EPA-330/1-82-001
MOTOR VEHICLE TAMPERING SURVEY - 1981
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE AND
HOUSTON, TEXAS
March 1982
National Enforcement Investigations Center, Denver
Office of Enforcement
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF LEGAL AND ENFORCEMENT COUNSEL
EPA-330/1-82-001
MOTOR VEHICLE TAMPERING SURVEY - 1981
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE AND
HOUSTON, TEXAS
March 1982
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Denver, Colorado
-------
DISCLAIMER
Mention of tradenames in this report does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION 1
1981 SURVEY OBJECTIVES 2
CONCLUSIONS 3
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND 6
SURVEY DESIGN 8
RESULTS 10
SITE AND AGGREGATE RESULTS 10
TRENDS, 1978-1981 10
TYPES OF TAMPERING 11
EFFECTS OF TAMPERING ON EMISSIONS 12
TAMPERING BY VEHICLE AGE 14
TAMPERING RATES BY VEHICLE MANUFACTURER 16
FUEL-RELATED TAMPERING 16
ADD-ON AND NON-STOCK EQUIPMENT 18
APPENDICES
A SECTION 103(a)(3)(A) and 203(a)(3)(B) OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
B DATA COLLECTION AND RECORDING PROCEDURES
C COMPUTER PRINTOUTS OF TAMPERING DATA
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• INTRODUCTION
• 1981 SURVEY OBJECTIVES
• CONCLUSIONS
-------
INTRODUCTION
The National Enforcement Investigations Center conducted a motor ve-
hicle tampering survey at two locations in September 1981 at the request of
the EPA Field Operations and Support Division (FOSD). During the survey, a
total of 399 vehicles were inspected at Houston, Texas and Chattanooga,
Tennessee.
A significant part of the Nation's efforts to achieve clean air stand-
ards has been directed toward controlling motor vehicle emissions. Accord-
ing to EPA estimates, motor vehicle emissions account for nearly three-
quarters of the total carbon monoxide, over one-third of the hydrocarbons,
and nearly one-third of the nitrogen oxides emitted to the atmosphere.* To
reduce these emissions, automotive manufacturers have installed control
devices on certain classes of new vehicles.
Congress has passed laws making it illegal for automobile dealers,
repair and service facilities, and fleet operators to disconnect or modify
emission control devices. These laws are contained in the 1977 Amendments
to the Clean Air Act under Sections 203(a)(3)(A) and 203(a)(3)(B) [Appen-
dix A]. The Field Operations and Support Division (FOSD) is responsible
for enforcing these sections, generally referred to as the tampering pro-
visions of the Act.
To determine the extent of tampering, surveys were conducted in 1978**
and 1979***. The 1978 survey was conducted by the Mobile Source Enforcement
Division (MSED — FOSD's predecessor organization) with the aid of an expert
* Unleaded Gas ... The Way To Go. Environmental Protection Agency,
OPA 13/0 January 1980
** Motor Vehicle Tampering Survey (1978), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Mobile Source Enforcement Division, November 1978
*** Motor Vehicle Tampering Survey (1979), Environmental Protection
Agency, National Enforcement Investigations Center, May 1980,
EPA-330/1-80-001
-------
consultant and the NEIC. The 1979 survey was conducted by the NEIC with
the aid of the same consultant and MSEO. These surveys used consistent
inspection procedures so statistical comparisons could be made. The re-
sults of these surveys are discussed in the Technical Analysis section of
this report.
1981 SURVEY OBJECTIVES
Two sites which had been used in prior surveys were selected for the
1981* survey -- Houston, Texas and Chattanooga, Tennessee. Houston was
selected to determine the effectiveness of FOSD's anti-tampering program
that has been in effect for the past 2 years. Houston had been included in
the 1978 and 1979 surveys, so it was possible to compare data from these
two previous surveys with data from the 1981 survey. Chattanooga was se-
lected to obtain an indication of any change in the rate of vehicle emis-
sion control device tampering at a site where there was no special anti-
tampering program. Chattanooga showed the least change in the combined
tampering and arguable tampering rates of three repeat sites in the 1978
•and 1979 surveys.
The objectives of the 1981 survey were:
1. Determine the current rate of tampering in Chattanooga, Tennessee
and Houston, Texas in order to ascertain the effectiveness of an
anti-tampering program in Houston
2. Determine current tampering trends for:
(a) the most prevalent type of tampering
(b) the effects of tampering on vehicle emissions
(c) the amount of tampering by vehicle age and manufactures
3. Determine the extent of fuel switching
No major tampering survey was done in 1980.
-------
4. Determine the extent of add-on and non-stock equipment installa-
tions that could affect emissions
To accomplish these objectives, an emission control device inspection
was performed on each vehicle. In addition, idle hydrocarbon (HC) and car-
bon monoxide (CO) emissions were measured, and fuel samples were taken from
vehicles requiring unleaded fuel. Vehicles requiring unleaded fuel were
also tested for tailpipe lead deposits with Plumbtesmo * test paper.
All vehicles inspected were classified into one of four mutually ex-
clusive categories: tampered (at least one control device removed or ren-
dered inoperative); arguably tampered (potential, but not clear-cut tamper-
ing); malfunctioning; and OK (all control devices present and apparently
operating properly).
CONCLUSIONS
The results for all four categories at both sites for the 1981, 1979,
and 1978 surveys are shown below. As will be noted later, the results are
not subject to exact comparisons.
HOUSTON SUMMARY
Vehicle Status
Tampered
Arguably tampered
Malfunctioning
OK
1981 Survey
(%)
9.6
46.9
1.4-
42.1
1979 Survey
(%)
22.5
50.4
1.7
25.4
1978 Survey
fty •v
\ifo /
22.2
59.7
1.4
16.7
* This is a product of Macherey-Nagel, Diiren, W. Germany, imported.
by Gallard-Schlesinger Chemical Mfg. Corp., Carle Place, N.Y.
-------
CHATTANOOGA SUMMARY
1981 Survey 1979 Survey 1978 Survey
Vehicle Status
Tampered
Arguably tampered
Malfunctioning
OK
19.5
43.7
3.7
33.2
22.6
46.7
0.4
30.3
20.4
44.4
0.9
34.3
The substantial drop in the tampering rate for Houston between the
1979 and 1981 surveys indicates that the FOSD anti-tampering program in
that city may have been successful. While the change is of obvious sub-
stantive importance, it cannot be conclusively tested statistically due to
variations in sampling. In contrast to Houston, Chattanooga was not one of
FOSD's target cities for concerted federal anti-tampering efforts. The
slight drop in the Chattanooga rate may reflect some impact of EPA's nation-
wide efforts to curb tampering.
The most prevalent form of tampering in the 1981 survey was filler
neck tampering (6% of vehicles), followed closely by exhaust gas recircula-
tion (EGR) system tampering (5.3% of vehicles). This result is a departure
from the 1978 and 1979 surveys when EGR tampering was the most prevalent.
However, limiter cap removal remained the most prevalent type of arguable
tampering for all 3 survey years. These results may indicate a trend
toward filler neck tampering, but more data is needed before a definite
conclusion can be reached.
A strong correlation between tampering (including arguable tampering)
and high idle emissions has been demonstrated by data from all three survey
years - 1981, 1979, and 1978. For the 1981 survey, the average idle CO and
HC emissions was over three times higher for tampered vehicles than for OK
vehicles.
Other results of the 1981 survey further substantiate the conclusions
reached in the 1979 and 1978 surveys that the tampering rate increases with
-------
the age of vehicles and that vehicles made by foreign manufacturers have
lower tampering rates.
The extent of fuel switching for both 1981 sites was down slightly
from the rates recorded in the 1979 survey. While the percentage of vehi-
cles requiring unleaded fuel that had leaded fuel in their tanks was down
slightly from the 1979 survey, other fuel-switching indicators in the cur-
rent survey provided evidence that fuel switching is still an important
problem. A very low incidence (0.5%) of add-on and non-stock equipment was
observed during the survey.
-------
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
• BACKGROUND
• SURVEY DESIGN
• RESULTS
-------
BACKGROUND
Prior to 1978, the Mobile Source Enforcement Division had data showing
that tampering was occurring. However, these data were inconclusive due to
the variability in inspection procedures and inspectors. Therefore, in
early 1978, MSED decided to conduct a tampering survey on a national level
that used consistent procedures.
The objectives of the survey were to determine: (1) the rate of
tampering on a national level, (2) the common types of tampering, and
(3) if a relationship existed between tampering and idle emissions. The
survey was conducted from May through August 1978, under the direction of
MSED, by an expert consultant with assistance provided by the National
Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC). Of the 1,953 vehicles inspected
at six sites* throughout the country, 19% showed tampering, 48% showed
arguable tampering,** 2% showed control device malfunctioning, and 31%
showed no visible signs of tampering or malfunctioning. The most common
type of tampering observed was EGR system tampering. Idle emissions from
tampered vehicles were higher than idle emissions from vehicles that showed
no signs of tampering.
To remain abreast of the tampering rates, MSED requested that the NEIC
conduct a second nationwide tampering survey during the summer and fall of
1979. In addition to the objectives of the 1978 survey, the 1979 survey
sought to (1) compare the tampering-rates in areas with inspection and main-
tenance regulations (I/M areas) with those having no inspection and mainten-
ance regulations (non-I/M areas) and (2) check for sampling bias*** that
may have been introduced because participation was voluntary during the
survey. The survey was conducted from June through November 1979 by the
* Washington, Virginia, Texas, Tennessee, Maine, and Delaware
** The term "arguably tampered" means potential but not clear-cut
tampering.
*** Because the survey was voluntary, drivers who had knowingly tampered
with their vehicles may have avoided inspection, thus biasing the
tampering rate lower.
-------
NEIC. Of the 2,499 vehicles inspected at eight sites,* 18% showed tamper-
ing, 46% showed arguable tampering, 2% showed control device malfunctioning,
and 33% showed no signs of tampering. Again, the most common type of tam-
pering was EGR system tampering, and idle emissions from tampered vehicles
were higher than idle emissions from vehicles showing no visible signs of
tampering. The survey also showed that tampering rates in I/M areas were
lower than those in non-I/M areas, and there was a possibility of negative
sample bias due to voluntary participation.
A major tampering survey was not conducted in 1980; however, 242 vehi-
cles were inspected in Rhode Island during June, and the data were given to
the State for review. In September 1981, FOSD asked NEIC to do the survey
that is the subject of this report.
* Arizona, Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and
Virginia
-------
8
SURVEY DESIGN
A goal of inspecting 300 vehicles per location was set. All inspec-
tions were voluntary. The mix of vehicles that came to the inspection sites
was assumed equivalent to a random sample, and no attempt was made to ap-
proximate the national vehicle mix.
Inspections were done by teams ranging from two to five inspectors,
depending on the needs at the site. A designated team leader was respon-
sible for data and sample collection.
Each vehicle inspection included checking all emission control systems,
recording basic data about the vehicle including the addition of certain
after-market parts, measuring idle HC and CO emissions, obtaining a fuel
sample from vehicles requiring unleaded fuel, and using Plumbtesmo paper to
check the tailpipe for lead deposits. Inspections were limited to 1975 and
newer light-duty vehicles, excluding those fueled with diesel, but including
those fueled with propane, alcohol, or alternate fuel. The inspection pro-
cedures required objectively determining and recording the condition of
emission controls. A determination whether conditions constituted tampering
was not made at the time of inspection. A detailed explanation of the in-
spection data required and the recording procedures are contained in Appendix B.
Refusal for inspection was documented; results from the 1979 survey
showed a possible negative bias on the tampering rate due to the voluntary
nature of the inspection. Although the refusal rates differed from site to
site (22% for Chattanooga and 37% for"Houston), this difference probably
reflects the methods of driver solicitation.
In Chattanooga, drivers at the city safety inspection station were
asked to participate. These drivers had taken time to make a special trip
to the inspection station to update their inspection stickers. The few
extra minutes required for the tampering inspection may not have inconven-
ienced them.
-------
In Houston, drivers at service stations were asked to participate.
Some of those asked were there for safety inspections but most were there
to buy gas. Many of the gas customers were probably more sensitive to the
time requirement of the tampering inspection, so a higher refusal rate
would be expected.
The location, dates, number of vehicles inspected, number of fuel sam-
ples analyzed, refusal rates, description of each site, and procedures used
to obtain vehicles for inspection are given below.
Chattanooga, Tennessee - City-run safety lanes
Dates September 14-18, 1981
Vehicles inspected 190
Fuel samples 157
Refusal rate 22%
Chattanooga has a city-wide annual safety inspection requirement which
is conducted at a four-lane inspection station. The tampering inspection
was performed at the exit of the only active lane.
Because vehicles registered in the County are no longer subject to an
annual inspection, vehicle flow through the safety lanes was lower (pres-
ently 500-700/week) than previous years, and the goal of 300 vehicles was
not met.
Houston, Texas - Private garage inspection
Dates September 21-25, 1981
Vehicles 209
Fuel samples 187
Refusal rates 37%
The Texas Department of Public Safety will not assist with roadside
inspections; however, they did assist with a private garage inspection.
The Department obtained permission for the NEIC to conduct the inspections
at the two busiest safety inspection garages -and accompanied the tampering
inspection teams to the garages on the first day. Two inspection teams
were sent to Houston to cover the inspection garages simultaneously.
-------
10
RESULTS*
SITE AND AGGREGATE RESULTS
Inspection results for each site and for all vehicles are listed below.
RESULTS BY SITE (%)
Vehicle Status
Tampered
Arguably tampered
Malfunctioning
OK
Vehicles Inspected
Houston
9.6
46.9
1.4
42.1
100.0
209
Chattanooga
19.5
43.7
3.7
33.2
100.1
190
Aggregate
14.3
45.4
2.5
.37.8
100.0
399
The system of classifying vehicles must be considered when evaluating
the above results. As the data for each vehicle were processed, the vehicle
was classified into one of four categories: tampered, arguably tampered,
malfunctioning, or OK. Since each vehicle inspected has various components,
each of which could be tampered, the vehicle itself is classified by the
worst state of any component in the vehicle. Thus, if any one component is
"arguably tampered", and all the others are functioning properly, the entire
vehicle is considered "arguably tampered". Hence, an "OK" vehicle must
have all observed components functioning properly.
TRENDS. 1978-1981
A comparison of the results by site from the 1978 and 1979 motor ve-
hicle tampering survey to the 1981 survey is presented below.
Computer printouts of the data used to produce the tables and figure in
this section are contained in Appendix C.
-------
11
In an effort to restrict the vehicles considered for this comparison
to the most recent 5 or 6 model years, certain changes were made in the
vehicle mix used. The 1978 and 1979 surveys included vehicles of model
year 1973 and later. The 1981 survey included vehicles of model year 1975
and later. Since a major modification to emission control systems occurred
in 1975 (addition of catalytic converters), it is possible that including
pre-catalyst cars in the earlier two surveys might impair the ability to
compare results precisely.
COMPARISON OF 1978, 1979, and 1981
RESULTS BY SITE (%)
Vehicle Status
Tampered
Arguably tampered
Malfunctioning
OK
Tampered
Arguably tampered
Malfunctioning
OK
1978 Survey 1979
Houston
22.2
59.7
1.4
16.7
Chattanooga
20.4
44.4
0.9
34.3
Survey
22.5
50.4
1.7
25.4
22.6
46.7
0.4
30.3
1981 Survey
9.6
46.9
1.4
42.1
19.5
43.7
3.7
33.2
As can be seen, the tampering rate for 1981 changed significantly for
Houston, dropping to less than half the 1978 and 1979 rates. However, the
1981 tampering rate for Chattanooga fell only nominally from the 1978 and
1979 values.
TYPES OF TAMPERING
There is a wide range of emission control devices subject to tamper-
ing. To better understand the tampering problem, the devices most commonly
tampered with have been identified.
-------
12
Filler neck restrictor tampering followed by EGR system tampering were
the most prevalent forms of tampering, and limiter cap removal was the most
prevalent form of arguable tampering for the 1981 survey. The filler neck
restrictor tampering results are a departure from the 1978 and 1979 surveys
when EGR system tampering was the most prevalent form of tampering. The
rates of tampering and arguable tampering by type are tabulated on the fol-
lowing page for the 1978, 1979, and 1981 surveys. These rates reflect the
percentate of vehicles exhibiting a certain type of tampering among those
vehicles equipped with the particular device. For instance, 82.5% of those
vehicles originally equipped with limiter caps had them removed. Since
many vehicles (especially newer models) do not have limiter caps, it is
incorrect to conclude that at least 82.5% of all vehicles are tampered or
arguably tampered.
The drop in EGR tampering is rendered less dramatic by removing the
1973 and 1974 model year vehicles from the 1979 survey data and recomputing
the rates. For the EGR system, the recomputed 1979 survey rate is 7.5%,
and thus, the difference between the 1979 and 1981 surveys falls to 2.1%.
EFFECTS OF TAMPERING ON EMISSIONS
To determine how tampering affects emissions, mean idle CO and HC emis-
sions were calculated for three categories of vehicles (OK, tampered, and
arguably tampered) for each model year. The results of the calculations
show that OK vehicles had lower average idle CO and HC emissions than either
tampered or arguably tampered, vehicles for five (1975-79) of the seven model
years compared. Also, the weighted-average* emissions for OK vehicles were
less than one-third the weighted-average emissions for tampered vehicles
for both CO and HC. These results further substantiate the 1978 and 1979
motor vehicle tampering survey results which also showed lower idle CO and
HC emissions for OK vehicles compared to tampered and arguably tampered
vehicles.
* The weighted average takes into account the number of vehicles in each
model year. For example, an average (year) with 50 vehicles would have
five times the value as an average (year) with 10 vehicles when com-
puting the weighted average for all years.
-------
13
RATES OF TAMPERING AND
ARGUABLE TAMPERING BY TYPE
Type of Tampering
EGR1 System
EGR Valve
EGR Sensor
Air Pump Belt
Air Pump Control Valve
Air Pump
Catalytic Converter
Aspirators2
PCV1
Vacuum Spark Retard
Idle Stop Solenoid
Heated Intake
ECS1 Storage
Filler Neck Restrictor
Li miter Cap
ECS Tank Cap
Tank Label
Dash Label
Heated Intake
1978 1979
Rate (%) Rate (%)
Tampering
13.0
11.9
5.3
5.7
2.9
3.2
1.2
-
3.3
10.5
0.7
0.8
2.6
3.4
Arguable Tampering
65.0
0.3
5.2
0.6
8.5
9.9
4.6
7.1
4.5
2.1
2.2
1.2
2.4
2.7
1.5
0.6
1.1
2.4
3.8
62.1
0.6
4.4
0.7
8.0
1981
Rate (%)
5.4
4.9
4.9
3.1
3.6
3.1
3.5
0
1.5
0.6
0
0
2.0
6.4
82.5
0.8
4.0
0.3
9.0
EGR: Exhaust gas recirculation
PCV: Positive crankcase ventilation
ECS: Evaporative control system
Aspirators were not checked during the 1978 survey.
-------
14
MEAN IDLE EMISSIONS OF
TAMPERED AND OK VEHICLES
Mean Idle CO (%)
Mean Idle HC (ppm)
Model Year OK Tampered
Arguably
Tampered
OK Tampered
Arguably
Tampered
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
Wt.-Avg.
1.05
1.08
0.62
1.45
0.66
0.35
0.58
0.65
1.94
2.53
3.38
2.44
1.56
0.10
2.39
1.98
1.82
2.81
1.96
1.48
0.99
1.56
1.96
75
142
112
225
112
53
53
87
350
341
376
246
180
17
294
178
239
230
194
163
36
60
182
TAMPERING BY VEHICLE AGE
Consistent with the 1978 and 1979 data, the tampering rate increases
with the age of vehicles and, correspondingly, the OK rate decreases with
the age of vehicles. The percent of tampered and OK vehicles is listed by
age below.
TAMPERING BY VEHICLE AGE
Age
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
Model
Year
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
Sample
Size
57
63
59
79
66
52
22
Tampered
(%)
1.8
4.8
8.5
15.2
21.2
28.8
31.8
OK
(%)
89.5
61.9
47.5
16.5
12.1
17.3
9.1
On the following page, the data from the table above have been fitted
to a straight line to demonstrate the increase in the tampering rate over
the life of the vehicle population; also shown is tampering rate vs
vehicle age from the 1978 and 1979 surveys.
-------
1OO-
90-
1978 SURVEY: Y - 3.627 + 5.574X
80-
1979 SURVEY: Y = 4.162 + 4.439X
70-
1981 SURVEY: Y = -2.823 + 5.382X
o
6O-
50-
«j 40-
3O-
20-
1O-
O.
I
4
I
5
6
I
7
8
AGE (YEARS)
Tampering Rate vs Vehicle Age
-------
16
TAMPERING RATES BY VEHICLE MANUFACTURER
To compare tampering rates occun'ng to vehicles made by different man-
ufacturers, 1978, 1979, and 1981 data were examined (see table on following
page); all foreign manufacturers composed one group for this breakout.
Foreign-made vehicles consistently have significantly lower tampering
rates, while vehicles made by AMC have higher tampering rates.
COMPARISON OF 1978, 1979, and 1981 TAMPERING DATA
BY VEHICLE MANUFACTURER
Manufacturer
CMC
Ford
Chrysler
AMC
Foreign
1978
20.1
20.2
20.1
31.3
8.5
Tampering (%)
1979
17.3
20.1
24.2
27.5
7.5
1981
12.4
25.0
12.5
33.3
3.9
FUEL-RELATED TAMPERING
Multiple Indicators
The 1981 survey used three indicators of fuel switching: (1) fuel
filler inlet restrictor tampering, (2) a Plumbtesmo test for lead deposits
in the tailpipe, and (3) more than 0.05 g/gal. of lead in the gasoline.
For several reasons, it was felt that any one indicator would not give
a representative evaluation of fuel switching. For example, a vehicle im-
properly fueled with leaded gasoline during a gasoline shortage may have a
deactivated catalytic converter, but due to proper subsequent fuel use
there might be little detectable lead in its fuel tank. This situation may
also characterize the "occasional" user of leaded fuel. Similarly, al-
though the presence of lead in the fuel is a strong indication of switch-
ing, its absence does not indicate that switching has not occurred in the
-------
17
past. A vehicle with an untampered fuel filler inlet restrictor may have
been fueled with a funnel or similar device. Or, the tailpipe lead test,
due to the difficulties of field administration, may fail to indicate the
presence of lead, and other vehicles may have had tailpipes replaced since
they were operating on leaded fuel.
In these and similar situations, the risk of obtaining non-representa-
tive survey findings was lessened by using multiple indicators to measure
fuel switching.
Fuel-Switching Rates
About 16% of the vehicles requiring unleaded fuel were identified as
fuel-switched by at least one of the indicators discussed above. The fol-
lowing table displays the rates found for individual indicators, as well as
the composite rates for both cities. The individual cities closely follow
the overall sample except for filler inlet restrictor tampering for which
Houston's rate was lower.
FUEL-SWITCHING RATE FOR 1981
SURVEY BY SITE AND BY INDICATOR
At Least One >0.05 g/gal. Tampered Positive
Site Positive Indicator Lead in Gasoline Filler Restrictor Tailpipe Test
(%) (%)
Chattanooga
Houston
Overall
16.8
15.5
16.1
6.7
7.7
7.2
8.4
4.6
6.4
8.9
7.9
8.3
Comparing Surveys
Comparison with the 1979 survey requires examination of only the lab
analysis for lead in gasoline, since other indicators were not used or con-
sidered together in analyses. The"following table shows the difference in
-------
18
rates by site and year of survey. The 1981 rate appears to be lower in
both Chattanooga and Houston. This may be explained partially by the effect
of EPA efforts to curb this practice and by the disappearance of gasoline
shortage conditions.
LEAD CONCENTRATION GREATER THAN 0.5 g/GAL.
IN UNLEADED VEHICLES — 1979 AND 1981 SURVEYS
1979 Survey 1981 Survey
Fuel-Switching Rate Fuel-Switching Rate
Site by Lab Analysis (%) by Lab Analysis (%)
Chattanooga
Houston
10.3
10.4
6.7
7.7
Indicator Overlap
Although one might expect considerable overlap among the three indi-
cators of fuel switching, the survey results seem to show a relatively
small degree of overlap. This tends to lend credence to the position that
these measures reflect different aspects of fuel-switching activity.
Since incorrect positive indications are extremely rare, the percent-
age of vehicles with at least one positive indicator seems most reasonable
as a minimum estimate of the fuel-switching rate in these cities. The real
rate could possibly be higher due to the negative bias of the quickly field-
administered Plumbtesmo tailpipe test and the bias* always associated with
refusal to participate in a non-compulsory survey.
ADD-ON AND NON-STOCK EQUIPMENT
Add-on and non-stock equipment that could affect emissions is avail-
able in the market place. Such-equipment includes turbochargers, air
cleaners, intake and exhaust manifolds, distributors, exhaust systems, and
a variety of fuel-saving devices. During the 1981 survey, each vehicle was
checked for add-on and non-stock equipment; however, only two instances
were documented.
* The nature and possible magnitude of this bias was discussed in the 1979
tampering survey report.
-------
APPENDICES
A SECTION 103(a)(3)(A) AND 203(a)(3)(B) OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
B DATA COLLECTION AND RECORDING PROCEDURES
C COMPUTER PRINTOUTS OF TAMPERING DATA
-------
APPENDIX A
SECTION 203(a)(3)(A) AND
203(a)(3)(B) OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
-------
A-l
Section 203(a)(3): The following acts and the causing thereof are
prohibited --
(A) for any person to remove or render inoperative any device
or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under this title
prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser, or for
any manufacturer or dealer knowingly to remove or render inoperative
any such device or element of design after such sale and delivery
to the ultimate purchaser; or
(B) for any person engaged in the business of repairing,
servicing, selling, leasing, or trading motor vehicles or motor
vehicle engines, or who operates a fleet of motor vehicles, knowingly
to remove or render inoperative any device or element of design
installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine in
compliance with regulations under this title following its sale and
delivery to the ultimate purchaser.
-------
APPENDIX B
DATA COLLECTION AND RECORDING
PROCEDURES
-------
B-l
DATA COLLECTION AND RECORDING PROCEDURES
The following data will be recorded on the data sheet shown as Figure A-l.
a. Date
b. Vehicle identifying survey number - Vehicles shall be numbered
sequentially as they are inspected, and this number shall be
preceded by a site identifying letter.
c. Odometer mileage (in thousands).
d. Air cleaner, intake manifold, and exhaust manifold - if these
parts are original equipment a "P" is coded. If these parts
are aftermarket or non-stock a "6" is coded.
e. Model year - obtained from underhood emission label.
f. Make
g. Model
h. Exhaust system and distributor are coded "P" or "6" as explained
above under item d.
i. Turbocharger may be coded "P", "6", "A", or "0". The "A" is
used to indicate add-on equipment and the "0" for not equipped.
j. Carburetor - In column 30 a "P" is used to indicate that the
carburetor is a production unit (original equipment). If fuel
injection is used, then a "F" is recorded. If the carburetor
has been replaced with a non-stock unit, then a "6" is recorded
and if the carburetor is a sealed unit (without limiter caps),
an "S" is recorded. In column 31 indicate the number of
barrels for carburetors or an "I" for fuel injection.
k. Engine family/CID (cubic inch displacement) as recorded from
the underhood emission label.
-------
B-2
1. PCV (positive crankcase ventilation) line may be coded "P" or "A",
The "A" is used to indicate add-on equipment. Particular
attention should be paid to fuel economy devices installed in
the PCV line.
m. The category "other" may be coded "A" or "P" and is used to
designate other add-on equipment such as fuel line devices
added on to reduce fuel consumption.
The following codes, will be used to record data on the data sheet shown
as Figure A-2.
0 - Not equipped
1 - Item is functioning properly
2 - Electrical disconnect
3 - Vacuum disconnect
4 - Mechanical disconnect
5 - Incorrectly routed hose
6 - Non-stock equipment
7 - Missing item
8 - Misadjusted item
9 - Malfunctioning item
N* - Negative
Y* - Positive
*To be used in column 75 to designate the results of the Plumbtesmo
paper.
-------
3-3
The codes are designed so that the inspector can objectively record the
condition of the device and not have to make an "on the spot" judgement
with respect to tampering.
The following items will be inspected and the results recorded on Figure A-2.
a. Idle stop solenoid - This solenoid provides an idle stop for
maintaining idle speeds to the higher speeds needed to minimize CO
emissions. On some vehicles, it is used to close the throttle and
thus prevent run-on when the engine ignition is turned off. On
vehicles with air conditioning, it is used for increasing engine
idle speed to compensate for a decrease in idle speed when the air
conditoner is engaged.
With the air conditioner on, (or in non-air conditioned vehicles)
the solenoid should activate and contact the throttle linkage.
With the air conditioner turned off, there should be a small gap
between the solenoid stop and the throttle linkage.
The idle stop solenoid will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
2 - Electrical disconnect
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning - If the gap between the solenoid and the
throttle plate is incorrect.
b. Heated air intake - Provides warm air to the carburetor during cold
engine operation. The heated air intake will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect - If the vacuum line to the vacuum override
motor is missing or disconnected.
-------
B_4 4 - Mechanical disconnect - When the stovepipe is missing, dis-
connected or deteriorated. Also when the air cleaner has been
unsealed, i.e., inverted air cleaner lid, oversized filter
element, or holes punched into air cleaner.
6 - Non-stock equipment - Custom air cleaner.
7 - Missing item - Missing stovepipe hose
9 - Malfunctioning item - Problems with the vacuum override motor.
c. Limiter caps - Plastic caps on idle mixture screws designed to
limit carburetor adjustments. Limiter caps will be coded as follows;
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
4 - Mechanical disconnect - Tabs broken or bent
7 - Missing item
8 - Misadjusted item (sealed plugs have been removed)
d. Positive crankcase ventilation system - A typical configuration for
a V-8 engine consists of the PCV valve connected to a valve cover
and then connected to the carburetor by a vacuum line. The other
part of the system has a fresh air tube running from the air cleaner
to the other valve cover. The PCV will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect - When the line between the PCV valve and
the carburetor is disconnected
4 - Mechanical disconnect - When the fresh air tube between the
valve cover and the air cleaner is disconnected or removed.
7 - Missing item - When the entire system has been removed.
e. Evaporative control system - Controls vapors from the fuel tank and
carburetor. Some systems have two lines, one from the fuel tank to
the canister, and one from the canister to the carburetor or air
cleaner to air purge the canister. Other systems have a third
line, usually connected to the carburetor. The ECS will be coded
as follows:
-------
B-5
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect-Line from canister to carburetor or air cleaner discon-
nected.
4 - Mechanical disconnect-Line from fuel tank to canister disconnected.
5 - Incorrectly routed hose
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning item - When the purge line is connected to the
air cleaner and the air cleaner is unsealed.
f. Tank cap - Part of the evaporative system, the tank cap seals with
the filler neck to maintain a closed system. Tank caps will be
coded as follows:
1 - Functioning properly
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning item - Tank cap not sealing properly
g. Air injection system - Consists of an air pump driven by a belt
connected to the crankshaft pulley. The pump directs air through a
control valve and lines connected to the exhaust manifold. An air
injection system may also consist of an aspirator located in the
air cleaner that supplies air to the exhaust manifold. The air
injection system is broken down into three parts which are coded as
follows:
Air pump
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
4 - Mechanical disconnect
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning
Air pump belt
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
7 - Missing item
8 - Misadjusted item - Loose pump belt
Note: If the vehicle is equipped with an aspirator, the air pump
belt is coded "0".
-------
B-6
Air pump control valve
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect
4 - Mechanical disconnect
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning item
h. Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system - The standard configuration
consists of a vacuum line from the carburetor to a sensor (used to
detect temperature to activate the EGR valve), and another vacuum
line from the sensor to the EGR valve. Some systems have multiple
sensors and thus additional vacuum lines. The system directs a
portion of the exhaust gases back into the cylinders for the
control of oxides of nitrogen. This is one system where a func-
tional check will be performed.
Non-sealed EGR valve functional will consist of:
1. Visually inspecting to see if the valve, sensor(s) and hoses
are in place.
2. If the system is intact, revving the engine and checking
visually or by touch the EGR valve stem movement.
3. If the stem fails to move, pulling off the vacuum line to the
valve and checking for vacuum while the engine is revved. If
vacuum occurs, the valve is not functioning and the hose
nipple on the valve will be checked for blockage. If vacuum
does not occur, the line will be checked for blockage. If it
is not blocked, a hand vacuum pump will be connected to the
sensor outlet and the engine revved. If a vacuum is obtained,
the sensor is functional. If no vacuum is obtained, the line
from the sensor to the carburetor will be checked for vacuum
while the engine.is revved. If this line has vacuum, then the
sensor is not functioning and will be checked for a plugged
port.
-------
B-7
4. Some systems have a vacuum delay valve. If the EGR valve is
not functioning, checking the delay valve for plugs and that
it is not installed backwards.
Sealed EGR valve functional check will consist of:
1. Visually inspecting the system.
2. Disconnecting the vacuum hose to the EGR valve. The hand
vacuum pump will be connected to the valve and vacuum applied
with the engine running. If idle speed drops with the appli-
cation of vacuum, the valve is good. The vacuum pump should
then be inserted into the line leading to the valve's vacuum
source. The engine will be revved to determine if vacuum is
available. If vacuum is not available, the sensors and hosing
are checked using the same procedures described for the non-
sealed unit.
The EGR control valve and sensor are coded as follows:
EGR control valve
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect - Disconnect, removed or plugged vacuum line
7 - Missing item (entire valve removed)
9 - Malfunctioning item
EGR sensor
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
3 - Vacuum disconnect
5 - Incorrectly routed hose
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning item
-------
B-8
i. Catalytic converter - Oxidizes the CO and HC to water and C02 in
the exhaust gases. The converter will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
7 - Missing item (catalyst removed from cannister or entire
cannister removed)
9 - Malfunctioning item - High temperature discoloration usually
light blue.
j. Dash and tank labels - will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
7 - Missing item
k. Filler neck inlet restrictor (unleaded vehicles only) - The restrictor
is designed to prevent the introduction of leaded fuel into a
vehicle requiring unleaded fuel. It will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
4 - Mechanical disconnect - Widened to fit a leaded filler nozzle
7 - Missing item
1. Vacuum spark retard - Adjusts the timing as RPM changes. It works
on manifold vacuum which is a function of RPM. The vacuum spark
retard will be coded as follows:
0 - Not equipped
1 - Functioning properly
2 - Electrical disconnect
3 - Vacuum disconnect - Any removed, plugged, or disconnected
vacuum line
-------
B-9
4 - Mechanical disconnect
5 - Incorrectly routed hose
7 - Missing item
9 - Malfunctioning item
m. Tampering source - Drivers will be asked who services their vehicle.
The following codes shall be used to explain their answers:
K - Don't know
0 - Owner or non-mechanic
0 - Dealer
M - Mechanic
n. HC in ppm and CO in percent with the engine at curb idle.
o. Plumbtesmo - Plumbtesmo paper is used to check for the presence of
lead in vehicle exhaust pipes. A positive indication will be coded
as "Y" and a negative as "N".
The data sheet shown as Figure A-3 will be used to keep an accurate
record of those not participating. All forms will be numbered and
handled according to the NEIC document control procedures.
-------
B-10
FIGURE A-l
EPA VEHICLE TAMPERING SURVEY--BASIC DATA
LOCATION
I.D.
ODOMETER
o
I
tX. !>-• |S_
ui.i|2:;
-------
FlbUKL A-
w
5
(X
—
1^ 111
S tor acre rj
^-v
$
—
—
51
L'S
r<
(•„•
U
i^
'n
c
£J
—
w
p
5
r*
/-
&
i,?\ \tt
•»
/i
».•
S
TA
sr
t-
f\
*z>
,->
n
>
^
c
i_
c
(,'
1
—
?'
l\
\
• 1
Jj
C'
-
fc— ^
£
^*
^
*
~
^/v.
i»
CJ
>
c
>
_J
p.
1^
! fl
1
S
PdU liL ill
1."*
t"
VJ
o
n
r^
O
l/j
—
^
^ >
l»
C
i-i
c
i)
VJ
t.
>
c
o
^
j
^
\ <
X I
n
s
<
1
H
T* - -
i .-•-„
i'ST
r-i
C^
"rS
»-—
r*
n
re
/->
^
^
»J
VF"
— -t «
.. J
r->
O
"r.
-"i
r.
—
H
1
—
—
«>
U
0
X
S-'
o
T->
—1
t.
k
\^
—
'C
r;
jj
CJ
c:
$•
(C
^
o-7
u
R
>
—
i
JO] [si j |&2
0
o
c
I.'.
c-
c
ti
C|
c
c-1
—
—
ki.
IDLE
Er'.ISSIO
CO
«;
csjcc
\s
•:c .
pp^s
i—
57 j&Sj 00
r=
,.
"
—
.7
»
-
-
o
fn
xl
•S3
5
_j
QL
—
—
—
—
—
75
0 - Kot Equipped
1 - Functioning Properly
2 - Electrical Disconnect
3 - Vacuum Disconnect
4 - t-iechanical Disconnect
5 - Incorrectly Routed Hose
6 - No.n-stock Equipment
1 - Missing Item
3 - Misadjusted Item
9 - Mdifunction ing Item
(I - Negative
V _ Pn-i ti w-i
-------
APPENDIX C
COMPUTER PRINTOUTS OF
TAMPERING DATA
-------
TKST (IK K'K'ISVS 11/02/B1 PAGE
Fll.l unuAir (CT.fi rTnM OATK =
_*_ *_.*_•_* _*_* _*_*_* _*_*_*_*_* „*_*_* c P n s_s_t_ft_n_u_L_A.-T_i_o N OF *****«« *»»»»»»« f ,_,_
STATUS "tHlCLF TA%1PKR STATUS HY CTTY
*******»»»***,*,*******,,, ******«*******»*»*,,,,* PAGE ! OF 1
Rn,, pr-T r
mi, prr i
•pn f orr I r
STATUS 1
0. t M
"K I 41.7
I 1 5.1
30. I.. _ 3.7
TA"PF«FD [ 14. H
1 11.5
31. I M
AHGUAHI.F. 1 FICIF JT (SYMMETRTC1 = 0.01S82
—KfJ'jaLLJS-lAM-.H.r -0.04fiOl s r.C'J.lF-lr.AMCt-s O..lbfi5
Tft'i r - -0.0^158 SlfiMJf TCA'JCE = 0.1665
GV'IA = -n.ORlJl
_ SQ'IL' 1'i..D-C^.SYl'.ii:.tHIC)-= -0..OSlJ-O—KUJL-SIAiUS DEP.EKDE.MT. a_=0.04094_KIIH_CUJt-
5(i"tos'S 0 ( <5Y'1"'l'T1'ID = -0.04570
MA = n.oQon wTF'i STATUS OF.PFMnt.HT. = 0.11,734 WITH CITY DEPEMOF.NT.
-J'LAl'SUlJ'S_H_.=-.Q.J9«L73._SIGlllFJ.CAilC£_s 0...035J
-------
TF.ST (IF
- EILL
PACK
fCRPATTnM DATE = 10/90/ijll
r » n s STAB ti NATION
BY H Yu-
PAGE
f * * *
1 OF 1
nyn
kOlv PCT t
rr>i. vr-f f
T'T PCT I
0. I
PK J
I
-1 -
to. i
I
1
-T-
31. I
ARGUABLE I
T
I
• T -
11, 1
MHiVNCTNn ]
1
T
TnTSl.
7-i
•J
1.3
9.1
0 S
7
-1-2-^3-
31.8
1.8
17
6.6
b4 ,S
3.0
1
10.0
4.5
n, 3
27
5.5.
.1
I
I
T
I
T
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
I
T
76
0
17'. 3
? 3
15
28.8
26
14.1
hfl.O
6.5
,
20.0
n s
57
.1
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
1
I
I
I
77
y
5.3
12.1
2 0
14
74 *•
21.2
3.5
4J
23.8
10. H
1
10.0
1.5
__L6..5
.1
x
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
I
I
T
78
j,
8.6
16.5
3 3
12
21 1
15.2
3.0
St
2P.?
17. P
,
30.0
3.8
'
79
—1.9 . 8_
.1
j
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
r
i
i
T
79.
28
16.5
47.5
7 0
5
8.5
1.3
23
12.7
39 , o
5.8
,
30.0
5.1
ft ,B
1.4 . 8 .
I
T
I
I
j
I
T
I
r
i
i
T
T
T
T
I
80.1
3° I
25.8 I
61.9 I
9fl r
3 I
•> 1 I
4.P I
O.fl I
21 T
11.6 I
"i 1 X
5.3 I
0 I
0.0 I
0.0 I
0. n T
61
IS. 8
ei
5 j
33,8
89.5
ID A
i
1 0
i.e
0.3
5
a', fl
a i
1.3
0
0.0
0.0
0. 0
IT
14.3
.1
j
I
I
1
T
t
I
r
7
T
T
I
x
fl2
ioo|o
ft -i
0
0 0
0,0
0.0
n
o.n
n n
0.0
n
0.0
0.0
n n
1
- 0.3
.1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
j
I
j
I
I
ROW
TnTR T.
1 R 1
37.8
57
< A 1
181
45.4
2.5
399
ino.o
12 OUT nh V ( 37.
-RINIMUU . EXP-LCa EU_CELL._EKEoUtHCY_s _ 0 .025
CHI SQUARE = I49.15f.72 k FTH 21
RiJ, V =
OF THE VALID CFLLS HAVE EXPECTED CFLl, FREQUENCY LESS THAN 5,0.
OK
SIGNIFICANCE = 0.0000
= 0.37110 WITH STATUS DFPFwncNT.
IJNCEHTAI"1Y
KMOftLI.'S Tftll i^ =
KL!!UALL.LS_TAU_C_s
_= _ Q..JJL150_UIJH_5TA-TUS-
f SVM"KTHIC5 = 0.13237
-0.36764 SinnlFICAMCb1 e 0.0000
=0.35303 _ SIGMIF-ICAHCE-s _ ^0,0000
= 0.1281? WITH MYR
-DEPENDENT. = o'.-l 041-7 -WlTH-MYR .
D (ASY'-'-IETHIC"* = -0.31 290 WITH STATUS OfPEHDENT.
= -0.42030 WITH HYR
OEPENDKNT.
= o.baoi'j V'TTM srftrns DKP^NDENT.
Pt.flHSClN'5 R =-n,-S207" 5TG"If 1C ANCF = 0.0000
0.54434 WITH MYR
NUMliKR
UHSfRVATIOHR
-------
TKST 1>F
F.I LL LD N «i;£
I1/07/P1
PAGE 13
_(.CMLA.1LIU" DATE. = 11/07£fl J. )_
n F
* * *
PAGE 1 OF 1
M
HO>-; prT l
COL .per -i .
TOT prT I
FC.PHIIHU 1-
0. I
HOT EOHIPPFD 1
i
i
i. i
flUHCl-P.RQP.EHLY I .
T
I
- 1 ™
11. 1
1
14 T
"ALUWTTO'I I
1
-I-
CnL.M 'l
TUT*!.
YR
75
0
0.0
0.0
Q..O .
. 17
77.3
«. 1
9.5
U f
o.s
»
10.7
13. A
_5..b
.T
r
I
T
T
-T-
T
. T
T
I
-T-
t
r
T
1
I
I
T
-l-
7
o
0.0
0.0
42
_12. .4
HO.R
10.5
t°.o
7.7.
1.0
ft
71 .1
11.5
1..5.
L3.-Q-
n.I
T
I
I
I
I
I_
I
I
1
I
1
1
1
I
l
Tl. T
2. ..I.
70.0 T
3.0 T
n. t; T
52 I
-1-5 .-3 L
7R.R T
1 3.0 T
S I
73. R I
•;.fi T
J.3 T
7 T
75.0 I
10. b T
1 .H T
T-
66
. 1h.5
78.1
, *
30.0 I
3.8 I
D_v_c 1 —
6J 1
—17.9... I...
77.2 J
j 5. 1 i
7 1
33.3 1
R 0 I
l.R I
R T
28. * 1
10. 1 i
7.0 I
79
19. H
79. T
2 I
20.0 T
3.4 I
0 . b — 1_
•51 I
_1 b . 0 I
1 7 . H T
7 I
1.4 I
0.5 I
4 I
14.3 I
6.fl I
1 .0 T
M?:
flO.J
? I
20.0 I
3.7 1
— 0 . 5 — 1_
1-
60 I
17.1 i
95.2 I
15.0 I
1 t
4.B I
1 f, j
0.1 I
0 ]f
0.0 I
0.0 I
0.0 I
1-
63
-15.8
fil
\
10.0
1.8
0.3-
lb.5
14.0
0
0.0
On
0.0
n
0.0
0.0
0 . 0—
14??
.1
T
T
I
— I-
-T-
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
-I-
P?
o
0.0
0.0
— a. XL.
i
0 ?
loo. n
0.3
0
0.0
n n
0.0
n
0.0
0.0
0..0
1
O..V.
.1
I
I
I
-I
I
J
T
I
I
T
l
i
i
-i
-i
ROW
THT At
1 n
2.5
340
71
5.3
7.0
399
100,0
VAL.TU CI-LI.S HAVE EXPRTTED CELL FREQMCMCY LESS THAN 5.0.
.=—a ..o 2 5
21
Of FREEOHM SIGNIFICANCE = 0.1247
WITH FGRUUBH DFPENPENT.
= o.n
LA'M.OA ( ASY;-"'F_TR!C) = 0.0
0.0
-=—0.09030_WITH_tGRBuBU DhPEKUENl.-
= 0.04151
TflM n = -o. 19004 SIC'IIFICANTK = O.OOOQ
C -= -0.12012 S1GIU.KICAMCE. = 0.0000
WITH MVH
-0.0269i_WI.TH-M-YR-
-DEPENPEMT-.
n (ASYwt'TNTr) = -0.1"646 WITH
SY1 I1E1P.1C) _= -Q. 16206
t ra = 0.-M93? Jii1" F^pQiinii oFp^wnh.MT.
PEAHSMFl'S o =-0.?37l6 STC'-HFlCAMCf. = 0.0000
UfPFNOFMT.
= -0.33025 WITH
DEPPHDENT.
= 0.73^14 WITH «YK
DEPENDENT.
^^
CO
-------
OF
10/29/R1
PARE
NfUlAM-- __ fCRKBTTON ntTF =
******************
_Eca-cnm-gciT. VAL
CROSSTAB
U !• A T I n H
BY MYH—
n F
* * * *
r>
i
****** PACK 1 DF I
25 niJT nF 12 ( 78.1%) HF THt; VALID CF.M.S HAVE EXPECTED CEIjI, FPEO'lENCY TESS THAN 5.0.
SIGNIFICANCE = 0.2?bO
CHI SQUAit = ?5.52H"0 WITH 21 DEGREES "F FRtEDOM
CBAMFP'S V = 1.14504
.CnMTlHflt.urv rqtfc-irirr.ir.g 0.24523
I AMIJOA (a.sY'H'ETpTC) = 0.0 WITH FG"CMVL DFPRNnEMl'. = 0,0
-UHCERT.M:ll.Y_Cu!iE.EHCIE.rlJ_£ASYJ4llETRIIl)_= 0_,.Ofl.90-9-Ji'I.IH_ECRCUVL. DEPENDENT._
UHCtPTAH'TY Cni'FFiriKiJT CSYM'U.THTC) = 0.03618
KE«DAMi'S TA'l " = -0.14235 SIGNTFTCAHCK = O.OOOb
!_ = -0.0 8 251 SlGMIF-ICAUCt_= O..OQQb
WITH MYR
=—o'. 03333-WTTH-MYR-
D f ASYHXEfHTC) = -O.OTJ40 WITH FCRCMVL DEPRNnE^T.
= -0.27106 WITH HYR
DEPEMOENT.
PEAKSON'S
F:GRC"V'I
SIGHIFTCANCF = 0.0005
= o.i7f»i6 WITH HYH
DEPFNDFNT.
CO'lfIT J
pnw PCT 1
rni. DTT T
T"T PCT 1
", t
NOT fOMJPpco I
T
T
- 1 •
1. I
KIJHTT PROPFUl y I
I
I
11. 1
J
I
Id. 1
I
I
- 1 —
TOTAF,
75. T
n T
0.0 I
0.0 I
n.n T
11 J
* 4 T
H6.4 I
4.8 T
7 T
10.5 I
0.5 T
) T
4.8 T
4.5 T
n,\ T
22
76
n
0.0
O.fl
n.n
46
1' '
BB.5
H.S
4
21.1
7 7
1 .0
,
3!l
o.s
1 ' ,n
.1
1
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
77
,
2?. 2
3.0
•53
1 K, 1
80,3
13.3
5
26.3
7,5
1.3
f.
26.6
1 ,s
66
-16.5
.1
1
T
I
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
1
T
I
T
T
78.1
•> j
2?.? I
?.S I
0,S I
b4 I
81.0 I
16.0 1
f> I
31.6 1
1.5 I
"> I
33,3 I
0.9 I
I B X
79
T3.T
? T
77.2 I
3.4 T
0. "• T
51 I
1 4. f- I
86. 4 I
12. B I
1 I
b.3 I
0.3 I
5 T
23.8 T
8.5 I
1 • 1 I
59
1.4.8 .
no,
•)
72.2
3.?
o s
17 1
95.7
15,0
5.3
n
O.P
0.0
o n
63
-15.3
I fll
I i
1 11.1
I l.H
T n -a
I Sf
t 16.0
I 08,2
I 14.0
I (1
I 0.0
I oo
I 0.0
I 0
I 0.0
I 0.0
I 00
57
14.3
.1
I
T
y
I
I
T
T
T
j
I
T
I
I
j
82
n
0.0
o n
i
0 3
100, P
0.1
0
0.0
n n
P.O
n
0.0
0.0
ft n
1
0.3
.1
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
j
I
I
I
T
POW
T n T A L
9
2.3
350
at i
19
4.8
21
5.3
399
mo.o .. ... .
NUHBKR OF
-------
Tf.ST OF
10/29/fll
PAGE
_ML!JjLltE CCJtEAilnrj nftTF = ]fl/3.9/K I )
CMOS S TAR M t, BTIflN
.tGKS'JSB
PAGE 1 OP 1
COUNT i
H<"ivi PCX I
rnr PTT i
n T
MOT FfllllPI'FO I
I
t
-I -•
1. I
FDNPT PROPFHLV I
1
1
M . I
TAMPERING T
T
t
t a T
1
T
THTA1.
75.
n
0.0
0.0
1 J
4J3
2
10. b
">. t
o.s
^
lh.7
>3.6
n R
77
r
I
T
I
j
I
I_
I
T
I
1
T
r
f
T
T
f
7b.I
r, T
O.fl I
0.0 I
•
44 1
1 ? * T
I 1 !o I
4 I
21.1 I
7.7 I
1.0 I
A 1
22.2 1
7.7 I
in t
57.
-13..0
77.
.
27,3
4.5
n a
i s t
83.3
13. e
5
76.3
1.3
.,
1&.1
4.5
n a
66
—16. S —
T
T
T
I
T'
T
1
T
T
T
T
T
I
r
T
T
78
^
3|p
*
64
• E. 2
81.0
16.0
•i
6.3
1.3
7
3B.9
"
79
-19.8-
.r
I
r
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
'T
i
i
i
T
79.1
•5 r
ifi.? r
3.4 T
•S4 I
1 *•, & T
91.5 T
13.5 I
2 t
10.5 I
^.4 T
0.5 I
V T
S.h I
1.7 T
0.3 T
14.8
on
•f
3!?
ft «;
60
1 7 1
95.2
15.0
1
5.3
1 .fi
0.3
n
n. n
0.0
0.0
f>3
.1
I
I
1
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
81
1
9.1
1.8
*
Sft
1 6. n
H!O
0
0.0
0»0_
0.0
n
0.0
0.0
0.0
57
14.3
.1
I
I
T
i
i
i
i
i
T
T
T
T
I
T
82
n
o[o
1
n 3
100.0
0
n.o
ft.O
0.0
ft
n.o
0.0
1
0.3
ROW
.1
I 11
I 2.8
I
I
I 351
I "fl 0
I
I
-i
I 19
I 4.8
I
I
I 4.5
I
I
399
IflO.O
2S OUT nr .12 ( 7R.1*) OF THE VALID CF'Lr.S HAVE FXPECTFD CELL FREQUENCY LESS THAN 5.0.
..'1lMI'lUM_EAPECI£D_CELLi- FHEQ'JENCi-s 0.028
CHI SQUARE = ?.H.7f>?M V TTH 71 RECRFES PF FfE^Uf1" 5TCNIFICANCF = 0.1329
V s n.
liAMRDA (ISYf''FITRTCI = 0.0 WITH F.GPSNSR nEPRHnntlT. s 0.0
l.A»HDA (SVI'lTTPir) = 0.0
.UNCLRIAI{lTY_CaEF..E:.LCl£Nl_f ASXJ!|IEIP1CJ_= 0 .QgibS—BllH-CGRSNSP—DEPENDENT..
FririftT (.<;vi»MhTH:c) = 0.037S1
o = -0.17013 SI GUI* TCANTF. s 0.00*10
-MPDALLiS_TA" C-~ ?0. 09834 SlGNIHICA(iCE_= O.-OOCO
WITH MYR
-DEP-ENDFHT.
Siif"bRS'S D (dSYM'T.TRTCl = -0.0«716 WITH
_.SOM.fc.HSJ.S_D.tSVI'H?:TPIC)_= -0.13921
KTA s 0.71 IS) V'T]" ^RtiSM.stJ n> PFNTJ: MT.
PEftHSOH'S H =-0.7212» STOMIFIftMCF = 0.0000
DF.PFNDF.NT.
= -0.13364 WITH HYR
DEPENDKNT.
s 0.72204 WITH HYR
DEPENDFHT,
-------
TEST UF NEWS'*!:
Fll.F IJONAMF
APMPPI.T
1
fCRK»TTO'l PATE = 11/02/81)
AIR PlUP BF|,T I1Y MYR
11/07/81 PAGE
O
10 OUT PF 74 ( 41.7%1 OF THF VAMD CELLS H»VF FXPECIED CELL FREQUENCY t.KSS THAN 5.0.
MINIMUM F.'X'TCTFD C^Lli F'Kf'OUfJCY = 0.01b
-C]|I_.SULJA!!h._= 10^.3689:1—JTTH l-d_DIO;EEE.S_QK_FlR.tEDDa SIGNJF-ICAHCE-S 0.-00-00
CRAW! rt'S V = 0.3bRl6
COMTI''Gt.'iCY roffPlClEriT = 0.4MR6 ,
I.A«BUA (SY"tFTPfC) = 0.1717S "
iriK'lT (ASY'1MCT»IC) = P.18102 WITH APMPHl.T OEPE'IDENT.
11C t EvT_t.s YiafctH-I C-l-= 0-.-1 C 0 7 7
KtNi:AI,l.'S TAN B = 0.29S49 51C.N IPIC»HCE = 0.00"0
KtUnAII.'S T*n r = 0.71S68 SIfiw!FTC*NCK = 0.0000
_G & V.HA _= C-.-4
AP'IPHI.T
NOT Kf
FUMCT
TA'lfEl
COUNT i
cm, PTT i
0. 1
juipprn t
i .
i
• T ~
1.. I
PRnpFRT,Y 1
I
j
-1 -
11. I
I
I
-I-
TOTAI,
7S
1 j
b.4
•5Q, 1
3. 1
o
5.9
40.9
2 3
0
0.0
0.0
72
5.S
.1
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
T
1
T
76
34
14.7
ftS t
15
i a
3
— 50.Q--
5.1
0.8
b?
13. c
.1
I
I
T
I
T
J
I
j
i
77
58
24.2
"7.1
14. S
7
10.6
1 9
1
1 ft 7
l.S
0.3
66
16. S
.1
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
78
7S.O
7*> o
15.0
1°
24*. 1
4 P
0
n 0
0.0
0,0
79
JQ.B
.1
r
i
j
i
i
i
i
i
i
T
I
1
79,
41
17.1
10.3
17
U.I
28. 8
4.3
1
ife.v
1.7
0.3
59
14.8
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
I
Rl
24
10.0
)R 1
6.0
38
24. R
60.3
n s
1
167
1.6
0.3
63
15. fl
3.1
I
I
j
I
j
1
I
I
I
I
I
81
10
4.2
IT c«
2.5
47
30.7
R2.5
11 A
0
0 0
0.0
0.0
57
14.3
.1
I
r
T
T
I
I
T
t
T
T
. T
"2.
n
0.0
n n
0.0
,
0.7
100.0
0
n p
0.0
0.0
1
0.3
J
I
I
1
I
1
T
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
TOTAL
240
fiO.2
4 Kl
3R.3
6
Vi«
100.1)
= 0.06977 WITH MYR
SOMI-HS'S D (ASY'VETRIC)
SU'lfi'S 0 (<;Y".'-PTI'li") =
-t t A- = - CL-.-13 J S l_a 7_U.'_
PEARSON'S * =
0.22507 WTlH
0.781H7
0.3R794 WITH
PEPEMDKflT.
5T(.NJFIC4"C«: = 0.1046
-------
TEST 01- «EW5»S
11/02/Bl
PAGE
FIt.E [JHN4MF (l'PtATTQ*l HATE s
ACHTUL ft I" cnnrnrji v*r,
1 1/02/H1)
n I, A T T n N n r *****
BY MYR
. .- RfVV VCT
COL PCI
TOT HCI
0.
MPT H)llIPpl.n
,
FIJIICT PR'IpFpl.y
M.
TAMPF.UTNr.
TOTAL
I
I
1
I
r
T
T
I
-J-
-T-
I
T
t
t
-T-
,5
n
6.3
-59^]
J.J
o
4. j
1
14.3
4.S
0.3
22
5.5
.1
-T-
T
I
T
T
..T.
T
T
-T-
I
T
I
T
-T-
7fi.r
30 r
b"7 7 t
7.S I
1" 1
0.7 I
34. ft I
• •» I
S7 1 f
7.7 I
13.0
77
75.1
7-R.8—
13.0
1 •>
7.0
1
-L4-.-3
l.b
0.3
Ifi.b
.T
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
7fl
53
25.6
8-7 .-1
2P
H.I
37.9
0
n.,n
0.0
P.o
19. R
'.I
I
I
1
I
T
I
I
.-I-
J
T
T
I
7<
37
17.9
6 ?-. -7
9.3
?1
U.4
35.6
5.3...
t
1-4. J
1.7
0.3
59
ti. a
I.T
T
I
I_
T
1
I
T
T
T
T
I
T
ft 0 . 1
16 I
7.7 I
?•> 4 I
4.0 I
74.'ft I
—11-. 8 1—
1-
n I
n n i
0.0 I
O.P I
63
15. R
Rl
f,
2.9
1 A S
1.5
t; j
77.6
_ I.?.. 8—
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
57
14.3
.1
I
I
T
I
I
I
— I-
-I-
I
T
T
I
B2
0
0.0
fl n
o.o
10".'o
n
o!o
l
0.3
.1
I
I
T
I
I
I
-I
I
J
I
I
TOTAL
207
51.9
46.4
7
1 P
309
100.0
10 OUT OF 74 C 11.7*1 PF THF VALID CFLLS HAVE EXPECTED CFI.l, FREUUENCY IjF.SS THAN 5 0
•ijfi].Miiv FXPKCTFP CFL,(. FRKOHF.UCY = o.ois
-CH1_SJUAR-K_= ina.. 4J-705_U1.T.H l.a_nhG4lt:NIF-]CAtlCE_= 0.0000
rRALPH'S v = — "
rnti'i
_LA"BDA_r iS-YJIMi TS.IC-1_= 0.40-1 Oa_l-,.TtH_lCW-TJ/L nEP-EhDEN-T-.
'jA^'SSHA ( 5Yf(l KT^If") = n. 70703
MMfrRTAI'lTV rQc-F=-irirriT f;, .<: Y :*'•! K T»I r) = 0.16537 WITH AHJTVIj DEPENDFNT. r 0.07448 WITH MYR
-JU M C L BIAIJJJC J_C 0 E F El C1 EM T_f.S Y L!i!k.T B_I C.)_= 0 . 1-0 6 2 J
KE"0«[I'S Till r. - 0.206QO STONI f Ir AiJCE = 0,0000
Kt^DAI.lj'S TA"i r = 0.2941fi SICHIFICAUCK = O.OOOQ
_GA»1KA_S 0.4JJ.5.7
= 0. 0.9062_t'-I.TH-MYR
DEPENDENT.
Ml^FRS'S I) f flSY«'iF;T(JTCl = 0.2317b WITH ACNTVL
sn^Ffs's n (iY"-Mni»tr) = O.^RIJO?
__tl A _s —0. 2QC6 7 _1-J 1"_ AC-'IT VU DERENDEHT-.
PEAR.snn"; P =-n.n(;3?7 sinuiFir»»JCF = 0.4740
DEPENDENT.
= 0.38037 WJTH MYR
DEPENDENT.
O-
•xj
-------
itsi (IF ME.KSKS 1 i/02/fi i
Fii.r i.!nvi&.tF rrHrATTnn IIBTP = 11 /no/Ail
AIRP'!VO
PAGE. fi
* PAGE 1 OF 1
O
00
TOTAL
5.5
n.o
16.b
19.8
14.B
15.8
14.3
0.3
100.0
PF TBF VALID-CELLS H.a.V.E_EXP-LCtED-CELL_gREnUtHCY_Lt.SS-THAH-5..-Q.-
CFLI. KHKIUKUCY = o.ora
CHI SOUABE = 101.97745 MTU 14 DC^RFKS np FPfF.nrw SIGNIFICANCE = o.oooo
y_= _ Q-.-35J 4-5 ______
LAMt'DA C^bV
IINCt RTAJ'JTY
-KL.MLftLLU
GAMwfl =
KF iriF«T = 0.45117
= 0.37919 ultJH
-F. r.H ic )_= — Q..-
DEPENOENT,
= 0.09687 WJTH HYR
DEPENDENT.
ROi; PCT I
cm. >>(-]• i
•pup ^i i
n l
UrtT fOUIP.'FD I
I
1 . 1
I
r
11 . i
t
• i -
rnt MUM
75. T
1 3 T
S.b I
591 I
b ' I
36.4 I
2.0 T
1 T
16.7 T
4 , s T
0. j I
5?
76
<<1
14.3
65.4
8 **
15
o 7
28.6
3.S
bO.O
•; P
n.fl
17
,1
I
I
I
J
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
77
^7
23.9
86.4
1 4 3
8
5. 2
12.1
2.0
1
16.7
i . "i
0.3
Pf-
f
I
T
T
T
T
1
T
I
T
T
78
nn
2b.2
7S.9
15.0.
19
24.1
4.B
0
0.0
ft.n
7F.NT.
-------
TEST nF
Jl/02/81
PAGE
MOM »X
f-CHLA I10il_DAi
IL/J)2/-BU-
r R o s s T
*********************
B n i, A T i n M
B X Hi H_
0 F
PAGE 1 OF 1
per i
POW
n j
'JUT F.QI'lopFH T
T
~ I "
1 . 1
FnMfT PRCJPrwI Y 1
I
T
4. t
''E.CH UTSCnMnKCT I
I
1
1 1 1
TflMHERTNG I
I
T
-1-
14. I
T
1
TOTAI
7S
,
in. 7
1 1.6
14
"3.6
3.5
1
"iO.O
0.3
a
1.1.3
lid
0
0.0
0.0
77
. r
T
I
I
j
I
T
T
t
T
T
T
T
I
I
T
-!-
r
T
T
T
7h
a
14.1
7.7
i n
41
i i <;
7°. 3
10.1
1
iO.O
i q
o.l
4
31.1
7.7
7.
inn n
3.8
0.5
b?
il. n
.1
T
I
j
I
I
I
1
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
77
-i
75.0
10.6
5B
t f.. 1
87.9
0
0.0
n.n
0.0
\
5.3
1.5
.0.3
0
n.n
0.0
n. o
fift
16. b
.1
T
T
T
T
J
T
T
T
T
I
I
T
-T-
I
T
T
T
78
B
78.6
7 0
71
2.0 0
n!«
o.«
0.0
n
n.n
n.n
CL.O_
0
n.n
o.n
0.0
19. fl
.1
T
I
I
7
\
1
T
1
I
I
I
I
_I_
-I-
I
J
I
I
79
4
14.3
6.H
I . n
53
_14-. 9
89.8
13.3
0
0.0
0 tO
0.0
1
16.7
3.4
0.5-
0
o.n
0.0
0.0
59
14.8
.T
I
I
T
T
j
i
T
T
T
T
T __
I
I
T ..
-T —
I
I
I
I
flO
7
7.1
3.7
f>0
169
is|o
0
0.0
o.n
1
.".3
1.6
_Q.3_
0
0.0
o!o
63
I5.fl
.1
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
-I_
-I-
I
[
I
I
m.
ft
0.0
o.o
1
57
If. 1
100.0
14.3
n
0.0
n.O
0.0
n
0.0
0.0
o.n ..
n, n
0.0
0.0
57
14.3
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
T
I
J
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
I
T
17.
n
0.0
o.o
n n
1
n t
100.0
0.3
0
n n"i.Hsls o (SYu-'-(-'jp ir ) = -0.01071
= -0.02771 WITH HYH
DEPKHDEKT.
I
VO
-------
.'jAS
1 i"Pt Rl»if, DATA
r-CRi.Jua.un_DiTi-.:_=_u_/-i.o^8i-)-
11/10/Pl
PAKE
. 5TM-1JS VI-IUCLE—.TAI'HEK-STAUli.
c n P s s T A R n r. A T i P n n F
BY AJ HP-HE
A ID Pll' t1 RFJ.T
_*_»_..¥_*._.*_*_* „*.. *_*--*_*_*_
VALUE =
0. NOT EQUIPPED
O
I
_PJU,E l_OF 1-
Mil m i
cm, FTT IPJ-PD
I Ol'I JIUiTT P°
TUTflL
STATUS
Dt
TAfPKHFI)
t
ii.Lfc-Kr.T_UD.
P
10
^ 1
3 )
I
I
T
I
I
. I
1
- 1-
I
- - 1-
1
I
. I
I
I
74
J 00 ft
M.3
1^0.0
--1 it 1 -
- - 1 1 7-
. Ah 7
b
Bft q.
3.4
I
T
T
T
-T _
r
_T
T
t
I
I
T
T
I
n
n n
0.0
0.1
r\
o.o
-O ft_
o.o
?
».l»
f.P.7
—0 ft
1
t 1 '
33.3
0.4
I
T
I
I
I
I
_ j
1
I
T
T
I
I
I
74
"^ 0 B
43
17.9
1 1 t
4V. b
9
3 B
CPLM-"
T()Tf I
7J7
3
1.3
240
100.0
4 M|!T OK H t bO.'llil PK THE VM.TP CELLS HAVF FXPtCTFD CELL FREQUENCY LESS THAI 5.0.
run: FxPfcnrn CFI.I. FRPOUI HCV = 0.112
APiv- = ----- p.^nsop U.TTH - j—nE.cpE-hs— ot— f-R-ERnau - S-I-GUJF-IGANCE— = — 0-,-oJao
r\tt>i fp'.s v r n. 1 1( i b*
Cci-1'! ir.r.*' O rrFfFiDFiji = o.]fi8]3
. I.AMMifi -(4SVJi.tTl.lC» = -«.n -- MTM-SM-T-US -- OEPFunEITi ------ = — 1.-" - W-I-TH- ATHPMP ---
LA'1 1* HA CiV'-T'ir 1C) = r . 1
'
II-< t RTA r-'TV r..FhrirtF.'T ( ASy'C.F 1 PIC 3 =
' S Tail n = o. 177'U SI CM IF
> R 1 fl'.l r = C.03J04 SICl'TK
O.niOf.0 "fJTH STATUS DtPt'JREMT.
= 0.18102 WITH AIRPMP DFPFNPEMT.
= O.fl?17
= 0.0217
h n f t.sy»"t-T|JTri = n.».28*9 WTIH STATUS
s D csY'VFrPiD = n.nifijn
O.nnjSc. ,. t } v ?• I AT'-S — -l)F t>f i.nf-'-'T.
'S R = o.lhlbl Slfi'M FITA'TT = 0.1047
&EPENntNT.
= - 0 . 1-91 55-U-ITH-
= 0.02403 WITH ATHPMP
—DEPENDENT-.
DEPENDENT.
-------
TEST (JF
H/02/fll
PAGE;
CrcfftTln-.' DftTF
p.cv
CROSS TABULATION
B.V M Y K_
n F
PAGE 1 OF 1
JtYB_
pn,j prr i
CT, PT 1
fr-if pfT ]
n i
NOT Cril'IPPicn i
1
i. i
i
i
- 1 -
11. l
TAMPI-HT vir 1
1
T
- T —
f f] J. 1 1 M M
T'JTA?
7*5. I
1 1
16.1 I
1.5 I
n i \
71 \
0
0.0
n.n
O.il
'?
5.5
76
fl
o|n
n n
<)4.7
12.3
3
50. r
«; R
fl.R
S3
13.0
.1
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
T
/U.J.
77
1
50.0
4.5
0 9
61
15J3
7.
33.3
3 0
O.h
ftfi
16. h
li_C£LL
.1
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
S-H
7B.I
1 I
1&.7 I
1.3 I
03 r
77 I
97. S I
19.3 I
1 1
16.7 I
0.3 I
19.8
A.V.E-EXP-L
0
0
p
100
14
0
0
14
79.
n
.0
.0
0
59
. 2
.0
.8
0
.0
.0
SQ
.8
-CEL
T
T
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
r
T
I
L-
PO.
0
o.o
o.n
0 0
*
\fl 1
100.0
15.8
0
0.0
0.0
6'
15.8
-F.REOUEM
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
C-Y
81
16.7
1.8
Q 3
5*
1 A S
]n'.Q
0
o.n
0.0
0.0
,..,
14.3
.1
f
I
I
j
1
I
J
I
r
i
-THJ
»2
n
0.0
o.n
n n
1
n 3
100.0
0.3
0
n n
0.0
,
0.3
>H_5-.0.
.1
I
I
I
I
I
T.
I
I
ROW
g.
l.S
3B7
Q 7 0
6
1.5
300
100.0
rxpefTfl) C'^r. FprgiifiCY = 0.015
nil <;()ll6w^ - i«.74^01 WITH 11 PKRHFLS OF FREEDOM SIGWTFICANCE = 0.1739
-S-Y—= C . l.b3-i-T
T = 0.21210
(H.SYWKTRTC5 = 0.0 I^TTH PCV
_= o_. 01205
DEPENDENT.
= 0.01250 WITH MYR
DEPENDENT.
UNCtl*T»IMrY
= O.lbfl03 WITH PCV
rsY-«HHir) = c.o?384
. -1-922
DEPENDENT.
= 0.01289 WITH MYR
TAIJ r = -0.0177'J Rir.HlFICANCF = 0.1972
-0. \e><)«7.
. 016Q
(SV'»«'TIMr) = -0.01877
-DEP-EWDENT..-.
HYH
OE.PENDFNT.
-------
TKST OF Ni-J'-'SaS
_F_ILj; HOMAGE.
*******
11/02/81
PAGE 10
_(CREATTO" HATE = ii/07/ai)
"CSMRI. YA£._5E!iK_K!LlJlC.
****************
C R 0 S S T A P U I, A T I n n
RY. HYH._
0 F
*****
o
rni, pri
•pn | pi-r /S
.0. S
NUT EGMIPPFI) 11.9
27. ;
! i. :u
F_uMr_T P^npc-RT v T 4.^
I 77.1
I 4.3
11.1 n
r o.o
mi,!]'"! 7?
TriTftt 5.5
.T
T
T
-l-
T
T
I
T
I
T
r
T
76.1
6 I
14. 1 I
11. -5 I
i i i
4S 1
..17.7 1
1J.T 1
1 T
bO.O I
1.9 J
o.l I
n.o
77
10
i?!?
13J8
1
50.0
1 ."3
0.3
66..
16.5
.T
r
T
r
T
-T--
T
T
T
T
-T--
T
T
T
T
7H.I 79. T
-I ' I 71
28.6 4.R T
15.7 3.4 I
1 .-ft 0 . 5 T
67 57 I
-IB." 16.1 .I....
H4.fi 9fi.<> T
Ifi.P 14.3 I
01 01
0.0 I o.O T
O.O i o.O T
0.0 T o.O T
79 S9
19.0 14.8
BO.
11.9
7.9
-J . 3 —
58
16 1
92.1
14.5
0
o.o
0,0
0.0
- 63
l-5.fi
r
j
T
I
T
!-•
I
T
T
1
I
I
I
R1
2
4.8
3.5
•55
-IS.b
9ft. 5
13. P
n
0.0
0 .P
0.0
14.3
.T
1
T
T
-I-
I
T
I
T
T
T
I
B2.I
n j
o.o :
o.n i
Q..n — i
i i
n 3 i
100.0 T
n.T I
0 I
0.0 I
no T
0.0 I
1
0.3
IM
ROW
10.5
355
99 0
2
0.5
IPO
100.0
11 OUT.'Jt 24.l..-15.Sl)_DE_EHE_VALlD_CELLS_l!AV.E_EXPtCTED.CELL_EREQUEKCY_LESS-THAN_5.0.
''M11IJ!' FXPtrirp CFLL Fi^QilfrNCY = O.OOb
THI SOUAPf = I?.',1'j69 i-iTTH 14 OECUfES OF KPFEUOH SIGNIKICANCF = 0.1B02
- C H AI'.EHI S._V_.= Q ..1 b 2.7J
(B,.SY«
LA'lliUA- (SVI4KlHrf.)_= 0.00275-
0.21113
mirn VCSPKHT
= 0.003J2 WITH MYR
OEPF-MDENT.
coTFirtF IT casyMneTPiC) = o.06694 WITH VCSPKRT OEPENDFNT.
COT1 I1"!!- 'IT fRYMVhTRTCl = 0.07160
-Kl.^r.AI.I,JS_Tii]_H_s n. 1-1 084—SI R'U F-ICAUCK-= 0.-00-S7
.•S Tail C = 0.0*793 "SIO'IMCANCE = 0.0057
0.0128B WITH MYR
DEPENDENT.
.SU-KHi.'S-U-CASY-.r'l-THlCl-s 0. 05352-riI-HH_VCSP.KRl DF.P.ENDLHT-.
S'V'ERS'i II ( <5Y''"rnir) = O.OB680
i-i ft = 0.10370 '.'TIM VCSP<«T IIFPFNUEWT. = o. 16693 WITH HYR
.4406
-0.27956-WITH-M-Y-R-
DEPEHDFMT.
-DEPENDFNT-.-
-------
TKST OF
-F I L E - H CMJ A I' E
1l/0?/fll
PACE:
t C R L A 1 1 DH_nAIt_=_U./_0 3/. 8 U_
******************
LSQI.STP IDLE_iT01l_SOL
******************
TROS 5 TABULATION
BY_hYR_
n F
* * PACE 1 OF 1
i(rv,i prr i
ciu ITT i
TOT PfT 1 75
.0 I .14
HOT PQUIPPFI) I 10.1
1 * 3.6
T 15
-I
1 . T 8
I 36.4
I 7.0
COL"' '•! 77
TOTAL 5.S
. I
1
T
I
I
-I —
T
T
I
I
7 OUT nj. ih ( ]?.S%1 OF
M|IIJM|i'f i-XPI-CTFri CFI.L FRFOl'tNC
CHI SOIIfttn = is. si (11 A V'TTH
CKAMFU'S V = 0.79931
7fc.
-,,
b9Jfi
1 R
21
B 1
4^.4
5.1
57
11. n
T 77. T
T 94 T
I 17.3 I
I 36.4 T
j t n T
I T
I 42 T
J lh.2 L
I M.h T
I 10. b T
16.5
THE VALID CH.LS
1 = 0.3«8
~l nkCuFFS Of |TR
7H.1
?" 1
17.1 I
6 ;.Q j
1-
55 I
21.7 I
69.6 I
13.9 I
79
19. B
T
— 14
10.1
23.7
-3.5-
4b
-1 7-. 3-
76.3
11.3
59
14.8
I.I BO. I
T 211
I 15.1 I
I 33.3 I
-I 5.1 I
-I I-
I 47 I
I 16 ? I
I h6.7 I
I 10.5 I
61
15. B
H&VF EXPLCTFD CFLL FKFQIlfNCY
EEDQM S1.GNJEJCANCE_J__0...00(
81
10
7.7
17.5
2.5
47
87.5
1 l.H
57
14.3
LESS
in
.T
T
I
T
. T
-I-
I
j
T
1
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
THAN 5
«2
i
.7
.0
.3
0
,-U —
.0
.0
1
.3
.0.
ROW
.1
"I
r 1 la
I 34. El
I
I
-I
I 260
I
I
399
100.0
0.2Pbfl«
_LAHDDft_Cftiyii>'£IKI.CJ_= O.t271fl UlTTH T$ri|_STg DEP-EilQEBT..
LAMBDA (.syvuFTRir) = 0.05779
(.HO RTAINTY CQFf F1C I EOT ( ftSyw/FTH 1C) = O.OftBg'j WITH 1SOLSTP Dfi'PENDFKiT.
= _ 0..0218l-WlXH_HYR
DEP.EMOENT
= 0.02329 WITH MYR
'S TAII n = 0.20H30
Ki:wDALL'R T«'J r = O.J5R3I SIGNIFICANCE = 0.0000
. C A y 1 A „= ____ 0 . J 3 0 9 3
SOUCPS'S 0 C».SYK"hTpIc) = 0.15263
snMt»s's i) (
-------
TEST OF NtM&BS
. -E1LE nau4fE_
HKAiril
f CRE A I-IQ:I_D AII
HKAT_Fn I'llAKF.
11/02/81 PAGE 7
• =_.I1SO?/H1 )
. ... BY MVB
M
CUUMT I
KOM pri i
. ..-.cm, I-TT...J.-
•|nr pel J
0. ....!_
NOT COKlPPFn I
1
1
-.1-
1 . 1
T
I
• I"
12. I
APGIJAH',1 IftiiDEPI I
T
I
- I-
1 a , i
MAM-UNCTIO11 I
1
I
-1-
TOTAL.... -
YH
7"
1
70.0
4.5
0.0-
. 16
"77.7
l.fi
•5
13.9
22-7
1 .3
n
0.0
0.0
0.0_
72
>.T
T
r
T
T
•-1-
t
T
T
I
•-L-
J
I
T
T
T
I
T
T
•-T-
7h
n
o.o
0.0
n n
41
J 1 .S
7P.f>
JO.T
11
_2i! 2
7.P
n
o.o
o.o
0.0
52
_L3.fl
.1
1
I
J
j
-T-
I
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
-I-
77
1
70.0
1.5
Q-.-3
• 5fl
— L6..2
67.9
M.5
7
19.4
10.6 .
1.8
i)
0.0
0.0
0.0_
fi6
— 16.-5_
.1
T
I
1
_I_
I
_.T .
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
I
I
T
-T-
78.
1
20.0
1.1
0...3 —
73
97.4
IB. 3
A
11.1
S.I
J.o
t
loo.o
1.3
0.3
71
-13. 8 —
I
T
1
I
-I—
I
1
I
t
I
1
1
,
I
I
T
79
1
20.0
1.7
0.3
52
14.6 .
88.1
13.0
h
16.7
-J.0.2
l.iJ
n
0.0
0.0
O.o
59
_14. 8
.T
T
I
I
T
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
RO
i
20.0
1.6
0.3
60
16.8
95.7
15.0
7
•5.6
--3.7
0.5
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
ib.a
.1
i
i
T-
I
f
I
I
I
I
•f
I
T
I
I
T
-I-
R1
Q
0.0
0.0
0.0
56
1 5 7
98.7
14.0
1
2.H
1.1
0.3
n
0.0
0.0
O.o
57
—14.3
.T
I
I
_ r
-i-
i
i
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
I
T
-I-
82
n
0.0
0.0
o.o...
1
0 3
100.0
0.3
n
0.0
0.0
n
0.0
o.o
0.0.
1
0..3
i
ROW
Tn-pn i
.1
•I
J Bj
I 1.3
I
-4 — -
-I
I 357
I 995
I
I
I 36
I 9.0
I
-I
T )
I 0.3
I
i
-I
399
70 OUT rip
CMi SIJUAPI: =
rBAH-l«'«> V r
. cu(!ii:jGE::n
L A i' H I) A (il S i
LA'-tOA (SYP
( (,?.*>%•> nr TIE VALID CFbl.S HAVE EXPECTED CELL FKEO"ENCY f.ESS THAN 5 0
= _ 0.003 _______
io.224nn WITH 21 DF;^RFE.S OF FPFEDOH
n. i LiOgn
:_= o_.2fib36
= o.o
SIGNIFICANCE = 0.0875
KENHALI'5
JT (SV|l«KTkICl = 0.03180
0.1'i614 .SJG';T^-^CA^^t = O.OOO?
-fh.riUALLJS.TAU C. = . .--0.08 18<1 _ SIGUJF-ICAriCK-s _ 0..0002
GAWA = -0.3BO°8
Sll'^Pfa'S P (ftSYr-TTpTCl = -0.07410 UITH HfATlN
SU-'LHS-'S-D .(S YJ'I. FIU I C]_ = .-0.. 17.123
iJTTII HtATU DFPENDEHT. = 0.02187 WITH MYR PEPF.NDEM.
—DEPENDENT. = 0.4)1-914—KITH-MYF
= -0.32095 WITH MYR
ETA = 0.^7714 l-'Trn MMTTII DFPFiini:MT.
PKARRdN'S » =-n.701)7 SJKHIFICA'ICF = 0.0000
= 0.71094 WITH MYH
-------
FKST PF MFV5»S
_F III I.Oli Af- P (CJ»i.#-IlUM-..DAIt:-J=_l IV-O-Z/.aU
1 1/02/81
PAGE
SIOR ECS_STDHAGt-.
C»05S TAP II IiATTPr'
H* MYR _
0 F
* * *
rniiNT I
pin pr r ]
rnL prr T
T"l PCT I
MOT EQUTPprp 1
J
i . i
FlllirT DRflpPOt V '
I
J
-1 -
n. i
r
I
rot L'vn
7S.
4.S
c, a
05. s
S. Jt
0
0.0
11,0
0,0
77
b.h
T
y
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
I
7ft.
•)
50.0
n G
47
1? '
90.4
11. R
3
1 R
O.R
„
; 1 3 . o
r
T
I
I
T
I
[
I
1
I
I
I
I
r 77
p
0.0
n.o
n n
— -Si • V
M
1 ft i,
<>7.0
16.0
75.0
1 , n
0.5
fiA
16.5
. I
T
7
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
7fl. I
25.0 I
'.3 I
n t T
75 I
|94 j
3 J
37.5 I
in i
O.R I
1«J
19. fl
79.
0.0
0.0
On
59
15.2
300.0
14.8
0
0.0
0 . 0
0.0
59
14.8
T
j
T
t
T
I
T
t
I
T
I
no. i
n I
0.0 I
0.0 1
00 1
63 I
1^1 I
100.0 I
15. fl I
0 I
0.0 1
n n i
0.0 I
6?
15.8
R1
0
0.0
o.n
57
14 7
100. 0
14.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
S7
14.3
.r
T
I
T
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
I
n?
ft
0.0
0.0
n n
1
lf>0.0
0
0.0
o.n
i
0.3
POW
TOTAL
.1
I 4
I 1.0
I
T
I 387
T 970
I
I
— T
i a
I 7.0
I
300
100.0
... .17 OUT. L'F 24_C..7Q.B%)._QE_IJlt:_l/ALlD_CELLS_HA-Vt_EXP-ECTED_CEH.. FREOUEHClf-LESS_THAH_5-. 0...
•III-IMIJM FX^MFfi en,!. rpfxjuEMCY = 1.010
CHI SOl'ft'Jt = 19.24H*4 WI1H 14 DtHPFES HF FREEOPM SIGNIFICANCE = 0.1557
^LR1S. V_=
LA'-l'DA
CoFFFiriFnT =
= 0.0
0.7M53
MTTH STOR
= 0.003J2 WITH MYR
DEPENDENT.
r (tSf'nFT'ici = o.niHS WITH STO«
ll'JrH>lAl''TY rr^FFirjfr.'T f sY«"KT"JTC) = 0,02566
_.KF.'lU-iLL,'S-TA!UR_= ---- -0.07l°2 - S 1 Kkl.1 HI-Ca!jr&_= - 0..30R4
KtNP«Mj'S Tfl C = -O.n0733 STGHII' JCA^ICE = 0.30H4
fl = -
llEPfcNDENT.
= 0.01386 WITH MYR
DEPENDENT.
n tsv-'Ptnirj = -o.oiosn
ETA = O.iaa?b V/TP1 STn(J
_t>EARSQHJ.S_P._=-O.Q.9634._.SlGt'lF.ICAriCE_s _ tt. 027J
-DE.PEtJnF.NT-. =_-O..OP3) 9_HI-TH—BY.R-
= 0.15849 WITH MYK DEPENDENT.
-DEPEMOENT.-
O
-------
ftST (IF M|.'*s»s 11/07/81 PAGE
_F1LL (JO'lAVE CCP.fc.AlIO!l_DAI.L_=_iJ/J)2/-8a-)
****************** rqnssTARui-ATinN D F
F.LLtltK E.lLLEk_iiCCK BY «YR
PACK 1 OF 1
HV»
RT; PH I
CHI, prT t
i"!1 tri r T5
n i -j
MRT EOMfPpirn t 7.7
1 9.1
1 . I 16
FlI'ICT PpOPFpl Y 1 45
1 72.7
1 4.0
11.1 4
TftMpERTMC J 16.7
I 1 h .?
1 1 .0
TCTAI, 5.5
.T
T
T
T
T
r
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
76.
A
7 '.7
i n
3fl
jn o
73.1
".S
10
41 .7
19,5
7.5
• 13.0
77
^
I 26.9
[ 10.6
t ] "
; 55
1 h. 9
83.3
[ 1 l.P
16.7
f,. i
1 .0
66
16.5
.T
T
T
T
T
1
I
I
T
T
T
I
•Jfl
^
26.9
1 R
70
?0 4
RP.6
17. S
fl.3
•3,5
0.5
19
. I
1
1
]
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
1
79
A
lb.4
6.8
1 0
53
j 5 f
R9.ft
13.3
8.3
'.4
O.b
50
14.8
.T
T
I
j
I
j
T
I
I
I
T
I
BO
i
l'.6
0 "J
61
1 7 "S
96. R
IS.. 3
1
1 A
0.3
63
is. a
. T
1
I
1
T
i
j
i
i
i
i
i
i
81
.
3.8
1 • n
55
4 ^ Si
96.5
13. R
J
4.2
1_. 8_
0.3
57
14.3
.T
I
T
j
T
t
T
T
T
I
T
T
P2
n
o'.o
0 n
1
0 3
100.0
0.3
0
o.o
n o
0.0
1
0.3
o
1
CT1
ROW
.1
I 6.5
1
T
I 349
I 975
I
I
_ j
I 24
I 6.0
1
1
}QQ
100.0
16 -LIUI Ot 24_.(.-b6.7's) -DE_XHL_VAUlD_CELLS_HA.VE_EXPtClED_CELL_ERLQUE.»]CY_LESS_lHAM_5.C..
rU'lP'-U" rFr-IFP C.17! L fkh'fJ'ip'lCY = O.OfiO
rul SCIIft'JK = Tft.SSoSP I.TIH 1« Ptf.RFl S rifr FREEnnM STGf'IFICANCF =
_CRAt.ERJ.S_V__ = Q . 21Jfl ?
JMCtE<"CY rriFf rlOIr'IT = 0.79077
(ASYr-'"ETHTC1 = 0.0 WTTH Fit.NEK DEPRNPE.NT'. = 0.02500 WITH HYR
=. 0. 02167
IINORTAIMTY ruFhfirjF'iT f ASY'MRTPIC) = f. 08944 WITH FILNEK DEPEMOF.NT. = 0.02173 WITH MJR DFPEMOfcNT.
IJNrFI»1 AINTY C^F^ FICl^'fT C{iYK»hTHTC) = 0.03496
-K£!!LALL.LS_TaU_!!_= -0.. 0.5a.l9 SIGtUKlCANCL-S O..J157
KMiDM.r.'S TAU r = -0.03405 SICHIFICAMTF = O.U57
flA'"'1 = -0.1161?
.SU''t.RS;S_D_UiY'-Mlj:8JCJ_-_^0.02683_hlTH_EXLMEK DLEENDEUT. =_a.0...05 9 9 fl_ UI T.H—M Y.R DEPEHDENT-.
SO"tPS'S D (SY'H PI0IC] = -0.04330
tT« = 0.7S704 U-IIM rif.M-'K DFJ»K|irf f'T. e O.?5059 WITH MYR DF.PF.NDfNT.
I HIS R a--0.2-fln.7-6 ildSUFUCAHCE-i= 0.. 0000
-------
TKST OF HK".SAS
.UL
10/29/61
PACE
Li'irap
LIMITFR
r&ns
HY
n N
. HYH
rnnriT r
r-ni r>rr i
THT prr r
n, r
NOT LullIPp^D I
1. I
1
I
-\
8. 1
PARTS MAIiARjllsTt. i
T
. j
1?. 1
ARGUABI.h TAHPE.PI I
I
TIITAI,
75
7
1.5
9.1
0 S
•>
9.1
0.5
0
0.0
n n
0.0
1 H
a. l
Rl.H
A. s
77
. r
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
r
76.1
4 T
*.l I
7.7 I
i ft 7
7 I
11. •* I
1.8 I
0 T
0.0 I
fl n i
0.0 I
4' T
18.6 I
7fl.fl I
IO.T r
b2
77
3.B
1 .3
8
17.4
12.1
7.0
0
0.0
n.O
0.0
•5?
74.0
P0.3
1 3.3
66
—16.5
.T
T
I
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
T
78. T
3.8 I
6.3 I
11 I
283 1
3)3 I
ft I
0.0 I
no I
0.0 1
61 I
27.6 I
77.2 I
79
19. fl
79
3d
76.0
57.6
8 *S
3
6.5
5.1
0.8
t
100.0
1 7
0.3
'1
3s'.6
s. 3
59
_l.4.8_
.T
T
I
T
T
T
T
r
r
i
i
T
I
T
I
I
T
80.
3 A
27.5
q 0
5
10.9
i!i
n
0.0
n 0
o.o
27
10.0
34.9
- 5.5
63
-15. B_
1
I
I
I
•f
I
j
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
j
81
Ad
33.6
77.2
1-1-,-Q
8
17. -4
14.0
2.0
0
0.0
0,0
0.0
5
2.3
8.6
1.3
57
—14. -3
.T
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
T
B2
1
ft.s
100. P
n i
n
o n
0.0
o.o
n
o.o
n fi
0.0
„
0.0
o.r
n n
1
0.3
ROW
TOTAL
.1
I 111
I 32.8
I
I 46
j 115
I
I
_ j
I 1
I 0.3
I
I 55.4
I
~i
399
i no
-------
TEST m "
-FI1.C «iC!U_»iiE (CPLATIOH DATK = 11/P?/H.I).
PAGE:
* *
TNKfAP
TANK TAP
***********************
C " 0 S S T A R H I. A T I n M
BY I'.YR_ _
0 F
******************
PAGE I OF 1
o
rniir.T i
pnu pr;T T
rni PTT I
1"T PCT T
n x
HOT EfJ'lIPPfD J
1
-. -... J
-I
1 . I
t liMTT PRnpTRt V 1
J
I
-I
12. i
AKGUABM-.. TA.ic-fRj j
T
T
rriLii'M
TOTftl,
75
n
0.0
0.0
. O.Q
•77
100. 0
n
n.o
0.0
0.0
72
5.5
.T
T
T
T
_I_
-I-
I
_J_
T
T
I
I
r
T
71.
1
1 V.I
1 .*»
O...T
•jO
_12.9 1
17.5
1
33.3
' !«
o. i
13.0
I • 77
?
[ 27.2
[ 3.0
n «;
M
Ih.S
•37.0
16.0
0
0.0
n.O
0.0
16. b
.T
T
I
I
T
-I-
I
..T .
T
T
I
I
T
T
78
,
sic
74
1.9...1
93.7
in. 5
7
6*. 7
t «;
0.5
7«
19. P
.1
T
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
1
I
T
I
7.77.lSl WTTH 14 DEfTRFES OF FPEf'DHH SIGNIFICANCE = 0.7785
.OKA 'i;sJ.i._v_= c.ime;
I.A"HOA C«SYM'• i A = o. n o o -51
. SU"LHSJ.S_D_CA3Y1'."LTHir )_=— 0 . OOOQ3-HITH_IHKCAP DEPEND?NT-.
su'-T.^s'i o (SY""-|rTiMr) = o.onooe
F'l 6 = 0.11H59 I-'TT1' T |K(-ftp Ot'PFUDtPT. = 0.05114 WITH MYR
= 0.00776 WITH MYR
DEPFNDEMT.
=—0 .0004 3_W I.T-H-M Y-R-
DEPENDFNT.
-------
PAGE 11
= 11/Q3/B11
CROSS TAP II IiATlD
BY MYR
0 F
****** PAGE 1 OF 1
24 OUT fU 3? f 75.0%) nh THE VM.Jn CELLS HAVF FXPfTED CELL FRFO'JKr'CY LESS THAN 5,0.
M1KI 'lUJl-EXP-EC'LED-CELL _F.slEQiJt:rJCJC_s C .00.3
CHT SDUABI-: = S7.6T4P1 n-TTII 21 DEGRFpS Of- FRE.FDOM SIGNIFICANCE = 0.0002
CrtM'EK'S V =
.-3fll.3a_ _
= o.o WITH TLAEHj PFPENOEHT. = o.ois&s WITH MYR
= 1.01374
CIH'NT 1
pn< pri 1
r n i , P r r i
r'U PO 1
n j
MOT F.<)III«»PFD T
r
T
1. 1
r
j
t. i
»n rn DT.sro" 11- CT i
i
- 1-
i •> i
APQIABTI- T*i»Pf°l 1
TflTM.
7S
,
f>.9
9.1
0 b
IS
f>fi.2
0
0.0
n o
0.0
^
1 1
72
S.S
.T
£
T
T
L
T
T
T
T
I
t
T
1
I
7h
/I
n.f
7.7
1 °
47
11 fl
an.p
i
10". 0
i Q
".3
S
35.7
1 1
1-3. «
.1
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
7
I
T
77
tt
27.6
V2.1
7 .n
. Sf.
84. H
14. 0
0
0.0
n n
0.0
7
14.3
n ,s
fif,
.lA.b
T
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
78
H
27.fi
10.1
*
^o 7
BR.P
17. S
0
"."
n.o
0.0
,
7.1
79
1 9...B.-
.1
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
j
I
f
T
T
79,
5
17.2
S.S
1.3
53
14 3
89.8
13.3
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
\
7.1
0.3
59
—1-4 . a
.T
T
t
I
T
T
j
I
T
I
I
T
I
T
I
R(
t
- 0.3.
67
175
9P.4
lb.5
n
o.n
0.0
0.0
f)
0.0
0 n
O.D-
63
15.8-
). I
T
I
I
- I-
I
j
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
81
1
3.4
l.R
O.J-
56
OS.?
14.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
n
0.0
On
-0.0
57
-14.3
.r
T
T
T
r
r
7
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
T
T
• a.
n
0.0
0.0
n^n
1
n ^
ton.*1
r 0.3
0
".0
n n
P. ft
n
O.n
*
1
... O.V..
I
T
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
PCW
TOTAL ..-_.. _ .. .. .
29
7.3
355
19 0
I
0.3
14 -
3.5
100.0
_Ok.PEHDF.NT._
)_= D. 12355_UITILJLABtL-
r.sV">*f.TRrci = 0.01514
KMJOai.L'8: TAII R r. -0.031S5 SI Htl I FTC^ HCP = 0.23)4
__KLNDALL.!.S-TAL' C.r _.._.-0 .01 75h_SIGi!IEJCA.l,Ct-= Q.2314
C.ATA = -0. 07-5^7
SrV'l-R.S'S 0 ( AiV;»»f'lBlCl = -O.OISbh WJTM TL'PFFj DfPFMpFMT.
_SD"fc.RSJS D-CSY""ErI'lC)-=- -0.02512
Ht = C.7'34'?/ LIT" Tl/Sp^b D'PFNOEI'T. = 0.77199 WITH WYR
PLAHSHM'S ') =-n.7j7H7 MCN 1FICA.IICE = 0.0000
_= 0 _02.3 6 l_W LIH-KY R-
-ur.p-Ennt.HT-.
= -0.06622 WITH MYK
DEPENDENT.
-------
TtST DV HEWSAS
11/07/81
PAGE 12
* * *
DLADEL.
.BASH-lftDEL-
CROSSTAB I' I, A T I 0 N
BY MYH_.
0 F
***********
MV
rnn.JT I
r"ni PC I 1
NMT FQIltPPFO 1
1
1 . 1
1
i
4. 1
PK"H UTsrr.roiiKCT J
i
T
p
75
l
11.1
13. ft
no
1 19
Si
•l.B
0
0.0
n. o
0.0
•»
.1
T
I
1
1
t
I
I
T
T
1
7fi
„
H.8
7.7
1 n
17
1J2 7
9ft. 4
11."
I
100. n
I 0
0.3
•57
.1
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
. 77
f,
77.7
9.1
•
1 h 'i
"0.9
ib.O
0
0.0
o.o
0.0
66
.1
I
T
I
1
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
I
7H
R
iXl
•> n
71
| 9 1
89.9
17. R
0
0.0
0.0
o.o
;q
.r
I
I 14
1 6
1
I 14
I 91
I 1.1
I
I 0
T 0
1 0
79.
4
• H
.a
n
S3
!H
0
.0
.0
59
T
T
I
T
T
i
T
I
I
T
T
T
RO.
•>
3J2
o «;
61
161
lO
0
o.o
0.0.
0.0
.63
I
T
I
1
£
i
i
i
i
i
T
I
81. t
0 T
0.0 t
0.0 T
D fl -I
57 T
154 T
l^o.o t )
14.3 T
n r
o.o r
o,n T
o.o r
•iT
B2
n
o.o
o.o
n.n
n j
0
0.0
0.0
o.o
1
1
ro
ROW
. i
T ?7
I 6.8
I
j _.
m T
I 371
T 930
I
I
-j
I 1
I 0.3
T
1
TOO
lOTAT,
13.0
14.R
Ib.fl
14.3
0.3
100.0
."INJ'MJ'I rxPKTTI-0 OLI. FKEOUM'Cr = 0.003
= 15.90545 MUM 14 r>t.r,RFf,s ni-
li_V_.= 0..141.1.8
M-ICY rnpi-PirTF,.'T = 0.19579
LA'-I-DA C»SVJ "r.THTC) = 0.0 «'TfH
SIGNIFICANCE = 0.3192
= 0.00317 WITH MVR
-LAVbDA-tSlli'-EIBJO-s 0.
|Y TlFt Fjn ^f. T '4SY
-.KKiiLULUS—Tit] .B_=
'S TA'I C =
= 0.0«0i5 WITH
= 0.01952
0.4002/1 _ S E KIUElCA-tJCE_= _ O.QH2
0. 0^)003 SIGMIUCANCE = 0.0112
OEPENDFNT.
= 0.01111 WITH
= 0.06H2R
FTA = 0.13'J7f> VT1" ni.ftuFl. (iFPFi
_£tAHSOtLLS_I'_ = _0. 07.E J 5 __i.Ii-.'.aE..tCt>lCE_= — 0-. 05BB
= 0 .-25492_WI-T-H_M-Y-R-
= 0.14B25 WITH I»YR DEPF.NDFNT.
DEPFNDEMT.
-------
SAS RU"i nr |tn?
"YR
•'YH
' YP
HYR
HYR
I1 YU
STATUS
t YU
'*YK
NYH
11 VI?
STAT"S
"1U
•yR
" VD
I- YR
YP
STATUS.
i vp
"^
TnLi- rn
TIJS VKH]CLF TAf'PKR STATUS
rripp VALUE bftllFTi
n . (>K
75.
77.
pn.
HI.
HO
Ti.
HO.
P 1
77 .
Tfl
7°.
U 1
13. MALFNCTNO
T;
77.
TP
11/03/81 PACK
N OF SURPPPULATinN
SUM
596.6919
97.6ono
2. 1000
a 7oftO
5.0onO
is.flofto
) e Arjfty
13.7000
2".7000
ft fl
1 36.3000
Hi, fiOnO
47.3000
o.iooo
n.o
71.7000
47.7000
120.9000
Qfl 70nO
34.1000
20.8QOO
'*iB000
B.6000
ft n
5.SOOO
0.0
0.3000
MEAN
1.495K
1.050"
1 077"
0.6750
) . A4g7.
n cf 41
0.3513
C1 0
7.5133
3.3786
1.5600
0.1000
.071,0
ft. 9<>05
0.860"
0 0
2.7500
0.0
0.1000
STD DKV
7.1779
1 .698S
0.7778
0.8464
2.3744
j 3284
1 . 1841
2.0460
n o
?.30<)4
1.4932
3.4)13
l.f.697
0.1732
n n
7.2872
1 .»)«?
2.1473
7.1878
7.5945
1 .4652
? "7.19
1 .3978
0 0
2.6163
0.0
n 4 1&?
0.1000
10
VARTAMCF
4.7433
2.6950
O.IObO
4 31)9
0.7164
1 761fi
1 .4070
4.1863
0 0
5.3131
i?;"!?
0.0300
P 0
b.7315
7 70B/1
5 .9004
6.7115
2.1469
4 0°Bn
1.9538
0 0
6.8450
0.0
0 1733
0.0100
'
C
f
f
t
f
c
f
c
c
f
c
f
c
!
N
390)
Q)
51)
1)
5*-)
7 j
14)
1 ?)
5)
3)
f \
-1-fll )
17 j
43)
23)
21)
1 )
7)
1 J
j j
"
i
INS
-------
SAS PUN Oh I9TS-1SH;! T A MPtr? 1 «G OftTA
Fii.r lionise (cm A i Tn-i mrt = ii/m/an
CHUEimi" VAPIAM.F: p-ir
^KOKFI. [in. '1 &Y STtTMS
•
------- |