low
-07
-04
-18
-10
-25
-25
-07
-17
-11
-37
-14
-17
-20
-20
-12
-12
-42
-42
-09
-09
-14
-14
-21
-10
-13
-13
-10
-18
-11
-12
-14
-17
-16
-22
-22
-08
-08
+21
+08
+17
+14
+04
+04
+12
+06
-01
+02
+22
+06
+07
+07
+05
+05
+28
+28
+17
+17
+11
+11
+16
+17
+16
+12
+11
+16
+12
+12
+07
+07
+07
+01
+01
+10
+10
-04
-05
-20
-11
-20
-20
-08
-19
-06
-24
-17
-14
-04
-04
-01
-01
-40
-40
-10
-10
-11
-11
-16
-11
-13
-12
-09
-03
-11
-10
-08
-12
-10
-17
-17
-10
-10
2
UP
+18
+10
+17
+14
+01
+01
+07
+08
+05
+04
+10
+06
+01
+01
+04
+04
+27
+27
+13
+13
+08
+08
+24
+15
+18
+12
+10
+01
+14
+11
+03
+07
+05
+06
+06
+09
+09
Level 3
Low Up
+00 +01
-10 +11
-05 +07
-06 +07
-10 +00
-10 +00
-09 +05
-13 +04
-03 +07
-17 +05
-18 +12
-11 +06
-03 +09
-03 +09
-02 +07
-02 +07
-27 +20
-27 +20
-11 +09
-11 +09
-07 +06
-07 +06
-15 +18
-12 +15
-13 +16
-14 +12
-09 +1 1
-01 +18
-15 +08
-11 +11
-08 +05
-11 +04
-09 +04
-19 +10
-19 +10
-09 +09
-09 +09
B-19
-------
TABLE B7. AUTOMATED N02 PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
22001
**MA
41001
**RI
31001
**NJ
33001
**NY
08001
**DE
09001
**DC
21001
21003
21005
**MD
39001
39002
39003
**PA
48001
48003
**VA
50001
50002
**WV
01014
01015
**AL
10001
10003
10011
10012
10013
10016
10018
**FL
Required Sites
No . No .
SLAMS NAMS
003
003
004
004
001
001
004
004
001
001
002
002
000
000
003
002
001
006
017
000
002
019
003
004
007
002
002
004
000
000
001
001
001
002
002
001
002
000
010
000
000
002
002
000
000
002
002
002
002
000
000
002
002
001
000
001
002
000
002
002
004
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
002
002
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
28
28
136
136
42
42
55
55
59
59
38
38
50
50
77
22
80
179
298
26
48
372
125
64
189
51
53
104
14
0
14
46
5
68
35
23
27
19
223
-12
-12
-14
-14
-07
-07
-15
-15
-13
-13
-11
-11
-09
-09
-18
-08
-05
-11
-11
-08
-17
-12
-08
-25
-17
-07
-09
-08
-04
-04
-10
-28
-13
-35
-08
-15
-20
-17
Limits
Up
+10
+10
+10
+10
+17
+17
+09
+09
+11
+11
+16
+16
+10
+10
+14
+08
+10
+11
+09
+07
+12
+09
+07
+16
+12
+12
+13
+13
+05
+05
+08
+27
+06
+42
+12
+21
+29
+19
No.
Audits
3
3
11
11
3
3
8
8
33
33
7
7
8
8
9
6
8
23
16
14
5
35
9
7
16
6
6
12
0
1
1
0
2
2
3
4
0
0
11
Level
Low
-10
-10
-10
-10
-22
-22
-20
-20
-11
-11
-19
-19
-08
-08
-32
-57
-24
-36
-09
-11
-20
-13
-28
-22
-25
-11
-06
-08
-22
-22
Accuracy
1 Level
Up Low
+14
+14
+17
+17
+10
+10
+16
+16
+10
+10
+20
+20
+06
+06
+09
+75
+10
+27
+21
+13
+28
+21
+20
+15
+17
+10
+21
+16
+40
+40
-06
-06
-09
-09
-15
-15
-11
-11
-08
-08
-07
-07
-05
-05
-19
-19
-13
-17
-14
-06
-11
-10
-11
-16
-13
-03
-01
-02
-50
-50
2
Up
+04
+04
+12
+12
+06
+06
+09
+09
+06
+06
+04
+04
+03
+03
+03
+25
+03
+09
+20
+07
+13
+13
+01
+09
+05
+04
+06
+05
+24
+24
Level 3
Low Up
-04 +01
-04 +01
-07 +10
-07 +10
-16 +05
-16 +05
-07 +01
-07 +01
-10 +05
-10 +05
-09 +00
-09 +00
-04 +02
-04 +02
-08 -01
-11 +04
-10 +05
-10 +02
-17 +18
-07 +03
-09 +06
-11 +09
-13 +00
-11 +05
-12 +02
-10 +07
-04 +04
-07 +06
-43 +20
-43 +20
B-20
-------
TABLE B7. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
11010
**GA
18001
18002
18003
**KY
34004
**NC
44006
**TN
14001
14003
**IL
15008
**IN
23002
**MI
24001
**MN
36001
36003
36007
36008
36009
36010
36014
**OH
51001
**WI
04001
**AR
19001
19002
**LA
32002
**NM
Required Sites
No. No.
SLAMS NAMS
000
000
006
001
000
007
000
000
000
000
003
003
006
001
001
000
000
000
000
001
000
001
004
000
000
001
007
000
000
001
001
015
000
015
001
001
002
002
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
001
001
002
000
000
002
002
002
002
000
000
000
002
002
000
000
004
002
002
000
000
002
000
002
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
28
28
105
9
368
482
20
20
483
483
119
39
158
17
17
13
13
74
74
0
0
0
52
15
2
23
92
50
50
25
25
18
6
24
13
13
+03
+03
-14
-23
-17
-18
-13
-13
-20
-20
-13
-19
-15
-17
-17
-15
-15
-09
-09
-14
-17
-02
-17
-14
-08
-08
-09
-09
-07
-10
-08
-08
-08
Limits
Up
+29
+29
+10
+10
+13
+11
+18
+18
+15
+15
+06
+19
+12
+11
+11
+04
+04
+08
+08
+19
+15
+05
+10
+14
+10
+10
+07
+07
+09
+21
+13
+08
+08
No.
Audits
4
4
18
5
1
24
4
4
0
0
7
8
15
4
4
4
4
6
6
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
24
4
4
4
4
1
0
1
6
6
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-49
-49
-29
-38
-32
-66
-66
-20
-13
-17
-26
-26
-17
-17
-23
-23
-31
-03
-48
-16
-21
-16
-24
+15
+15
-15
-15
-14
-14
+32
+32
+35
+21
+30
-24
-24
+15
+01
+08
+15
+15
-14
-14
+21
+21
-03
+01
+56
+22
+12
+28
+23
+25
+25
+14
+14
+16
+16
-49
-49
-20
-33
-24
-14
-14
-09
-06
-07
-15
-15
-12
-12
-10
-10
-32
-03
-22
-02
-13
-06
-13
-12
-12
-08
-08
-12
-12
+39
+39
+21
+18
+20
-12
-12
+08
+00
+04
-01
-01
-07
-07
+16
+16
+03
-02
+26
+06
+03
+14
+10
+20
+20
+02
+02
+19
+19
Level 3
Low Up
-18 +33
-18 +33
-19 +15
-33 +18
-24 +16
-09 +01
-09 +01
-04 +04
-06 +01
-05 +03
-15 -03
-15 -03
-12 -07
-12 -07
-07 +12
-07 +12
-37 +06
-05 +00
-10 +02
-04 +07
-09 +02
-02 +11
-10 +05
-05 +06
-05 +06
-09 +05
-09 +05
-12 +20
-12 +20
B-21
-------
TABLE B7. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
37101
37102
37103
**OK
45001
45002
45006
**TX
17001
**KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
**MO
06001
**CO
35001
**ND
46001
**UT
03300
**AZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
**CA
29300
**NV
38001
**OR
49001
**WA
Required
No.
SLAMS
002
001
003
006
004
000
002
006
001
001
000
002
004
001
007
002
002
002
002
004
004
002
002
029
008
004
016
057
002
002
001
001
000
000
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
000
000
000
002
001
001
004
000
000
002
001
000
001
004
002
002
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
004
002
004
010
000
000
000
000
002
002
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
0
9
27
36
2,185
46
41
2,272
10
10
49
112
22
50
233
48
48
49
49
65
65
38
38
368
311
0
408
1,087
39
39
0
0
31
31
-20
-10
-16
-08
-11
-09
-09
-56
-56
-16
-12
-49
-25
-22
-12
-12
-08
-08
-13
-13
-17
-17
-18
-08
-09
-12
-03
-03
-09
-09
Limits
Up
4-09
+05
+07
+04
+16
+06
+09
+09
+09
+17
+16
+40
+30
+24
+11
+11
+07
+07
+08
+08
+09
+09
+13
+08
+18
+13
+02
+02
+08
+08
No.
Audits
2
4
9
15
59
7
6
72
0
0
5
4
4
6
19
8
8
4
4
6
6
2
2
15
24
2
20
61
4
4
13
13
4
4
Level
Low
-70
-12
-18
-24
-34
-14
-08
-20
-06
-23
-28
-25
-22
-32
-32
-22
-22
-11
-11
-02
-02
-22
-13
-15
-23
-18
+00
+00
-64
-64
Accuracy
1 Level 2
Up Low Up
+49
-09
+06
+08
+37
+03
+03
+17
+09
+19
+32
+02
+14
+55
+55
+15
+15
+14
+14
+05
+05
+09
+10
+09
+19
+13
+00
+00
+21
+21
-89
-14
-18
-27
-12
-19
-08
-13
-03
-11
-12
-31
-17
-11
-11
-05
-05
-07
-07
-02
-02
-15
-12
-23
-16
-15
-11
-11
-48
-48
+60
+00
+04
+11
+16
+18
+02
+12
+02
+02
+11
+04
+04
+21
+21
+01
+01
+08
+08
+07
+07
+06
+09
+13
+16
+11
+05
+05
+16
+16
Level 3
Low Up
-84 +59
-18 +00
-16 +06
-26 +12
-14 +13
-23 +19
-04 +00
-14 +11
-11 +06
-05 -05
-06 +11
-23 +04
-12 +02
-07 +14
-07 +14
-07 +02
-07 +02
-08 +08
-08 +08
-03 +05
-03 +05
-20 +16
-12 +09
-24 +15
-14 +14
-16 +13
-06 +01
-06 +01
-43 +17
-43 +17
-14 +12
-14 +12
B-22
-------
TABLE B8. OZONE PRECISION AND ACCURACY ANNUAL AVERAGES
FOR REPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Reporting
Organization
07001
**CT
20001
**ME
22001
**MA
30001
**NH
41001
**RI
47001
**VT
31001
**NJ
33001
**NY
40001
**PR
08001
**DE
09001
**DC
21001
21003
21005
**MD
39001
39002
39003
**PA
48001
48003
**VA
50001
50002
**wv
Required
No.
SLAMS
002
002
003
003
005
005
005
005
001
001
002
002
007
007
014
014
002
002
003
003
001
001
007
004
003
014
018
002
001
021
004
004
008
003
001
004
Sites
No.
NAMS
006
006
000
000
008
008
001
001
001
001
000
000
006
006
Oil
Oil
000
000
001
001
001
001
002
000
001
003
008
002
001
Oil
005
000
005
000
000
000
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Checks Low
105
105
70
70
309
309
355
355
156
156
26
26
143
143
216
216
39
39
95
95
58
58
367
46
158
571
420
57
23
500
218
91
309
53
47
100
-08
-08
-05
-05
-18
-18
-13
-13
-08
-08
-07
-07
-11
-11
-08
-08
-05
-05
-06
-06
-08
-08
-05
-09
-09
-07
-13
-05
-04
-08
-08
-14
-11
-10
-04
-07
Limits
Up
+08
+08
+08
+08
+09
+09
+08
+08
+09
+09
+06
+06
+10
+10
+08
+08
+04
+04
+12
+12
+10
+10
+12
+04
+08
+08
+13
+08
+05
+09
+06
+11
+08
+07
+09
+08
No.
Audits
8
8
3
3
20
20
25
25
10
10
2
2
10
10
54
54
0
0
10
10
8
8
59
16
19
94
26
15
4
45
15
11
26
6
3
9
Accuracy
Level 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-05
-05
-05
-05
-15
-15
-09
-09
-03
-03
+04
+04
-07
-07
-13
-13
-06
-06
-10
-10
-22
-20
-19
-20
-18
-07
-11
-13
-08
-04
-06
+03
-02
+02
+05
+05
+17
+17
+12
+12
+06
+06
+08
+08
+06
+06
+01
+01
+09
+09
+06
+06
+15
+15
+16
+12
+22
+16
+15
+19
+07
+13
+09
+07
+08
+09
+09
+09
-05
-05
-07
-07
-11
-11
-08
-08
-02
-02
-02
-02
-03
-03
-10
-10
-03
-03
-10
-10
-16
-15
-14
-15
-14
-06
-05
-09
-08
-07
-08
-02
+00
-02
+02
+02
+13
+13
+09
+09
+03
+03
+07
+07
-01
-01
+03
+03
+10
+10
+08
+08
+10
+10
+16
+16
+19
+17
+10
+05
+02
+06
+08
+09
+09
+08
+03
+07
Level 3
Low Up
-07 +05
-07 +05
-04 +08
-04 +08
-11 +10
-11 +10
-12 +02
-12 +02
-05 +06
-05 +06
-04 +00
-04 +00
-06 +05
-06 +05
-10 +10
-10 +10
-03 +10
-03 +10
-10 +09
-10 +09
-13 +16
-16 +18
-05 +12
-11 +15
-15 +09
-08 +03
-06 +01
-10 +05
-08 +07
-08 +08
-08 +08
+00 +05
-03 +04
-01 +05
B-23
-------
TABLE B8. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
01011
01012
01013
01014
01015
01016
**AL
10001
10003
10005
10007
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
**FL
11010
**GA
18001
18002
18003
**KY
25100
**MS
34001
34002
34003
34004
**NC
42001
**sc
44001
44002
44003
44004
44005
44006
**TN
Required
No.
SLAMS
003
002
002
000
000
000
007
003
001
000
000
000
002
002
000
000
000
000
001
009
000
000
012
001
000
013
002
002
006
001
000
001
008
003
003
001
000
001
002
000
000
004
Sites
No.
NAMS
000
001
000
000
000
000
001
000
001
000
000
002
001
001
000
000
004
000
004
013
004
004
000
001
000
001
000
000
002
000
001
000
003
004
004
001
002
001
000
002
000
006
Precision
No. Data Prob. Limits
Pairs Low Up
64
27
39
13
25
91
44
138
32
30
7
216
73
80
25
0
93
46
81
821
111
111
440
36
453
929
217
217
121
11
74
18
224
1,142
1,142
128
60
48
69
84
398
787
-13
-05
-14
-06
+00
-07
-07
-07
-18
-10
+05
-09
-11
-08
-07
-08
-04
+00
-08
-13
-13
-13
-20
-17
-16
-11
-11
-07
-10
-09
-07
-08
-06
-06
-06
-06
-07
-05
-06
-17
-07
+11
+05
+12
+08
+19
+08
+11
+09
+13
+18
+20
+05
+14
+05
+11
+10
+06
+00
+09
+08
+08
+11
+12
+16
+13
+13
+13
+06
+10
+09
+06
+08
+04
+04
+08
+06
+03
+09
+05
+18
+08
No.
Audits
4
4
7
3
5
0
23
8
6
4
3
10
5
15
6
2
6
6
6
78
5
5
61
6
0
67
7
7
20
2
31
2
55
92
92
16
14
12
16
13
6
77
Level
Low
-16
-10
-07
-98
-21
-23
-16
-13
-01
-08
-14
-16
-15
-16
-03
-17
-12
-18
-14
-17
-17
-17
-11
-15
-16
-16
-11
+08
-10
-13
-09
-12
-12
-13
-05
-15
-06
-06
-18
-10
Accuracy
1 Level 2
Up Low Up
+11
+03
+06
+59
-01
+10
+22
+12
+15
+10
+05
+21
+12
+11
+06
+10
+13
+30
+14
+14
+14
+14
+09
+13
+09
+09
+11
+08
+10
+00
+09
+11
+11
+08
+06
+08
+08
+02
+13
+07
-06
-15
-11
-12
-08
-10
-06
-08
+03
-12
-07
-22
-12
-10
-05
-19
-13
-11
-11
-16
-16
-16
-02
-11
-03
-03
-08
-02
-06
-03
-06
-12
-12
-12
-06
-10
-02
-06
-15
-08
+05
+05
+07
+25
+02
+07
+13
+10
+03
+06
+00
+23
+10
+12
+20
+08
+10
+15
+10
+38
+38
+13
+08
+11
-03
-03
+08
-01
+08
+00
+06
+10
+10
+09
+08
+06
+05
+04
+13
+07
Level 3
Low Up
-03 +03
-23 +04
-15 +07
-04 +13
-08 +03
-10 +05
-07 +12
-04 +07
-01 +01
-10 -01
-12 +04
-26 +23
-07 +09
-12 +11
-05 +22
-19 +04
-15 +10
-06 +10
-11 +09
-17 +40
-17 +40
-14 +11
-04 +06
-11 +09
-06 +04
-06 +04
-07 +06
-02 -01
-07 +07
-03 +00
-06 +05
-11 +09
-11 +09
-11 +09
-07 +08
-11 +06
-03 +04
-06 +04
-16 +12
-09 +07
B-24
-------
TABLE B8. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
14001
14003
**IL
15001
15002
15003
15008
15010
**IN
23001
23002
**MI
24001
**MN
36001
36002
36003
36005
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36012
36014
36015
36016
**OH
51001
**WI
04001
**AR
19001
19002
**LA
32001
32002
**NM
37101
37103
**OK
Required Sites
No. No.
SLAMS NAMS
021
007
028
002
001
000
001
000
004
004
003
007
006
006
001
003
000
001
000
000
005
' 002
003
000
001
000
000
016
017
017
000
000
016
000
016
003
003
006
002
001
003
010
001
Oil
005
000
002
000
000
007
007
001
008
002
002
002
000
000
000
002
002
003
001
001
001
000
002
001
016
004
004
002
002
006
000
006
000
002
002
001
002
004
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
890
106
996
181
5
18
64
21
289
156
98
254
343
343
67
60
19
42
36
34
144
55
46
19
17
49
19
607
97
97
50
50
191
38
229
53
72
125
28
59
87
-13
-19
-16
-11
-15
-06
-11
-09
-10
-12
-13
-12
-13
-13
-16
-16
-12
-14
-12
-07
-09
-05
-15
-03
-10
-13
-01
-10
-12
-12
-06
-06
-09
-13
-10
-09
-08
-08
-09
-12
-10
Limits
Up
+09
+12
+10
+11
+19
+13
+14
+06
+12
+15
+08
+11
+12
+12
+12
+13
+05
+12
+09
+05
+08
+09
+13
+06
+10
+11
+03
+09
+08
+08
+05
+05
+09
+16
+10
+09
+04
+06
+07
+06
+06
No.
Audits
23
14
37
9
2
4
8
4
27
18
6
24
16
16
7
4
2
5
9
6
26
11
9
4
5
4
8
100
5
5
7
7
18
6
24
10
17
27
4
10
14
Level 1
Low Up
-08
-11
-09
-10
-05
-08
-11
-12
-10
-11
-10
-11
-10
-10
-06
-21
-33
-13
-12
-10
-05
-07
-12
-35
-05
-02
-09
-11
-19
-19
-13
-13
-09
-11
-10
-08
-09
-09
-04
-07
-06
+08
+16
+12
+04
+07
+11
+07
+08
+07
+08
+15
+10
+06
+06
+06
+11
+06
-02
+24
+12
+07
+12
+24
+27
+06
+09
+11
+12
+18
+18
+03
+03
+11
+10
+11
+10
+01
+05
+11
+04
+06
Level 2
Low Up
-08
-15
-11
-08
-05
-13
-11
-09
-10
-06
-01
-04
-08
-08
-06
-20
-17
-13
-07
-09
-03
-12
-05
-27
-06
-01
-11
-09
-14
-14
-11
-11
-14
-02
-11
-08
-09
-08
-02
-04
-03
+03
+12
+07
+03
+03
+13
+06
+06
+06
+05
+07
+06
+07
+07
+04
+12
-17
+02
+16
+07
+07
+11
+13
+14
+01
+07
+04
+08
+10
+10
+02
+02
+17
+09
+15
+04
+01
+02
+05
+04
+04
Level 3
Low Up
-09 +02
-13 +09
-11 +06
-10 +04
-06 -06
-10 +10
-10 +06
-09 +06
-09 +05
-07 +05
+00 +06
-05 +05
-07 +05
-07 +05
-03 +04
-22 +13
-20 -20
-12 +01
-07 +12
-10 +07
-02 +08
-07 +12
-05 +16
-23 +08
-07 +01
-01 +07
-15 +02
-09 +07
-12 +10
-12 +10
-13 +04
-13 +04
-12 +15
-01 +12
-09 +14
-10 +02
-11 +01
-11 +01
-04 +04
-05 +05
-05 +05
B-25
-------
TABLE B8. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
45001
45002
45006
**TX
16001
16002
16003
**IA
17001
**KS
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
**MO
28003
**NB
06001
**co
35001
**ND
46001
**UT
03100
03200
03300
**AZ
05001
05004
05036
05061
**CA
12120
**HI
29200
29300
**NV
Required Sites
No . No .
SLAMS NAMS
009
002
006
017
001
001
001
003
000
000
002
003
005
001
001
012
001
001
008
008
002
002
007
007
003
007
002
012
045
017
006
025
093
000
000
000
001
001
014
001
000
015
002
000
001
003
002
002
002
001
000
001
000
004
002
002
003
003
000
000
002
002
000
003
002
005
008
004
002
004
018
001
001
002
002
004
Precision
No. Data Prob.
Pairs Low
4,920
125
132
5,177
91
24
61
176
70
70
132
61
34
56
15
298
49
49
102
102
43
43
196
196
26
157
68
251
549
480
146
165
1,340
52
52
42
96
138
-07
-12
-17
-12
-01
-03
-10
-04
-20
-20
-09
-09
-30
-09
-15
-13
-11
-11
-20
-20
-09
-09
-12
-12
-05
-09
-07
-07
-16
-07
-08
-05
-09
-07
-07
-11
-10
-10
Limits
Up
+09
+10
+09
+09
+03
+15
+09
+09
+12
+12
+11
+09
+22
+14
+24
+15
+12
+12
+13
+13
+10
+10
+08
+08
+13
+08
+09
+09
+10
+06
+06
+19
+09
+14
+14
+06
+05
+05
No.
Audits
109
17
21
147
7
12
4
23
7
7
7
6
7
6
1
27
4
4
14
14
3
3
19
19
4
7
1
12
50
42
5
32
129
61
61
8
4
12
Accuracy
Levei 1 Level 2
Low Up Low Up
-20
-19
-06
-15
-11
-03
-11
-08
-12
-12
-02
-04
-15
-14
-07
-11
-11
-14
-14
-11
-11
-07
-07
-18
-06
-02
-07
-18
-14
+08
-20
-17
-25
-25
-26
+00
-15
+32
+08
+10
+17
+07
+14
+11
+11
+11
+11
+06
+09
+08
+05
+07
-05
-05
+07
+07
+05
+05
+10
+10
+04
+08
+07
+07
+08
+10
+06
+07
+08
+19
+19
+20
+00
+11
-15
-18
-05
-13
-28
-04
-09
-11
+01
+01
-07
+01
-14
-10
-07
-12
-12
-11
-11
-11
-11
-06
-06
-12
-05
-04
-06
-14
-09
-03
-09
-10
-07
-07
-12
-04
-08
+20
+10
+11
+14
+13
+09
+05
+08
+04
+04
+06
+07
+02
-03
+04
-04
-04
+06
+06
+04
+04
+08
+08
+00
+04
+07
+04
+06
+05
-03
+05
+04
+06
+06
+12
+10
+11
Level 3
Low Up
-16 +17
-17 +11
-07 +12
-13 +13
-24 +15
-06 +07
-07 +05
-10 +08
-05 +05
-05 +05
-07 +03
+02 +04
-16 +04
-11 -08
-07 +01
-09 -04
-09 -04
-14 +07
-14 +07
-13 +05
-13 +05
-06 +08
-06 +08
-10 +00
-05 +04
-06 +07
-06 +04
-12 +05
-08 +03
-03 +03
-08 +07
-09 +05
-08 +10
-08 +10
-05 +10
-06 +11
-06 +10
B-26
-------
TABLE B8. (Cont.)
Reporting
Organization
38001
**OR
49001
**WA
Required
No.
SLAMS
004
004
003
003
Sites
No.
NAMS
002
002
005
005
Precision
No. Data Prob. Limits
Pairs
158
158
295
295
Low
-16
-16
-07
-07
Up
+05
+05
+07
+07
No.
Audits
30
30
27
27
Level
Low
-32
-32
-07
-07
Accuracy
1 Level
Up Low
+23 -25
+23 -25
+05 -07
+05 -07
2
Up
+23
+23
+08
+08
Level
Low
-25
-25
-07
-07
3
Up
+24
+24
+08
+08
B-27
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
TABLE Cl. PARS AND PA DATA FOR CO, Pb, TSP, M02 (MANUAL) AND S02 (MANUAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF ftADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
DATE 1/00/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 01 STATE 07 CONNECTICUT REP ORG 001 LAB 306001
PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD.
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
31)
30
148)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
-8 -2
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOU UP
-H -3
( -8) ( + 6)
-1 , +2
( -8) ( + 3)
LEVEL 3
LOU UP
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
REGION 01 STATE 20 MAINE
REP ORG 001 LAB 301001
AUDITS
39
( 32)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
TOTAL
MIU&J
LEVEL
LOU
-11
( -5) (
10J.J.J.JX ijj.no.jL:>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOU UP
+ 8
+ 8)
LEVEL 0
LOU UP
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 01 STATE 22 MASSACHUSETTS
REP ORG 001 LAB 304001
POL. CD.
C02101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 18)
12
( 7)
LEVEL
LOU
-21
( -6) (
-19
1
UP
+ 31
+ 6)
+ 0
rKUDABJ.jViJ.J
LEVEL 2
LOU
-8
( -5)
-21
(-16)
UP
+ 10
( +5)
+ 26
( +8)
L i itj.no. ra-
LEVEL
LOU
-8 H
( -7) (
-02 <
3
UP
H3
+ 7)
H8
LEVEL 0
LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
01
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
01 STATE 30 NEW HAMPSHIRE
REP ORG 001 LAB 302001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
18
( 22)
m
( 32)
STATE
AUDITS
15
( 11)
12
( 23)
6
( 17)
STATE
AUDITS
9
( 3)
23
( 28)
LEVEL
LOU
-11
( -8) (
TOTAL
41 RHODE
LEVEL
LOU
-4
( -3) (
-8
(-11) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 7
+ 5) (
(
ISLAND
1
UP
+ 2
+ 3) (
+ 10
+ 5) (
(
47 VERMONT
LEVEL
LOU
-7
(-15) (
TOTAL
1
UP
-2
+ 17) (
(
fKVB
LEVEL
LOU
?
-7) (
-7
-6) (
r KUD
LEVEL
LOU
-1
-1) (
-9
-9) (
-5
-6) (
r KU £»
LEVEL
LOU
-2
-12) (
-5
-6) (
A a j. L j. i x
2
UP
+ 6
+ 6)
+ 3
+ 6)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 4
+ 4)
+ 9
+ 1 )
+ 1
+ 6)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 0
+ 16)
+ 3
+ 4)
jjj.nj.T5
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
-2 +4
( -7) ( +6)
REP ORG 001 LAB 305001
T T MT ₯»
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 02 STATE 31 NEW JERSEY
REP ORG 001 LAB 308001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
78
( 8)
37
( 12)
LEVEL
LOW
~" 6
( -7) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 5
+ 7)
i'KUBJ
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -5) (
-5
( -3) (
1BJLJUJ..
2
UP
+ 3
+ 2)
+ 8
+ 2)
LI jjj.nj.is-
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -5) (
3
UP
+ 3
+ 1 )
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 02 STATE 33 NEW YORK
REP ORG 001 LAB 307001
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
83
( 38)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
rKUB
LEVEL
LOW
-1 1
( -2) (
ABJ-JjXTI JjJ.niii>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 21
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 02 STATE 33 NEW YORK
REP ORG 001 LAB 407008
POL. CD.
AUDITS
C42101 CO 123
PARS ( 28)
112128 LEAD 24
PARS ( 4)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
rKUBABJ.|jJLJ
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
LI Jjj.nj.i5
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-12 +4
(-10) ( +9)
-12 +16
(-25) (+27)
-4 +6
( -4) ( + 6)
-20 +13
( -9) (+18)
-5 +6
( -1) ( +2)
-34
+ 16
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-3
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 02 STATE 40 PUERTO RICO
REP ORG 001 LAB 309001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 2)
LEVEL
LOU
+ 1 H
( -1 ) (
1
UP
1-13
-1 )
f K.UBI
LEVEL
LOU
+ 7
( -4) (
VBJ.ii.LJ.
2
UP
+ 7
+ 0)
i jj JL n J. a a -
LEVEL
LOU
+ 1
3
UP
+ 9
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-4
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 03
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 11)
12
( 7)
STATE
08 DELAWARE
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-12) (
-37
(-16) (
1
UP
+ 3
+ 9)
+ 12
+ 13)
r r.\jo
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -4) (
-24
( -5) (
HDJ.UJ.1
2
UP
+ 4
+ 7)
+ 10
+ 4)
21 MARYLAND
REP ORG
L*Y LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -5) (
-28
REP ORG
001
3
UP
+ 3
+ 8)
+ 6
001
LAB 31300
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
LAB 31200
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
152
( 56)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r K.VBI
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -9) (
1 D J. li J. J. I 11.1.11X10
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 8
+ 9)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 03 STATE 21 MARYLAND
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
152
( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
002 LAB 312001
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +8
(-13) (+10)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-5
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
03 STATE 21 MARYLAND
REP ORG 003 LAB 412004
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
14
( 13)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
+ 28
(-15) (
Anj.iij.ii ijj.nj.ic>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 88
+ 18)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 03 STATE 21 MARYLAND
REP ORG 005 LAB 412002
AUDITS
16
( 11)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-10) (
HJDJ.iiJ.li iij.rij.id
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 18
+ 1 1 )
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03 STATE 21 MARYLAND
REP ORG 006 LAB 412006
AUDITS
20
( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
rKUB
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -6) (
A 0 j. ! x 1 1 jjj.nj.is>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 15
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03 STATE 39 PENNSYLVANIA
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
001 LAB 311002
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
5
( 121)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-3 +3
( -9) (+12)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-6
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
03 STATE 39 PENNSYLVANIA
REP ORG 002 LAB 411002
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
9
( 34)
18
( 212)
STATE
AUDITS
39
( 6)
13
( 12)
STATE
AUDITS
36
( 9)
1 1
( 6)
51
( 51)
LEVEL
LOW
-6
(-13) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 4
+ 9)
39 PENNSYLVANIA
LEVEL
LOW
-12
( -8) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 9
+ 7)
48 VIRGINIA
LEVEL
LOW
-2
(-14) (
-52 +
(-12) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 1
+ 9)
19
+ 9)
- l-KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
-7
( -4) (
r KU B
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -1) (
-3
(-11 ) (
r KU B
LEVEL
LOW
-4
(-11) (
-3
( -9) (
-9
( -5) (
A D J. li J. 1 X
2
UP
+ 2
+ 2)
+ 4
+ 5)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 7
+ 2)
+ 21
+ 8)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 3
+ 5)
+ 4
+ 4)
+ 4
+ 3)
iij.nj.ia
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +1
( -4) ( +1)
REP ORG 003 LAB 411001
T TMTTC _ _
Lj.nj.ib
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-2 +6
( -1 ) ( +1 )
REP ORG 001 LAB 315001
T T M T T <
LIMITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +0
(-11) ( +6)
-4 +1
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-7
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
03 STATE 48 VIRGINIA
REP ORG 002 LAB 415005
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 9)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
fKUtS
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -4) (
ABJ.LJ.il LJ.HJ.lb
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 8
+ 12)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 03 STATE 48 VIRGINIA
REP ORG 003 LAB 415004
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42
101 CO
PARS (
142602 N02
112
11 1
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (
21
13)
9
28)
6
16)
13
23)
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -4) (
-4
( -5) (
-26
( -8) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 8
+ 7)
+ 3
+ 5)
-26
+ 5)
- rK.uBABj.Lj.iiLj.nj.ib- - -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
+ 0
( -7)
-4
( -3)
-2
( -3)
+ 5
( -7)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+7 -1 +7
( +6) ( -7) ( +5)
+2 -4 +5 -2 -2
( +5) ( -3) ( +5)
+46 -2 -1
( +3)
+ 6
( +5)
REGION 03 STATE 48 VIRGINIA
REP ORG 005 LAB 415001
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
5
( 9)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
f HUUi
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -1 ) (
IBJ.LJ.1I LJ.nj.lb
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 1 )
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-8
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
03 STATE 50 WEST VIRGINIA
REP ORG 001 LAB 314001
POL. CD.
C42
11 1
101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 1)
30
( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-34 +7
TOTAL
rtiva
LEVEL
LOW
-3
-10
(-12) (
A B J_ li _L 1 I li -L H J. J. i
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
-3 -3 +0
+ 1 1
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 03 STATE 50 WEST VIRGINIA
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
002 LAB 314002
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
16
10)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-12 +20
( -4) ( +7)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-9
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 01 ALABAMA
REP ORG Oil LAB 319001
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
15
( 40)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r KUD
LEVEL
LOW
-8
( -9) (
ADJLiiJ.lI JjJ.nj.ia
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 2
+ 14)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 01 ALABAMA
REP ORG 012 LAB 419001
POL. CD.
C42
11 1
101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 13)
12
( 298)
LEVEL
LOW
-12
(-30) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 10
+ 23)
f nun;
LEVEL
LOW
«. o
( -3) (
+ 4
( -4) (
t a j. ! j. j
2
UP
+ 6
+ 4)
+ 8
+ 4)
11 JLI J. n j. i a
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -5) (
3
UP
+ 4
+ 1 1 )
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 01 ALABAMA
REP ORG 014 LAB 419004
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 8)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
rjKUB/
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
( -4) (
iBj.iij.ii iij.nj.ji2>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-10
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 01 ALABAMA
REP ORG 015 LAB 419005
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
fKUB
LEVEL
LOW
-22
(-14) (
ABa.JjJ.il LJ.rU. IS
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 13
+ 20)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 001 LAB 323005
POL. CD. AUDITS
142602 N02
PARS (
142401 S02
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
10
12)
10
12)
36
38)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-5 +10
( -3) ( +5)
-21 +39
(-11) ( +8)
TOTAL
f KUBAJJJ.LJ.TX LJ.rU.TS
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW
-4
( -1)
+ 15
( -7)
-12
( -7)
UP LOW UP
+6 -2 +4
( +5) ( -2) ( +6)
+15 -5 -5
( +4) ( -6) ( +4)
+ 6
( +4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-2 +3
-7 +12
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 002 LAB 323003
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
22
( 5)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
f KUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-19 +
( -3) (
BJ.LJ.TI LJ.nj.T5
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
12
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-ll
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04x85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
OH STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 003 LAB 323001
POL. CD.
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
5
( 4)
23
( 15)
LEVEL
LOW
-1 +
( -2) (
TOTAL
1
UP
16
+ 4)
f KUBI
LEVEL
LOW
( -2) (
-15
(-14) (
inj.jux J
2
UP
+ 5)
+ 3
+ 7)
LI i, j. n j. i a -
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -2) (
3
UP
-3
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-4 +5
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 004 LAB 323008
POL. CD.
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
10
( 11)
10
( 12)
20
( 10)
LEVEL
LOW
-97
( -3) (
-12
(-13) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 49
+ 12)
+ 27
+ 9)
f KUO
LEVEL
LOW
-71
( -2) (
-6
(-11) (
-10
( -6) (
A B J. i, J. J
2
UF
+ 39
+ 10)
-6
+ 11)
+ 3
+ 4)
LI ii J. n j. r a
LEVEL
LOW
-86
( +0) (
-7
( -7) (
3
UP
+ 21
+ 7)
-7
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-92 +42
-6 -1
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-12
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS G PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 005 LAB 323002
POL. CD.
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
4
( 8)
5
( 8)
13
( 17)
STATE
AUDITS
5
( 11)
10
( 11)
32
( 12)
STATE
AUDITS
5
( 4)
LEVEL
LOW
+ 5
( -4) (
-9
( -6) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 5
+ 8)
+ 3
+ 1 1 )
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
( -3) (
-33
(-22) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 4
+ 6)
+ 1 1
+ 18)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL
1
UP
r KUD
LEVEL
LOW
+ 2
( -7) (
( -9) (
-10
(-13) (
r K U D
LEVEL
LOW
+ 3
( -4) (
HB J. i.X J. I
2
UP
+ 2
+ 7)
+ 9)
+ 2
+ 10)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 3
+ 4)
-1 -1
(-31) (+22)
Q
( -4) (
T^ T» *\ T»
PROB
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -3) (
+ 7
+ 8)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 2
+ 2)
ii j. n JL i a
LEVEL
LOW
+ 3
( -6) (
-13
(-13) (
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
+ 3
( -5) (
-1 1
(-17) (
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+3 +1 +1
+ 8)
-13 -16 +1
+ 11)
006 LAB 323006
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+3 +3 +3
+ 5)
-11 -19 -7
+ 8)
007 LAB 323010
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-13
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA REP ORG 011 LAB 423003
PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
27
( 24)
59
( 80)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-8 + 3
( -4) ( +7)
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-4 +2
( -2) ( +3)
-9 +4
(-10) ( +9)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-3 +2
( -3) ( +3)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 012 LAB 423004
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 5)
5
( 25)
LEVEL
LOW
-19 +
(-12) ( +
-4
( -4) (
1
UP
13
12)
-4
+ 4)
r K.VB
LEVEL
LOW
-13
(-10) (
-6
( -3) (
RO±L,± j
2
UP
-1
+ 13)
+ 0
+ 4)
I 1 Jj-LllX J. 2>
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -5) (
-4
( -4) (
3
UP
+ 0
+ 1 1 )
-4
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-5 -5
142401 S02
PARS
10
( 28)
112128 LEAD 6
PARS ( 14)
111101 HIV 38
PARS ( 22)
-1 +10
(-11) ( +7)
-2 -2
( -7) ( +7)
TOTAL
-1 -1
( -7) ( +6)
-8 -3
( -4) ( +2)
-12 +22
(-10) (+14)
+ 0 +0
( -6) ( +3)
-7
-6
-2
+ 4
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-14
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG 013 LAB 423016
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
30
( 22)
10
( 10)
12
( 9)
31
( 29)
STATE
AUDITS
10
( 35)
19
( 14)
STATE
AUDITS
15
( 5)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-9 +2
( -7) ( +8)
-66 +3
( -8) (+18)
-8 +12
( -1) ( +7)
TOTAL
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-18 +12
(-22) ( + 113
TOTAL
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
rKUBHB -Lli J. 1 I
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +4
( -4) ( +6)
-22 -22
( -6) (+11)
-6 +2
( -4) ( +8)
-14 -1
( -2) ( +1 )
rKUDADXliJ. 1 I
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 6 +6
(-10) ( +6)
-6 + 8
(-16) (+19)
rKUl>Al5iljJL 1 X
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-29 +14
(-27) (+18)
iij.nj.ia
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-3 +2
( -3) ( +3)
-7 -7 -13 +8
( -8) (+17)
-4 +4
REP ORG 014 LAB 423005
TTMTTC » _
iij.nj.io
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-4 -4 -4 +11
( -7) ( +5)
REP ORG 015 LAB 423015
T TMTTCS _
iij.nj.is
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-15
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA REP ORG 016 LAB 423008
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
rKUBAB-Lii-LJ
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
LI JjJ.nj.TS
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-16 +6
( +1) (+11)
-1 +0
( +3) ( +9)
REGION 04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
-4 +2
( -1) ( +5)
REP ORG 017 LAB 423001
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO
PARS (
142602 N02
PARS (
142401 S02
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
30
4)
10
58)
10
42)
30
12)
LEVEL 1
LOW
-1 1
( -8)
+ 0
( -8)
-39
(-26)
TOTAL
UP
+ 6
( + 17)
+ 3
( + 10)
+ 16
( +2)
rKUBABJ.LJ.j
LEVEL 2
LOW
-2
( -1 )
-4
( -4)
-10
(-17)
-7
( -5)
UP
+ 1
( +9)
-2
( +5)
-10
( +1)
+ 4
( +7)
II LJ.nj.TS
LEVEL 3
LOW
-2
( -1 )
-5
( -6)
-13
(-14)
UP
+ 1
( +4)
+ 2
( +5)
-13
( +2)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-3 -1
-1 1 +1
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-16
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 10 FLORIDA
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
018 LAB 423002
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
21
4)
112128 LEAD 6
PARS ( 6)
111101 HIV 17
PARS ( 90)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-13 +1
( -7) (+12)
+ 3 +3
( -2) ( +2)
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-3 +3
( +0) ( +3)
+ 2 +5
( -6) ( +1)
-8 +4
( -8) ( +8)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-1 +2
( -1) ( +2)
-1
+ 4
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 11 GEORGIA
REP ORG 010 LAB 321001
POL. CD.
C42
11 1
101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
18
C 9)
32
( 52)
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-40) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 14
+ 31)
r JKUD
LEVEL
LOW
-3
(-20) (
-3
( -5) (
A O J. Jj J. J
2
UP
+ 7
+ 26)
+ 4
+ 4)
LI ii j. n j. i a
LEVEL
LOW
-3
(-16) (
3
UP
+ 4
+ 23)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 18 KENTUCKY
REP ORG 001 LAB 316001
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
10
( 85)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
rnuis
LEVEL
LOW
5
(-12) (
A o j. i. a. a. i it j. n J. i a
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 24
+ 18)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-17
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 18 KENTUCKY
REP ORG 001 LAB 316007
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 04
AUDITS
36
( 25)
12
( 6)
STATE
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-16 +11
(-13) (+12)
-28 +29
( -2) (+26)
18 KENTUCKY
f KUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -8) (
-19 +
( +0) (
BJ.k.L.
2
UP
+ 3
+ 6)
19
+ 9)
II LJ.nJ.TS-
LEVEL
LOW
-4
(-12) (
-14 +
REP ORG
3
UP
+ 5
+ 9)
19
002
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
LAB 41600
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
24
( 4)
10
( 56)
10
( 58)
12
( 3)
13
( 21 )
LEVEL
LOW
-16
( -9) (
-39
(-29) (
-25
(-11) (
-17
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 7
+ 3)
+ 19
+ 26)
+ 18
+ 12)
+ 5
f KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-14
( -7) (
-25
(-19) (
+ 6
( -4) (
-12
( -1 ) (
-4
( -5) (
ABJ.L1J
2
UP
+ 16
+ 6)
+ 6
+ 18)
+ 6
+ 5)
+ 4
+ 11)
+ 4
+ 5)
LX LIHITS
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -3) (
-18
(-12) (
-1 1
( -3) (
-15
3
UP
+ 12
+ 7)
+ 7
+ 6)
-1 1
+ 4)
-4
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-17 +3
-13 +14
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-18
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 25 MISSISSIPPI
REP ORG 100 LAB 322002
-PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-1 1
+ 7
-4
+ 6
-4
+ 3
111101 HIV 12
PARS ( 27)
( 4) ( -3) ( +6) ( -1) ( +4) ( -5) ( +2)
TOTAL
-12 +1 1
(-10) (+10)
REGION 04 STATE 34 NORTH CAROLINA REP ORG 001 LAB 318001
PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD. AUDITS
111101 HIV 65
PARS ( 256)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-9 +9
( -4) ( +3)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 04 STATE 34 NORTH CAROLINA REP ORG 001 LAB 318004
PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD. AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
12
-16
+ 9
-5
+ 3
-4
+ 1
( 5) (-23) (+21) ( -6) ( +6) ( -7) ( +7)
+ 2
+ 2
+ 1
+ 2
+ 2 +2
( 17) ( -6) ( +3) ( -6) ( +2) ( -4) ( +0)
-1 1
+ 8
-6
-2
+ 3
( 20) (-10) ( +6) (-11) ( +0) (-18) ( +4)
12
-26 +40
-6 +12
-12
+ 5
( 5) ( -4) (+10) ( +0) ( +0)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-19
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 9ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 34 NORTH CAROLINA REP ORG 002 LAB 418003
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
fKUBAHJ-IiXTI Jj J. n J- T S>
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
12 -13 +3 -8 -2 -9 +0
( 7) (-25) ( +8) (-11) (+14) (-11) (+15)
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
( 50)
( 36)
+ 2 +2
(-14) (+13)
-7 +1
(-30) (+19)
+ 2 +2
(-16) (+14)
(-21) (+13)
REGION 04 STATE 34 NORTH CAROLINA
-1 +0 -4 -4
(-13) (+13)
+1 +1 +0 +2
(-18) (+12)
REP ORG 003 LAB 418006
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO
PARS (
142602 N02
PARS (
142401 S02
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
30
59)
10
57)
5
58)
61
59)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-8
( -6)
-8
( -5)
-32
(-15)
TOTAL
+ 3
( +4)
+ 1 1
( +8)
-14
( +3)
rKUBAajLiiXJ
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-2
( -2)
-6
( -1 )
( -8)
-3
( -5)
+ 6
( +3)
+ 6
( +6)
( +5)
+ 8
( +9)
.1 1-iiij.ii
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-2
( -2)
-4
( -1 )
-7
( -6)
+ 2
( +3)
+ 7
( +5)
-7
( +6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-6 +8
-3 -2
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-20
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EnSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 34 NORTH CAROLINA
« T* I
POL. CD. AUDITS
14
14
11
2602 N02
PARS (
2401 S02
PARS (
1101 HIV
PARS (
10
12)
5
6)
9
10)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
-17 +10
(-11) (+15)
-29 +12
(-19) ( +8)
TOTAL
REP ORG 004
\T»»«TT T- m W T T- M T m C«
rn.VDHD-LJjJ.ll j-> J. 1 1 -L 1 O
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOU UP LOU UP
-10
(-15)
(-17)
-3
( -4)
-3 -8 -4
(+11) (-16) (+14)
-11 -11
(+22) (-11) (+15)
+ 6
( + 17)
LAB 41800
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
-8 -2
-15 +1
REGION 04 STATE 42 SOUTH CAROLINA
REP ORG 001 LAB 320001
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
POL.CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO 21
PARS ( 39)
112128 LEAD 12
PARS ( 18)
111101 HIV
PARS
1 1
( 355)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
-18 +9
(-26) (+10)
-7 +3
( -8) (+18)
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOU UP
-6 +3
( -5) ( +4)
-2 +2
(-19) (+21)
+ 0 +1
( -3) ( +3)
LEVEL 3
LOU UP
-3 +2
( -2) ( +3)
-5
+ 1
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-21
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
002 LAB 417004
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
27
29)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-6 +7
( -5) ( + 6)
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 0 +4
( -4) ( +7)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
+ 0 +2
( -5) ( +7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
111101 HIV 8
PARS ( 55)
TOTAL
REGION 04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
-2 +0
( -9) ( +9)
REP ORG 003 LAB 417003
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO
PARS (
142602 N02
PARS (
112128 LEAD
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
30
26)
10
29)
12
60)
29
90)
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
(-14) C
+ 1
( -5) (
-34
( -4) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 2
+ 6)
+ 1
+ 6)
+ 68
+ 3)
fKUJBABiliiJ
LEVEL 2
LOW
+ 1
(-12)
«~ C
( -4)
-46
( -4)
-5
( -5)
UP
+ 2
( + 7)
+ 10
( +3)
+ 83
( +1 )
+ 9
( + 10)
LI l.J.n.1. 0. a
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +1
(-16) (+10)
-2 +1 -2 -1
( -4) ( +4)
-10 +12
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-22
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
REP ORG 004 LAB 417002
POL. CD.
C42
11 1
101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
3
( 2)
15
( 44)
LEVEL
LOW
-8
(-11 ) (
TOTAL
1
UP
-8
+ 21)
r K.\JD
LEVEL
LOU
+ 0
(-11) (
-3
( -5) (
AD-Llii J
2
UP
+ 0
+ 17)
+ 6
+ 4)
LI li JL I 1 J. 1 3
LEVEL
LOU
+ 0
(-11) (
3
UP
+ 0
+ 17)
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
REGION 04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
REP ORG 005 LAB 417001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 9)
26
( 100)
LEVEL
LOU
-1 1
( -9) (
TOTAL
1
UP
-1
+ 7)
LEVEL
LOU
-5
( -4) (
-6
( -6) (
ABXli J. J
2
UP
+ 1
+ 4)
+ 11
+ 6)
1 1 ii J. n j. i a -
LEVEL
LOU
-3
( -9) (
3
UP
+ 0
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
REGION 04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
REP ORG 006 LAB 417001
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
26
( 35)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
TOTAL
f KUD
LEVEL
LOU
-6
(-10) (
ACXliJ.lI l
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1x04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 14 ILLINOIS
REP ORG 001 LAB 328001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
51
( 9)
12
( 3)
4
( 57)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 3)
17
( 20)
STATE
AUDITS
18
( 11)
9
( 30)
LEVEL
LOW
-15
(-11) (
-6
( -3) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 7
+ 8)
+ 2
+ 5)
14 ILLINOIS
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -4) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 12
+ 4)
14 ILLINOIS
LEVEL
LOW
-8
(-20) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 4
+ 7)
f KUOK
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -9) (
-4
( -1 ) (
-13
(-12) (+
fKUiS A
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -9) (
-1 1
( -9) (
n D rv 13 n
r KUD A
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
-10
( -8) (
D J-Jj-L 1 I
2
UP
+ 7
+ 5)
+ 1
+ 3)
+ 2
10)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 9
+ 7)
+ 3
+ 6)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
+ 5
+ 9)
iiJLriJLis - - - -
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-6 +5
( -1) ( + 3)
-12 +4
REP ORG 002 LAB 428002
jU-tn J. i a
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-29 +13
REP ORG 003 LAB 428003
Lin J. i a
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-2 +3
( -9) ( +4)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-24
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGIOK
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 15 INDIANA
REP ORG 001 LAB 329001
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
5
( 38)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 2)
STATE
AUDITS
26
( 32)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
15 INDIANA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-31 -29
(-31) (+35)
15 INDIANA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
15 INDIANA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
I'KUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-10
( -4) (
_ T% T> f\ TJ 11
rKUB A
LEVEL
LOW
-41
( -8) ( +
T> T> f\ »J
rKUB A
LEVEL
LOW
-1 +
( -1) (
_ D D f\ T> H
rKUB A
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -6) (
D J. Jj J. I I
2
UP
+ 2
+ 5)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 5
16)
BILITY
2
UP
10
+ 3)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 3
+ 7)
iiJLnj.ia
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
REP ORG 001 LAB 329002
T T M T T
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 15 INDIANA
REP ORG 005 LAB 429005
POL. CD.
111 101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
23
( 14)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
t-Kva
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -1) (
ADJ.iij.ii iiJ.nj.is
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 6
+ 10)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 05 STATE 15 INDIANA
REP ORG 008 LAB 429004
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
5
( 16)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r KUB>
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
( -1) (
IBJ.I.J.II ii j. n j. j. a
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 9
+ 1)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 05 STATE 15 INDIANA
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
15
8)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
009 LAB 429008
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-5 +0
( -4) ( +4)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-26
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 05 STATE 23 MICHIGAN
T* T> /
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42
112
11 1
101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (
24
6)
12
14)
12
35)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-1 1 +7
( -9) (+10)
-93 +20
( -8) ( +0)
TOTAL
REP ORG 001 LAB 32600
X T» « T» T1 T f m\f T TMTmC*
rnuDHDj-jjXii jij.iij.xo
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-9
( -7)
-78
( -8)
-2
( -4)
+8 -10 +7
( +6) ( -8) ( +4)
+31 -83 +30
( +0)
+ 1 1
( +8)
REGION 05 STATE 23 MICHIGAN
REP ORG 002 LAB 426001
POL. CD. AUDITS
C4
11
11
2101 CO
PARS (
2128 LEAD
PARS (
1101 HIV
PARS (
30
4)
12
3)
54
24)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-26 +14
(-11) ( +6)
-9 +76
( -2) ( +2)
TOTAL
r KUOACXiiJ. J. I ii J- 1 1 J. 1 2>
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-6
( +1 )
-10
( -2)
-9
( -5)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+10 -5 +8
( +4) ( -1) ( +6)
+14 -4 +6
( +2)
+ 5
( +5)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-27
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 24 MINNESOTA
REP ORG 001 LAB 324001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
37
( 23)
12
( 8)
29
( 70)
STATE
AUDITS
18
( 4)
12
( 22)
STATE
AUDITS
31
( 12)
LEVEL
LOU
-18
(-17) (
-10
(-20) (
TOTAL
36 OHIO
LEVEL
LOU
-3
( -3) (
-36
(-18) (
36 OHIO
LEVEL
LOU
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 5
+ 23)
+ 6
+ 9)
1
UP
+ 13
+ 13)
+ 29
+ 13)
1
UP
^KUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -8) (+
-2
(-17) (
-20 +
( -7) (
r KU l> A
LEVEL
LOU
+ 5 +
( +5) (
-19
( -8) (
r KU D A
LEVEL
LOU
-7
(-11) (
a J. L J. r i
2
UP
+ 6
14)
+ 1
+ 8)
14
+ 9)
BILITY
2
UP
13
+ 7)
+ 8
+ 6)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 0
+ 7)
LIHITS
LEVEL
LOU
-5
( -8) (
-3
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOU
+ 3
( +4) (
-1 1
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOU
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
+ 6
+ 9)
+ 2
001 LAB 327001
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
+ 9
+ 1 1 )
+ 5
002 LAB 327003
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-28
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF fiADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO REP ORG 003 LAB 327005
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
18
( 23)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
yKUJs;
LEVEL
LOW
-6
(-10) (
I B .L Jb JL 1 X ^J.nJL12>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 0
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 005 LAB 327006
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 10)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
fKVBI
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -9) (
i B J. 1. J. i i jjxnj-ia
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 3
+ 3)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 006 LAB 427001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 5)
46
( 17)
LEVEL
LOW
-21 +
(-21 ) (+
TOTAL
1
UP
43
15)
f KUBJ
LEVEL
LOW
-5 H
(-13) (
-5
( -5) (
I B J. ! J. J
2
UP
H9
+ 5)
+ 4
+ 8)
LI li J. H 4. T a
LEVEL
LOW
-9
(-18) (
3
UP
+ 15
+ 10)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-29
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS G PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 007 LAB 427002
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
28
( 19)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
f HUB!
LEVEL
LOW
+ 0
( -3) (
iBj.ijj.ii jjj.nj.ib
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 4
+ 6)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 008 LAB 427003
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42
112
111
101 CO
PARS (
128 LEAD
PARS (
101 HIV
PARS (
30
4)
6
22)
31
40)
LEVEL
LOW
-22
(-15) (
-2
(-18) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 9
-3)
-2
+ 13)
rKUBABJ.LJ.TI .LJ.nj.Tb
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW
-3
( -4)
-5
( -8)
-6
( -8)
UP LOW UP LOW UP
+ 3 -3 +3
( +3) ( -4) ( +6)
-2 -5 -4
( +6)
+ 8
( +6)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-30
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1X04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 009 LAB 427004
POL. CD. AUDITS
C42101 CO
PARS (
142602 N02
PARS (
142401 S02
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
12
5)
10
44)
10
46)
26
39)
LEVEL 1
LOW
-19
(-13)
-12
( -4)
-1 1
(-10)
TOTAL
UP
+ 10
( +6)
+ 21
( +6)
+ 15
( +4)
rKUBABJ.JLiJ.J
LEVEL 2
LOW
-3
(-12)
-7
( -3)
+ 3
( -5)
-7
( -4)
UP
+ 3
( +4)
+ 10
( +5)
+ 3
( +4)
+ 4
( +6)
LI ii J. n j. i s> -
LEVEL 3
LOW
-4
(-11)
-3
( -4)
-4
( -4)
UP
+ 2
( +3)
+ 7
( +5)
-4
( +4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-6 +7
-1 +7
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 010 LAB 427005
POL. CD.
C42
11 1
101 CO
PARS
101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
9
( 4)
6
( 29)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-33 +16
(-47) (+19)
TOTAL
Jf KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-2
(-17) (
-6
( -8) (
A B J. ii 1 J
2
UP
+ 6
+ 15)
+ 10
+ 9)
LI jjj.ru. id
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -7) (+
3
UP
+ 4
1 1 )
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-31
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 012 LAB 427007
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
142602 N02
PARS
142401 S02
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 05
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 2)
10
( 59)
10
( 59)
43
( 17)
STATE
AUDITS
17
( 20)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 2)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
-11 -2
( +5) ( +5)
+ 1 +1
( -8) ( +5)
-33 +19
( -7) ( +5)
TOTAL
36 OHIO
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
TOTAL
36 OHIO
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
+ 1 +2
(-11) ( +5)
rKUBfl
LEVEL
LOU
-1
( +1 ) (
-2
( -3) (
+ 8
( -5) (
-8
(-11) (
T> t> A U 1
- rKUB/
LEVEL
LOU
-14
( -6) (
« Y! ^\ Y% 1
PROBJ
LEVEL
LOU
+ 1
( -9) (
i B ± Jj J_ 1 I
2
UP
+ 0
+ 9)
+ 1
+ 3)
+ 8
+ 4)
+ 4
+ 8)
IBILITY
2
UP
+ 9
+ 5)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 3
+ 7)
ii j. n j. i a
LEVEL
LOU
-5
( -1) (+
-3
( -3) (
-6
( -3) (
REP ORG
LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOU
REP ORG
LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOU
-1
( -8) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
+ 6
1 1)
+1 -2 +0
+ 5)
-6 -7 +4
+ 3)
013 LAB 427010
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
014 LAB 427008
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOU UP
+ 0
+ 4)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-32
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 015 LAB 427009
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 2)
14
( 18)
LEVEL
LOU
-12
( -3) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
__ rKUBA
LEVEL
LOU
-2
( -5) (+
-7 +
( +3) (+
B J. 1> J. J
2
UP
-1
1 1)
1 1
14)
LI JiJ.nj.ii>-
LEVEL
LOU
-2
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 0
+ 9)
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 016 LAB 427012
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
28
( 24)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
TOTAL
fHUBI
LEVEL
LOU
-4
( -5) (
lBJ.liJ.TI liJ.nj.TS
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOU UP
+ 5
+ 3)
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
REGION 05 STATE 51 UISCONSIN
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REP ORG 001 LAB 325001
AUDITS
37
( 16)
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
TOTAL
fKVOi
LEVEL
LOU
-3
( -4) (
lBJ.liJ.TI liJ.nj.TS
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOU UP
+ 6
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-33
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF gADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 05 STATE 51 WISCONSIN REP ORG 001 LAB 325002
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
fKUHABJ.LJ.TI LinHS
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
54 -11 +13 -2 +9 -3 + 7
C 5) ( -1) (+19) C -4) ( +9) ( -3) ( +4)
112128 LEAD 6 -3 -3 -4 -2 -6 -4
PARS ( 27) (-16) ( +8) (-18) ( +9)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-34
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF fiADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
06 STATE 04 ARKANSAS
REP ORG 001 LAB 332001
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
C42101 CO 6 -10 -4
PARS ( 1)
r K.U B AD-LJ-i-L 1 I Ju-LHAli
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-12 +4 -12 +1
REGION 06 STATE 04 ARKANSAS
REP ORG 002 LAB 332001
AUDITS
1 1
( 105)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r JK.UJDJ
LEVEL
LOW
-10 M
( -6) (
\oj.jjj.ii i.j_nx.ii>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
M2
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06 STATE 19 LOUISIANA
REP ORG 001 LAB 334001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 3)
21
( 144)
LEVEL
LOW
-34
(-14) (
TOTAL
1
UP
'+6
+ 2)
r Kvat
LEVEL
LOW
-19
(-12) (
-8
( -6) (
V O J. JU JL J
2
UP
+ 9
+ 4)
+ 7
+ 4)
L I JUXnj-15>-
LEVEL
LOW
-19
(-19) (
3
UP
+ 7
+ 9)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-35
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1x04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 06 STATE 32 NEW MEXICO
REP ORG 001 LAB 330001
POL. CD.
112128 LEAD
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 34)
8
( 257)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 30)
6
( 23)
STATE
AUDITS
9
C 3)
3
( 20)
LEVEL
LOW
-1 1
(-14) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 8
+ 5)
32 NEW MEXICO
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -6) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 3
+ 5)
37 OKLAHOMA
LEVEL
LOW
-44
C-38) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 19
+ 16)
r KUJS
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-10) (
-5
( -5) (
r HUB
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -4) (
-8
( -7) (
LEVEL
LOW
-40
(-40) (
-24
( -6) (
A £ J. li J. 1 1
2
UP
-3
+ 7)
+ 19
+ 5)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 10
+ 6)
+ 28
+ 6)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 18
-5)
+ 29
+ 7)
juj.nj.ia
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-6 +0
REP ORG 002 LAB 430001
TTMTTC!
it J. n J. 1 O
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +3
( -7) ( +7) ( -5) ( +6)
REP ORG 101 LAB 331002
Lj.nj.io
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-40 +15
(-52) ( -5)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-36
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF CADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 06 STATE 37 OKLAHOMA
REP ORG 102 LAB 431001
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
v KUB;
LEVEL
LOW
-17
( -5) (
lBJ.iiJ.ii L J. n J. r a
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 5
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 06 STATE 37 OKLAHOMA
REP ORG 103 LAB 431002
POL. CD.
C42
112
101 CO
PARS
128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 06
AUDITS
12
( 10)
12
( 23)
STATE
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-10) (+
-5
( -4) (
45 TEXAS
1
UP
+ 6
15)
+ 5
+ 2)
FKUBABJ.LJ.J
LEVEL 2
LOW
-1
( -4)
-2
( -5)
UP
+ 2
( +7)
+ 4
( +4)
LI LJ.ru. la
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +2
( -3) ( +4)
-3 +2
REP ORG 001 LAB 33300
-PROBABILITY
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
(
15
43)
20
( 502)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-8 +13
(-24) (+27)
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-8 +5
(-12) (+12)
-13 +3
( -6) ( +5)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-8 +4
(-11) ( +9)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-37
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
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
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
2
( 7)
12
( 18)
39
( 52)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 2)
55
( 72)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 33)
LEVEL
LOU
+ 0
(-11) (
-44
(-19) (
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL
LOU
-12
( -7) (
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL
LOU
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 0
+ 19)
+ 46
+ 7)
1
UP
+ 9
+ 15)
1
UP
.TKUB
LEVEL
LOU
+ 0
( -7) (
-12
(-15) (
-7
( -9) (
r KUJJ
LEVEL
LOU
+ 3
( +0) (
-8
( -4) (
Sr KU £
LEVEL
LOU
-35
(-15) (
a a j. i. j. i i
2
UP
+ 0
+ 13)
+ 21
+ 3)
+ 4
+ 6)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 7
+ 0)
+ 5
+ 4)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 20
+ 19)
ij j. n j. i £>
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
(-10) (+10)
-5 +10
REP ORG 003 LAB 433001
T T M T rn r«
LIMITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
+ 1 +6
( +2) ( +2)
REP ORG 004 LAB 433004
T T M T T C _
ii-LFlX 1 £>
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-38
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
06 STATE 45 TEXAS
REP ORG 005 LAB 433005
POL. CD.
142602 N02
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
5
( 49)
19
( 33)
STATE
AUDITS
15
( 2)
6
( 6)
16
( 62)
STATE
AUDITS
10
( 39)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-1 -1
( -4) ( +8)
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-17 +7
( -9) ( -9)
-4 +43
( -8) ( +0)
TOTAL
45 TEXAS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
v HUB*
LEVEL
tow
-3
( -8) (
-8
( -6) (
r t\\} o t\
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -3) (
+ 3
( -4) (
-7
(-10) ( +
r KU D A
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -2) (
IBJ.L.LTI
2
UP
-3
+ 9)
+ 2
+ 4)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 5
+ 9)
+ 3
+ 0)
+ 4
14)
BILITY
2
UP
+ 2
+ 2)
: LIMITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-3 -1 -4 -4
(-12) ( +4)
REP ORG 006 LAB 433008
T T M T irt r«
LIMITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-3 +3
( -4) ( +2)
-35 +20
REP ORG 007 LAB 433010
T T" M T" m r*
LIMITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-39
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
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
12
( 5)
30
( 16)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 12)
15
( 15)
STATE
AUDITS
6
( 4)
12
( 13)
18
( 48)
LEVEL
LOW
*7
(-12) (
TOTAL
16 IOWA
LEVEL
LOW
+ 2
( -6) (
TOTAL
16 IOWA
LEVEL
LOW
-30
(-18) (
-18
( +0) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 3
+ 24)
1
UP
+ 16
+ 3)
1
UP
+ 23
+ 0)
+ 18
+ 0)
r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-6
(-11) (
-25
(-38) (
D D f\ D
rKUB
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -7) (
+ 1
( -5) (
n n f\ TJ
LEVEL
LOW
-4
(-12) (
-6
(-12) (
-5
( -4) (
A B J, i, J. i I
2
UP
+ 1 1
+ 7)
+ 12
+ 24)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 23
+ 5)
+ 2
+ 10)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 3
+ 1 )
+ 9
+ 9)
+ 2
+ 4)
iij.nj.is
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-2 +1
(-10) ( +4)
REP ORG 002 LAB 436002
L J.rl JL 4. o
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
+ 1 +20
( -6) ( +4)
REP ORG 003 LAB 336001
i» j_n .L i £>
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-5 -1
(-22) (+13)
-6 +5
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-40
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 07
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
STATE 17 KANSAS
AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
22 TOTAL
( 33)
rKU±5A
LEVEL
LOW
-15
(-13) (+
REP ORG 001
tlTTTTV TTMTTC
OJ.ljJ.lI liJ.nj.lo
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 6
15)
LAB 33700
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 07
POL. CD.
C42 101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 07
STATE
AUDITS
18
( 7)
12
( 37)
STATE
17 KANSAS
T*T>/\B»T4T-T Tr
LEVEL
LOW
-16
(-18) (
-31
(-24) (
1
UP
+ 9
+ 8)
+ 9
+ 1)
r IIUD>
LEVEL
LOW
-6
( -4) (
-25
(-22) (
\D J. JLiJ. .
2
UP
+ 6
+ 5)
+ 2
-1 )
26 MISSOURI
REP ORG
CY LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -3) (
-17
REP ORG
001
3
UP
+ 3
+ 2)
-3
001
LAB 43700
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
LAB 33800
POL. CD.
C4
11
2101 CO
PARS
1101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
10
( 4)
47
( 20)
LEVEL
LOW
5
(-in (
TOTAL
1
UP
-2
+ 12)
r KUBJ
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -4) (
-8
( -7) (
ID J.li J. j
2
UP
+ 1
+ 2)
+ 4
+ 6)
LI i.j.njLia-
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -3) (
3
UP
1
+ 4)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-41
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
07 STATE 26 MISSOURI
REP ORG 002 LAB 438004
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
30
( 4)
8
( 10)
LEVEL
LOW
-7
(-11) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 9
+ 15)
t-K.VBf
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -5) (
-1 1
( -6) (
V J3 J. i. JL J
2
UP
+ 8
+ 8)
+ 7
+ 5)
LI ii j. n j_ i s> -
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -2) (
3
UP
+ 7
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 07 STATE 26 MISSOURI
REP ORG 004 LAB 438002
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
14
( 6)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r KUD*
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -2) C
\ D _L ! J. 1 I Jj J_ 11 A 1 S
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 07 STATE 26 MISSOURI
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
15
4)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-23 +9
(-17) ( +6)
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
004 LAB 438006
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +1
( -8) ( -4)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-6 +3
( -9) ( +1)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-42
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
07 STATE 26 MISSOURI
POL.CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV 17
PARS ( 12)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REGION 07 STATE 28 NEBRASKA
REP ORG
PROBABILITY LIMITS-
005 LAB 438005
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 -1
( -4) ( +2)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REP ORG 001 LAB 335001
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
13
( 20)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
fKUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-12
(-10) (+
o j. ! x i i iij.ru. is
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 7
15)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 07 STATE 28 NEBRASKA
POL.CD.
AUDITS
111101 HIV 13
PARS ( 11)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REP ORG
PROBABILITY LIMITS-
002 LAB 335001
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-12 +7
( -8) ( + 8)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-43
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 07 STATE 28 NEBRASKA REP ORG 003 LAB 435003
POL.CD. AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOU UP
rKUBABJ-liJ. J
LEVEL 2
LOU UP
L i ii j. n JL j. a
LEVEL 3
LOU UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
112128 LEAD
PARS (
12
111101 HIV 36
PARS ( 20)
-5 +6
(-24) (+21)
TOTAL
-8 +16
(-13) (+15)
-13 +5
( -7) ( +4)
-2
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-44
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 08
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
STATE 06 COLORADO
AUDITS
51
( 15)
LEVEL
LOW
-20 +
(-18) (+
1
UP
13
16)
r HUD
LEVEL
LOW
-1 1
( -8) (
KD J-ii -L J
2
UP
+ 15
+ 12)
REP ORG
rY LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-10
( -3) (
001
3
UP
+ 13
+ 7)
LAB 34400
LEVEL
LOW
( -1 ) (
4
UP
+ 2
REGION 08 STATE 27 MONTANA
REP ORG 001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
11 1 101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
18
( 6)
9
( 44)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-58 +47
( +5) (+20)
TOTAL
rKU B«
LEVEL
LOW
-29 +
( +0) (+
-6
( -6) (
BAli J. J
2
UP
25
15)
+ 6
+ 6)
LI I> J. 11 -L 1 1>
LEVEL
LOW
-26
( -4) (
3
UP
+ 22
+ 13)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 08 STATE 27 MONTANA
REP ORG 002 LAB 439001
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
2
( 8)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
r KVBI
LEVEL
LOW
-8
( -2) (
lBJ.liJ.TI IiJ.riJ.Ttj
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
-4
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-45
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
08 STATE 27 MONTANA
REP ORG 003 LAB 439002
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 2)
1 1
( 4)
LEVEL
LOU
+ 1
( -6) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 1
+ 3)
r KUD
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -5) (
-2
( -4) (
ADJ-iiJ. J
2
UP
+ 9
+ 4)
+ 12
+ 8)
LI ii j. n j. i a -
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 4
-3)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 08 STATE 27 MONTANA
REP ORG 004 LAB 439003
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 2)
17
( 14)
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( +1 ) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 7
+ 14)
r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
^
( +2) (
-15
(-30) (
KD -Li. J. J
2
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
+ 8
+ 34)
. I Jj -L 11 J_ 1 S
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -2) (
3
UP
+ 8
+ 11)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 08 STATE 35 NORTH DAKOTA
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
001 LAB 341001
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
6
23)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-16 +7
( -9) ( +7)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-46
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF gADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
08 STATE 43 SOUTH DAKOTA
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
3
77)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REGION 08 STATE 46 UTAH
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
001 LAB 342001
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-6 +3
( -3) ( +4)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REP ORG 001 LAB 340001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
48
( 24)
20
( 28)
LEVEL
LOW
-7 +
( -9) (
TOTAL
1
UP
1 1
+ 7)
r F.VDI
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -8) (
-22
( -4) (
ljD-LliJL J
2
UP
+ 6
+ 5)
+ 5
+ 4)
I 1 1> JLHJ. 1 0-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -7) (
3
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-47
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
09 STATE 03 ARIZONA
REP ORG 100 LAB 347001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 09
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
REGION 09
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 9)
7
( 14)
STATE
AUDITS
39
( 7)
32
( 32)
STATE
AUDITS
18
( 1 )
9
( 16)
LEVEL
LOW
-15
(-20) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 3
+ 9)
03 ARIZONA
LEVEL
LOU
-25
(-26) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 14
+ 13)
03 ARIZONA
LEVEL
LOW
-3
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 9
riiua.
LEVEL
LOU
-4
(-15) (
-8
(-13) (
T> D r\ n
LEVEL
LOU
-7
( -6) (
-16
(-11) (
n n f\ tj
r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-1
-27
(-10) (
ABJ.li.LI I
2
UP
+ 1
+ 7)
+ 6
+ 7)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 4
+ 3)
+ 13
+ 9)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 4
+ 39
+ 16)
liiHJ. 1^
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
-2 +0
( -2) ( +3) ( -2) ( +2)
REP ORG 200 LAB 447001
j-i-Lri-L i b
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
-9 +3
( -4) ( +2)
REP ORG 300 LAB 447002
Jj-Lrl-L 1 o
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOU UP LOU UP
-2 +2
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-48
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
POL.CD.
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
76
71 )
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
REP ORG
-PROBABILITY LIMITS-
001 LAB 345002
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-22 +15
(-11) (+10)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REP ORG 001 LAB 345003
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
21
( 26)
LEVEL
LOW
-16 +
( -7) C +
1
UP
1 1
10)
f KUBJ
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -7) (
lBJ.i.J.1
2
UP
+ 4
+ 6)
I LJ.nj.T5-
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -6) (
3
UP
+ 1
+ 5)
LEVEL
LOW
( -2) (
4
UP
+ 2
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
AUDITS
39
26)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-41 +27
( -7) (+10)
REP ORG
PROBABILITY LIMITS-
001
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-1 1 +6
( -7) ( +6)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-7 +7
( -6) ( +5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
( -2) ( +2)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-49
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
REP ORG 004 LAB 445001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS
6
( 33)
12
( 9)
LEVEL
LOW
-9
(-12) (J
-12
( -7) (
1
UP
+ 4
H6)
+ 8
+ 0)
rKUB/
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -3) (
-18
( -7) (
I B J. li J. 1
2
UP
+ 2
+ 3)
+ 0
-4)
. I ii J. n J. 1 a -
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -2) (
-9
3
UP
+ 1
+ 2)
+ 1
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
REP ORG 036 LAB 445003
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
REGION 09
POL. CD.
AUDITS
28
( 7)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
TOTAL
1
UP
05 CALIFORNIA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
fK.\jat
LEVEL
LOW
-20
(-17) (
FKUB^
LEVEL
LOW
LBJ.ljJ.1 I
2
UP
+7
+ 7)
ABILITY
2
UP
i, j. n x i i
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
REP ORG 036
iixnjL i o
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
LAB 445005
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
C42101 CO
PARS
39 -9 +7
10) (-31) (+35)
-3 +2
( -8) ( +8)
-3 +3
( -4) ( +4)
( -5) ( +3)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-50
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA REP ORG 061 LAB 445002
POL.CD. J
112128 LEAD
PARS (
111101 HIV
PARS (
REGION 09 STATE 05 CALIFORNIA
ITS
6
7)
4
30)
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -6) (
TOTAL
1
UP
+ 7
+ 9)
r KUBA
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
( -6) (
-3 +
(-13) (+
uj.iij.ii iij.nj.1 a
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+1 -4 +0
+ 7)
19
10)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REP ORG 061 LAB 445018
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS
39
( 24)
6
( 7)
LEVEL 1
LOW
-10
( -2)
+ 3
( -6)
UP
+ 18
( + 18)
+ 3
( +9)
rKur>
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( +1 ) (
-3
( -6) (
A0J.li J. J
2
UP
+ 5
+ 1 1)
+ 0
+ 7)
LI jjj.rij.ia-
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -4) (
+ 0
3
UP
+ 5
+ 8)
+ 1
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 09 STATE 12 HAWAII
REP ORG 120 LAB 348001
-PROBABILITY LIMITS
POL.CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 137)
24
( 50)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-5 +12
(-14) (+15)
TOTAL
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 1 +7
( -4) ( +4)
-3 +3
( -6) ( +5)
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-2 +5
( -4) ( +3)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-51
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
09 STATE 29 NEVADA
REP ORG 200 LAB 446001
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
111101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
18
( 8)
50
( 63)
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -3) (
TOTAL
1
UP
-1
+ 8)
fKUBA
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -3) (
-19 +
( -5) (
a j. L j. j
2
UP
H
+ 5)
15
+ 6)
LI LJ.nj.ib-
LEVEL
LOW
-5
( -3) (
3
UP
+ 1
+ 5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 09 STATE 29 NEVADA
REP ORG 300 LAB 446002
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
rKUJSABJ.LJ.il LJ.nj.ib
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
18 -7 +4 -3 +3 -2 +0
( 4) ( +0) ( +0) (-13) ( +9) ( -5) ( +3)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-52
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
10 STATE 38 OREGON
REP ORG 001 LAB 453001
POL. CD.
C42
112
101 CO
PARS
128 LEAD
PARS
REGION 10
AUDITS
24
( 57)
12
( 6)
STATE
LEVEL 1
LOW
-22
(-18)
-9
( -5)
UP
+ 10
(+24)
+ 16
( +9)
rKUnABJ.JL.J.J
LEVEL 2
LOW
-6
( -8)
-8
( -4)
UP
+ 7
( +8)
+ 10
( + 7)
49 WASHINGTON
LI JLjJ.nj.lJb
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-5 +5
( -7) ( +3)
--1 +1
REP ORG 001 LAB 45200
I
POL. CD.
11101 HIV
PARS
AUDITS
78
( 29)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
TOTAL
V KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-21
( -4) (
A B J. JL, J. T X JjJ.nj.lJ>
2 LEVEL 3
UP LOW UP
+ 15
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
REGION 10 STATE 49 WASHINGTON
REP ORG 001 LAB 452006
POL. CD.
C42101 CO
PARS
112128 LEAD
PARS
AUDITS
1 1
( 39)
6
( 7)
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -6) (
+ 10
( -5) (
1
UP
+ 4
+ 6)
+ 14
+ 7)
fKUBI
LEVEL
LOW
-1
( -4) (
+ 0
\BJ.JjX J
2
UP
+ 2
+ 3)
+ 0
LI Jjj.nj.io"
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -4) (
-9
3
UP
+ 1
+ 2)
+ 7
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-53
-------
TABLE C2. PARS AND PA DATA FOR S02 CONTINUOUS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 01 STATE 41 RHODE ISLAND
REP ORG 001 LAB 305001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
AUDITS
8
C 13)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
-13
( -7) (+
1
UP
+ 1
14)
47 VERMONT
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
fKUCA
LEVEL
LOW
-3
( -9) (+
LEVEL
LOW
a J. L x r i
2
UP
+ 0
14)
BILITY
2
UP
L 1 H JL T 5 -
LEVEL
LOW
-4
( -5} (J
REP ORG
LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
+ 3
H3)
001
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
LAB 30
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
3001
4
UP
C42401 S02 3
PARS ( 9)
+ 3 +3
( -7) ( +2)
+ 1 +3
( ~6) ( +1)
( -6) C +3)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IM THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-54
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF BADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 01 STATE 07 CONNECTICUT
REP ORG 001 LAB 306001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 01
POL. CD.
AUDITS
20
( 14)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 9)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 33)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
-10
( -8) (
20 MAINE
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -8) (
1
UP
+ 4
+ 4) (
1
UP
-7
+ 3) (
22 MASSACHUSETTS
LEVEL
LOW
-7
( -9) (
1
UP
'+5
+ 6) (
30 NEW HAMPSHIRE
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
fKUDf
LEVEL
LOW
-9
-8) (
r K(J a I
LEVEL
LOW
-5
-6) (
r KUol
LEVEL
LOW
-3
-9) (
FKO D 1
LEVEL
LOW
i a x ii j. 1 1
2
UP
+ 1
+ 3)
IBILITY
2
UP
-3
+ 5)
IBILITY
2
UP
+ 0
+ 4)
ABILITY
2
UP
ii JL n j. i a
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-8 +0
( -8) ( +5)
REP ORG 001 LAB 301001
iiJLnj.ii>
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-2 -2
( -6) ( +7)
REP ORG 001 LAB 304001
Lj.ni.io
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-6 +3
C -9) ( +6)
REP ORG 001 LAB 302001
Lin JL 1 o
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02
PARS
( 33)
-4 -4
( -8) ( +6)
-6 -2
( -9) ( +6)
-4 -4
( -9) ( +6)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-55
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF fiADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 02 STATE 31 NEW JERSEY
REP ORG 001 LAB 308001
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1
LOW UP
C42401 S02 16 -8 -3
PARS ( 16) (-14) (+13)
fKucfttsj.iij.ii jj JL ri JL i a - -
LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
-6 +0 -4 +2
( -9) (+12) ( -8) (+12)
REGION 02 STATE 33 NEW YORK
REP ORG 001 LAB 307001
POL. CD.
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
fKUBACXJUXJ
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
i i ii j. n j. j. £>
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42401 S02 12
PARS ( 88)
-18 +27
( -8) (+11)
-8 +13
C -8) (+11)
-6 +7
(-10) (+12)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-56
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF SADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
03 STATE 08 DELAWARE
REP ORG 001 LAB 313002
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 03
POL . CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 8)
STATE
AUDITS
20
( 40)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 27)
STATE
AUDITS
12
( 77)
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-12) (
1
UP
-4
+ 16)
21 MARYLAND
LEVEL
LOW
-17
(-20) (
1
UP
+ 17
+ 15)
39 PENNSYLVANIA
LEVEL
LOU
-25
(-15) (
1
UP
+ 1 1
+ 13)
39 PENNSYLVANIA
LEVEL
LOW
-4
(-17) (
1
UP
+ 2
+ 15)
r KUB
LEVEL
LOW
-12
( -1) (
r KUD
LEVEL
LOW
-2
(-12) (
r KU D
LEVEL
LOW
-13
(-15) (
r K U Jo
LEVEL
LOW
+ 1
(-13) (
A 0 J. L X 1 I
2
UP
+ 8
+ 10)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 13
+ 11)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 5
+ 10)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 4
+ 11)
Linj.rt>
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-14 +10
( -8) (+18)
REP ORG 001 LAB 312001
T T V T T f*
Lin ITS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
+ 2 +10
(-12) (+12)
REP ORG 001 LAB 311002
T T MT T C _
Lxnxio
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-12 +5
(-12) (+10)
REP ORG 002 LAB 411002
T TM T T C?
ii j_n j. j. o
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
+ 1 +6
(-15) (+12)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-57
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
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
4
( 11)
STATE
AUDITS
16
( 12)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 9)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
+20 +20
(-22) (+12) (
48 VIRGINIA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-10 -1
( -8) ( +6) (
50 WEST VIRGINIA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-1 -1
( -9) (+13) (
50 WEST VIRGINIA
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
f K\JDJ\D±JjJ. i 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
+ 8 +9
-16) (+12)
rKUJBAiJXLJ.1 1
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-9 +2
-7) (+11)
rKUUAi}J.Jj-Ll I
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-2 +0
-8) ( +9)
r K U a A 15 JL L 1 1 I
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
JUillili
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
+ 7 +7
(-12) (+11)
REP ORG 003
L J_ni. 1 1>
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-10 +3
(-10) (+12)
REP ORG 001
Lin JL 1 o
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
-1 -1
(-10) (+10)
REP ORG 002
jjXnx i o
LEVEL 3
LOW UP
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
( -6) ( +6)
LAB 415004
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
LAB 314001
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
LAB 314002
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
C42401 S02
PARS
4 -1 -1
9) (-10) ( +6)
+ 0 +3
( -8) ( +7)
+ 2 +2
( -8) ( + 7)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-58
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
DATE
REGION
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
04 STATE 01 ALABAMA
REP ORG 01 1 LAB 319001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
AUDITS
4
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
8
( 19)
STATE
AUDITS
8
( 5)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 4)
LEVEL
LOW
-71
(-17) (-
1
UP
71
12)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL
LOW
-19
(-20) (+
1
UP
1 1
16)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL
LOW
+ 2 +
( -1 ) ( +
1
UP
14
13)
10 FLORIDA
LEVEL
LOW
-10
(-20) (
1
UP
10
+ 0)
fKUB
LEVEL
LOW
-87
(-19) (
r KU D
LEVEL
LOW
-18
(-19) (
r KUo
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-18) (
r KU is
LEVEL
LOW
-15
(-21 ) (
A C J. ii JL 1 I
2
UP
-86
-12)
ABILITY
2
UP
-6
+ 15)
ABILITY
2
UP
-no
+ 21 )
ABILITY
2
UP
-1 1
-2)
i, -L H J. T b
LEVEL
LOW
-88
(-18) (
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-20
(-14) (
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-15) (
REP ORG
LIMITS
LEVEL
LOW
-14
(-15) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
-88
-12)
011 LAB 423003
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
-4
+ 12)
012 LAB 423004
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 6
+ 22)
018 LAB 423002
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
-14
-3)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-59
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 18 KENTUCKY REP ORG 002 LAB 416001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 04
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
AUDITS LEVEL
LOW
12 +0
( 4) ( -9) (+
STATE 34 NORTH
AUDITS LEVEL
LOW
18 -28 +
( 21 ) (-15) ( +
STATE 34 NORTH
AUDITS LEVEL
LOW
4 -6
( 12) (-28) (
STATE 42 SOUTH
AUDITS LEVEL
LOW
6 -24
( 75) (-14) (H
FKUBABJ.LJ.TX
1 LEVEL 2
UP LOW UP
+4 -1 +2
16) ( +3) (+12)
CAROLINA !
PROBABILITY
1 LEVEL 2
UP LOW UP
36 -26 +30
10) (-17) (+12)
CAROLINA
rKUB AB xli-L 1 I
1 LEVEL 2
UP LOW UP
-6 -7 -6
+8) (-27) ( +8)
CAROLINA
PROBABILITY
1 LEVEL 2
UP LOW UP
-24 -3 +5
H 1 ) (-11) ( + 10)
LJ.nj.1 b--
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
REP ORG
JLiXrl-L 1 o
LEVEL
LOW
-27 +
(-15) (+
REP ORG
iij.ru. i o
LEVEL
LOW
-7
(-30) (+
REP ORG
L±nx i b
LEVEL
LOW
+ 2
(-11) (
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 1
+ 6)
001 LAB 318001
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
30 +12 +12
11) (-12) ( +2)
003 LAB 418006
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
-7
10)
001 LAB 320001
3 LEVEL 4
UP LOW UP
+ 7
+ 9)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-60
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS E PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 04 STATE 44 TENNESSEE
REP ORG 001 LAB 317001
hKUiJABXl..LTI i.±nXXi)
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02 14 -18 +16 -15 +10 -15 +10
PARS ( 14) (-13) ( +8) ( -6) C +5) ( -9) ( +5)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
-17 +6
(-14) ( +7
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-61
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
DATE
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
POL.CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
AUDITS
8
2)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-19 +13
(-23) (-10)
REP ORG 003 LAB 327005
-PROBABILITY LIMITS
LEVEL 2
LOW UP
-15 +9
(-15) (-10)
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-20 +13
(-12) ( +9)
REP ORG 006 LAB 427001
rKUBABO.ljJ.-j
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2
LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02 12 -31 +22 -18 +14
PARS ( 4) (-27) (+20) ( -9) (+13)
LI LJ.nj.TS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-7 -5
( -6) (+12)
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 007 LAB 427002
fKUBABJ.liJ.-j
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2
LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02 8 -6 +19 -4 +12
PARS ( 8) (-11) (+17) ( -6) (+11)
i. I LJ.nj.TS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-8 +19
(-10) (+13)
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 008 LAB 427003
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
AUDITS
12
( 8)
LEVEL
LOW
-5
(-10) (
1
UP
+ 7
+ 5)
fnuai
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -6) (
1 B JL L J. J
2
UP
+ 5
+ 6)
.1 LJ.nj.TS-
LEVEL
LOW
-2
( -7) (
3
UP
+ 4
+ 7)
LEVEL 4
LOW UP
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-62
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 6ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 1/04/85
DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 012 LAB 427007
rKUBAB-LliXJ
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2
LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02 8 -3 +20 -4 +18
PARS ( 4) (-24) (+29) (-15) (+17)
LX LJ.nj.TS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-1 +11
(-20) (+21)
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 013 LAB 427010
rKUBABJ.JjJ.-J
POL. CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2
LOW UP LOW UP
C42401 S02 8 -29 +19 -19 +8
PARS ( 2) ( -7) ( -4) (-12) ( -4)
LX LJLnXTS
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP
-16 +9
(-12) ( -5)
REGION 05 STATE 36 OHIO
REP ORG 016 LAB 427012
POL. CD.
C42401 502
PARS
fKUBABiJuJLTI L J. n JL i S
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
t 4 -16 -16 -19 -17 -20 -20
( 6) (-34) (+10) (-29) (+10) (-28) ( +6)
REGION 05 STATE 51 WISCONSIN
REP ORG 001 LAB 325001
POL. CD.
C42401 S05
PARS
rKugAJBj.Lj.Tx L j. n J. T s
AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
! 8 -48 +32 -24 +12 -20 +10
( 19) (-15) (+16) (-12) (+10) (-12) ( +6) (-11) ( -3
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-63
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMSL PRECISION/ACCURACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF 2ADHS ACCURACY AUDITS C PARS
DATE 1/04/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1982
REGION 06 STATE 32 NEW MEXICO
REP ORG 001 LAB 330001
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
C42401 S02
PARS
REGION 06
POL. CD.
AUDITS
14
( 8)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 11)
STATE
AUDITS
4
( 2)
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LOW
-34
(-11) (
1
UP
+ 5
+ 6)
32 NEW MEXICO
LEVEL
LOW
+ 6
(-16) (
1
UP
+ 6
+ 6)
37 OKLAHOMA
LEVEL
LOW
+ 7
(-11) (
1
UP
+ 7
-9)
37 OKLAHOMA
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
r KUB*
LEVEL
LOW
-25
(-11) (
~ r KUB*
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-15) (
r KU D I
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-14) (
r KUB I
LEVEL
LOW
iB-UjJ. 1 I
2
UP
+ 0
+ 7)
IBILITY
2
UP
+ 5
+ 5)
ABILITY
2
UP
+ 5
-4)
ii j. n _L i ;> -
LEVEL
LOW
-28
(-11) (
REP ORG
LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 4
(-13) (
REP ORG
LIMITS-
LEVEL
LOW
+ 3
(-13) (
REP ORG
ABILITY LIMITS-
2 LEVEL
UP LOW
3
UP
+ 2
+ 9)
002
3
UP
+ 4
+ 5)
101
3
UP
+ 3
-9)
102
3
UP
LEVEL
LOW
-14
LAB 430
LEVEL
LOW
(-16) (
LAB 331
LEVEL
LOW
LAB 431
LEVEL
LOW
4
UP
-5
001
4
UP
+ 5)
00 1
4
UP
001
4
UP
C42401 S02
PARS
4 +17 +17 +2 +10
3) (-22) ( +1)
+ 9 +9
(-26) ( +1)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-64
-------
APPENDIX C
TABLE C2. PARS and PA Data for 502 Continuous
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL FfcECIS I ON/ACCURACY KEPOKTINt SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADhS ACCURACY AUDITS * PAPS
DATE 3/16/&i DATA SELECTED FCh YEAR 19?2 PA6E NO. 1
REGION i1 !TATE 07 CONNECTICUT KEf ChG LCI LAB 306CC1
POL. CD.
C424C1 Su2
PARS
REGION u1
POL. CD.
C424G1 SU2
PARS
kEGICN jl
POL. CD.
C424G1 St2
PARS
kEGION u1
POL. CD.
C424C1 Su2
PARS
AUDITS
20
(. 14)
>TATE
AUDITS
4
I V)
>T.Tt
AUDITS
12
I 33)
!IAU
AUDITS
4
^ 33)
LEVEL 1
LOW UP
-1C 44
( -5) ( +4 )
2T V. ^ ttl r
u n A j« £
LEVEL -j
LOh UP
-7 -7
( -B) ( 43}
22 MASSACHUSETT
LEVEL 1
LOte UP
-7 45
( -9) ( 46)
30 NE* HAWPSHIR
LEVEL 1
LO* UP
-4 -4
( -b) ( 40)
PR
LEV
LOM
-9
( ~fc)
LEV
LOk
-5
( -o)
S
LEV
LOw
-j
( -9)
E
LEV
LOW
-6
( -9)
teflBi L l
fcl- 2
UP
«1
C 4^)
f,& A D 1 1 T
VD A D i L 1
EL ?
UP
-3
( 45)
f iD & U T 1 T
UD AH i L 1
EL 2
UP
40
( 44 )
f rj * r> f a 7
CD ABI LI
£L 2
UP
-2
( 46)
ly LJPillij
LtVEL - LEyEL 4
LCi« UP L0», UP
~b 4G
( -fe) ( 45)
RcP ORG OC1 LAB 3f1001
TV i 1fefTTC__...._KMK _ _
LEVLL3 LEVEL4
L0k» UP LO* UP
-2 -2
( -6) ( 4?)
REP GKG GC1 LAP 3C4CG1
LtVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LGh UP LOb UP
-t 43
( -9) ( 46)
REP CkG L101 LAB 3G20C1
TV 1 TMTTC«.«.^«>«.«^..^ ^^
LcVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LO* UP LOW UP
-4 -4
( -V) ( 46)
o PROBABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CALULATION OF 1H£ AVERAGES
C-65
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EKSL P RE C I S ION /AC CUR AC Y REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF GADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 3/U/Sj DATA SELECTED FOk YEAR 1982 PAGE NO. c
REGION L1 STATE 41 RHODE ISLAND
REF OhG CC1 LAE 3C.5GC1
POL. CD.
C424C1 St2
PARS
REGION U1
POL. CD.
C42401 So2
PARS
AUDITS
5
I 13)
STATE
AUDITS
3
t 9)
LEVEL
LO*
-13
< -7) <<
1
UP
41
14 )
47 VfcRKONT
LtVEL
LO*
+ 3
( -7) <
UP
+ 3
+ 2)
PR
LEV
L0»
-3
( -9)
Pt ..
LEV
LOW
M
( -6)
CttAbJ Li
tL 2
UP
+ 0
(+14 )
tEABlLI
EL 2
UP
( +1 )
TT LJrtilb
LEVEL 3 LEVEL A
LCn UP LOi, UP
-4 +3
( -5) (+13)
RtF CRG GC1 LAb 3t'3CC1
LtVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LOl* UP LOW UF
( -o) ( +3)
* ZfcRU PRQbABILITY L^jTS ARE Im
IN yHE CALCULATION Of THE AVERAGES
C-66
-------
ENVIRONMENT Ac PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PKECISION/ACCUFACY REPORTING S*STEtt
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
£>ATE 3/16/8i 1>ATA SELECTED FOk YEAR 1y£,2 PAGE KG . 4
REGION t2 STATE 31 NEW JERSEY KfcF ORG 001 LAf 3fbOC1
PROBABILITY LI HITS
POL.CO. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVtL I LtvEL 3 LEVEL <*
LOW UP LOW UP LO* UP L0i» UF
C424L1 Su2 16 .6 -3 -6 +0 -4 +2
PARS i 1t>> (-14) (+13) ( -9) (+12) ( -b) ( + U)
REGION L2 i>TATt 33 NEW YORK RtF OkG U01 LAB 3C7CG1
PRLfaABILITY L IKITS
POL.CO. AUDITS LEVEL ) LEVEL ? LtVtL 3 LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOw UP LOh UP LOlK UF
C424G1 SU2 1^ -1c +27 -8 +13 -6 +7
PARS 4 &&> ( -b) ( + 11) ( -6) ( + 11) (-10) ( + 1i)
* ZERO PRC3A6ILITY LIMITS AR£ INCLUDED IN THE CAlCyLAlION OF THE AVERAGES
C-67
-------
ENVIRON?-chfTAc PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL P RE C I S I C N / AC CUR AC Y HEPQRTlNu S^STEF
COMPARISON REPORT OF GADhS ACCURACY AUDITS R PARS
DATE 3/16/Sj DATA SELECTED FCK YEAR 19?2 PAGE NO. f
REGICN .3 STATE Ob DELAWARE ?LF GKG Uf1 LAb 3130C2
POL. CD.
C424C1 S02
PARS
REGION u3
POL. CD.
AUDITS
12
( fa)
STATE
*UD1 TS
LEVEL
LO*
-10
(-12) (
21 MArfYL
LEVEL
LOW
1
UP
oi,
AND
1
UP
p
L ^
LO*
( 'I
LE
LOW
k tb AB1 L i
VEL ?
UP
+ c
) (+10)
L*c A b 1 L I
VEL 2
UP
I Y L i it I 1 :>
LO*
-14
< -o) (
REF CRG
Y L i n I 1 o
LEVEL
UF
+ 10
+ 16)
uC1
3
UP
LLyEL
LO*
LAB 31Z
LEVEL
LCw
4
UF
CC1
4
UF
C424C1 S02 20 -17 +17 -2 +13 +2 + U
PARS * 4Q) (-2u) ( + 15) (-12) ( + 11) (-12) ( + 1<:)
REGION u3 iTATE 39 PENNSYLVANIA REF CRG 001 LAb 311CC2
PROBABILITY LI KITS
POL.CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 1 LtVEL 4
LO* UP LOw UP LOte UP LOW UF
C424C1 S^2 12 -25 +11 --|3 +5 -12 +5
PARS < 27) (-1S) (+13) (-15) (+10) (-It) (+1b)
REGION u3 i>TATE 39 PENNSYLVAKiA REF OKG uC2 LAB 411002
PhObABILITY LIMITS
POL.CO. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LtVEL 4
LOfe UP LOto UP LO* UP LO- UP
C42401 Su2 12 -4 +2 +1 +4 +1 +6
PARS < 77) (-17) ( + 15) (-13) ( + 11) (-1i>) (+12)
* ZERO PROBABILITY LlhlTS ARE INCLUDED IN' THE CALCULATION Of THE AVERAGES
C-68
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECIS I ON/ACCuRACY REPORTING SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 3/16/8- DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 19?2 PAGE NO. 7
RE&ION J> STATE 39 PENNSYLVANIA Rhf- ORG uC3 LAB 4-J1001
POL. CD.
C42401 SU2
PARS
REGION u3
POL. CD.
C42401 SG2
PARS
REGION w3
POL. CD.
C424C1 Su2
PARS
REGION u5
POL. CD.
C42401 SL2
PARS
AUDITS LEVEL
LO*
t 11) (-22) (
ST AT £. 48 V jRGI
AUDITS LtVEL
LOfc
16 -10
c 12) ( -a) (
HATE 50 WEST
AUDITS LEVEL
LO*
4 -1
1 V) ( -9) <
STATE 50 WEST
AUDITS LtVEL
LOw
4 V) (-10) (
1
UP
+ 20
Nl«
1
UP
-1
+ 6)
VIRGIN.
1
UP
-1
+ 13)
VIRGIN!
1
UP
+ 6)
PR
LEV
LOW
(-16)
LEV
LOW
-9
A
LEV
LOte
( -I)
A
LEV
LOW
( -fc)
COAbl Ll
UP
+ V
( + 12)
CT t T
EA8ILI
EL 2
UP
( + 11 )
At A £1 T 1 T
UD Ad i L I
EL 2
UP
+ 0
( +9)
/ O A O T I T
Cb ABI L J
EL 2
UP
+ 3
( +7)
Ty Linilo---
LtVEL 3 LEyEt- 4
LOh UP LOW UF
'7 +7
(-12) ( + 11 ) ( -o) ( + 6>
REP ORG 003 LAB 4150C4
TV i M TC __________
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LQw UP LO* UF
- 1 u +3
PEP ORG OC1 LAB 3140C1
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LC* UP LO* UF
-1 -1
(-1u) (+10)
REF OR& 002 LAB 3140C2
LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
LO* UP LO* UP
( -6) ( +7)
* ZERO PRC8ABILITY LIMITS ARE INCLUOEt IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-69
-------
ENVI
I PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL P kE CIS I ON / AC CUF. AC Y
COMPARISON RtPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
;, DATA SELECTED FOR YFAR 1982
DATE 3M6/S;,
REGION j.4 STATE 01 ALAoAKA
U11
&L NO. 1U)
PR'
LEV
LOb
-57
(-19)
Pr
LEV
LO*
<-M,
r*i r.
LEV
LOW
+ 4
Pfj
LEV
LOW
-5
(-1?)
GBAEILI
LL 2
UP
-§6
(-12)
f~ f , fi f~ 1 \ T
ub A b I L I
tL 2
UP
"6
(+15)
f D A fj T 1 T
G 8 A b I LI
£L 2
UP
+ 10
(+21 )
t' 13 A Si T 1 T
CP Abl LI
tL 2
UP
+ 10
Ty LlPillb
LEVEL 3 LEyEL 4
LO* UP LOW UF
-86 -Fo
(_1b) (-12)
RfcF CRG L11 LAB 422CC3
LtVEL 3 LEVEL 4
Lf* UP LOte UF
-L-u -4
(-14) ( + 1
-------
NTAL PKuTECTIGN AGEr,C* EMSL PKECISI ON/ACCUF AC Y REPORTING. SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 3/16/81, DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 19^2 PAGE NO. 10
REGION U4 iTATE 1C FLOKIDA REF OkG Glo LAB 423U&2
POL .CD.
C424L1 Su2
PARS
REGION .4
POL. CD.
C42401 Su2
PARS
REGION b4
POL. CD.
C424G1 Sa2
PARS
REGION .4
POL.C i).
C424D1 Su2
PARS
HUD I TS
4
v 4)
STATE
AUDITS
12
< 4)
i>TATE
AUDITS
* 21)
STATE
AUDITS
t 1
LtV
LOW
-1
( 43)
NA
n
LEV
LOU
-26
(-17)
LEV
LOw
-7
(-27)
ubAbi La
LL 2
UP
-11
( -2 )
t lit A Q f 1 T
t b A b i 1 1
£L 2
UP
+ 2
(412)
L. ^ i t i
8 A B A L 1
EL 2
UP
(412 )
AC A Q T 1 1
Ub A8 I L I
EL 2
UP
-6
» y L ini ib
LtVEL
LOtf
-u
(-1^) (
';[ F ChG
TV 1 T k T T C
T L I n I 15
LtVEL
LO*.
( ~-o) (
RfcF CRC-
TV 1 fo * T C
TY Lj^jTS
LEVLL
LOw
-27
(-1i) (
REP 0«G
TV 1 T M 1 T C
Y L In I T S
LLVtL
LO*
-7
(-?C) (
3
UP
-14
-3)
002
UP
41
OC1
3
UP
411 )
003
UP
-7
*i-:>
LEvEL 4
LO* UF
LAB 41&OL1
LEVEL 4
LO* UF
LAb 3UOC1
LEVEL 4
LOW UF
412 412
LAE. 41£OG6
LEVEL 4
LOW UF
* ZERO PROBABILITY LlMjTS AKE INCLUDED IN jHE CALLbLATIQK OF THE AVERAGE!
C-71
-------
fcNVI RONWcNTA L PROTECTION AGENCY ENSL F RE C IS I ON /AC CURAC Y rUPGKTlfcG SYSTEM
COMPARISON REPORT OF GADhS ACCURACY AUDITS k, PARS
DATE 3/16/83 UATA SELECTED FOh YFAR 1
-------
RON*INTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRECIS ION/AC CUR AC» REPOhTlNG S^STtf1
COMPARISON REPORT OF GADHS ACCURACY AUDITS £ PARS
DATE 3/16/Sj OATA SELECTED FOR YEAR 1^p2 FAGE NO. 13
REGION :5 5TATE 36 OHIO REF ORG GC3 LAB 32?GC-5
-PROBABILITY LI ft ITS
POL.CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 L E V tL 2 L*-VEi_ 3 LEyEL A
LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP LOW UP
CA2A01 Sc2 h -1v +13 -p + 9 -2u +13
PARS t 2) (-23> (-1Q) (-15) (-10) (-1<> ( +9)
REGION o5 STATt 36 0HIG ! ( -9) (+13) ( -6) (+12)
REGION u'5 3TATL 36 0HI0 RcP OKC OC7 LAB A?7CC2
POL. CO.
CA2AC1 S02
PARS
REGION ~5
POL. CD.
AUDITS
b
i o)
STATt
«UDITS
LEVEL
LOW
-0
(-11) (
36 OHIO
LtVcL
LOw
1
UP
+ 19
+ 17)
1
UP
----r K
LEV
LOW
-A
( -6)
LtV
LOw
tH«t!i L 1
EL 2
UP
+ 12
( + 11 )
/ f * « r> f k T
vb AB 1 L J
EL ?
UP
IT L I rt 1 I i
LLVfcL
LO*
-b -<
(-U) (H
PEP ORG
TV i T hft 7 T C
Y L I ru I b
LtVEL
L C. »-,
-?
UP
>19
H3>
OOc
t
UP
LEVEL
LOk,
LAB A?
LtVEL
LO*
A
UF
7C.C?
A
UF
CA2AC1 SO? 12 -5 +? -2 + 5 -^ *<*
PARS ( 6) (-10) ( +5) ( -6) ( +u> ( -?) ( +7>
* 2£Ru PROBABILITY LIHITS ARE UCLUDEt IH THE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
C-73
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EKSL FRECIS I ON/AC CURACY REPORTING SYSTEK
COMPARISON REPORT OF CiADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 3/16/?j DATA SELECTED FO* YEAR I9g2 PAGL NO. U
REGION U5 ITATE 36 OHlu REP OK& U12 LAB 4??GC7
PRO&AGlLITy LIMTS
POL.CD. AUDITS LtVEL 1 LEV^L 2 LEVEL 2 LEyEL 4
L0t» UP L0» UP LO* UP LO* UP
C42401 Su2 c. -3 +20 -4 +18 -1 +11
PARS t 4) (-24) (+29) (-15) (+17) f-?0> (+21)
REGION .5 STATfc 36 OhlO REP OkG u 1 3 LAD 427U1C
POL.C a.
C424G1 S02
PARS
REGION ^5
POL. CD.
AUDITS
b
( 2>
STATE
AUDITS
LEVEL
LO*
-2V
( -7) (
36 0HI0
LEVEL
LOw
1
UP
+ 19
-4,
1
UP
-- --KK UB
LEVhL
LO*
19
(-12) (
LEVEL
LOW
fleu L i
2
UP
+ 5
-4 )
A C T 1 T
ABI L I
2
UP
II L i r. i I i -
LEVtL
LO*
-U
(-U) (
PEP ORG
TV t T fc T T C
Y L J ri I 1 o
LEVEL
LOW
3
UP
+ 9
-i.)
016
3
UP
LEVEL
LO*
LAB 4?
LEVEL
LOw
4
UF
7C1?
4
UP
C424C1 SU2 4 -16 -16 -1* -17 -?U -20
PARS I o> (-34) ( + 10) (-29) ( + 10) <-2t> ( +o )
REGION u5 iTATt 51 WjSCONSlK REF OKG G01 LAb 32bCC1
PROBABILITY LlfillS
POL.CD. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LlVtL 3 LtVEL 4
LOh UP LOW UP LO* UP LOW UF
C424C1 Su2 b -4b +32 -24 +1^ -2u +10
PARS i 1v) (-15) ( + 16) (-12) ( + 1G) (-U) ( +t ) (-11) ( -3)
* ZERO PRvBABlLITY LIMITS AK E INCLbt»El> IN THE CALCULATION OF THE AVER/K-ES
C-74
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EMSL PRE CIS ION / AC CUR AC Y REPORTING SYSTt*
COKPARISON REPORT OF OAOHS ACCURACY AUOI1S & FARS
DATE 3/16/&:> DATA SELECTED FOk YEAR 1og2 PAGE NO. 16
REGION Q6 STATE 32 NtW MEXICO REF OfcG L01 LAB 33GOC1
POL. CD.
C424G1 SU2
PARS
REGION U6
POL. CD.
AUDITS LEVEL
LO*
14 -34
C a) (-11) (
oTflTE 37 OKLrtH*
AUDITS LtVEL
LOl*
1
UP
«5
+ 6>
)MA
1
UP
PR
LfcV
LO*
-25
(-11)
r\ »".
LEV
LOw
Ub «B1 Li
t1- ^
UP
+ 0
( +7)
»" D A O 1 1 1
c B A B 1 LI
tL 2
UP
ly nn i i a --
LtVtL 3
LC» UF
-?fc +A
(-71) ( +V)
REF ORG 1C1
LEVtL 3
LO* UP
LO*.
-14
LAB 331
LEVEL
L0«
4
UF
-5
001
4
UF
C424L1 S^2 4 +7 +7 +4 +5 +3 +3
PARS ( 2> (-11) ( -9) (-14) ( -4) (-13) ( -V)
REGION U6 STftTt 37 OKLAHOMA Ftp CkG 1L2 LAb 431CG1
POL.CO. -UDITS
C424C1 S02 4 +17 +17 +2 +10 +9 +9
PARS (. 3) (-22) ( +1) (-Zt) ( +1)
PRC3A6IL1TY LIMITS ARE iNCtUOEb IN THE CALCULATION OF 1HL AVtRAGLS
LcVfcL
LOW
1
UP
-----K
Lt
LO.
h t/B^
VtL
^S-41-*
2
UP
IT L J
L
LO
ft 1 ts
LVtL ?
» UP
L
LO
EVEL
H
4
UF
C-75
-------
ENVIRONWcNTAt PROTECTION AGENCY EHSL FRE CIS ION/AC CUP AC V NEPOKTlNG SYSTLF
COMPARISON REPORT OF QADHS ACCURACY AUDITS & PARS
DATE 3/16/85 DATA SELECTED FOR YEAR lyft PAGE NO. 12
ON L9 STATfc 05 CALiFGRNIA PEF CkG 036 LAB 4^5Cl?
PR06 ABILITY LI MIS
POL.CO. AUDITS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 ILVEL ! LEVEL 4
LOW UP LOW UP LOk UP L0\» UF
C424L1 S02 15 -3d +25 -29 +?1 -31 +24 -31 +2t
PARS t 6) (-1ft) (+16) c -3) ( +1) ( -1) (+1b) (-1&) C+^^)
* 2£Ru PRuBABILITY LIMITS A«E INCLUDED IN ThE CALCULATION OF THE AVERAGES
«OA OOVf NNMENT PHINTING OFFICE: 1985/559-111/10813
C-76
------- |