Assessment of the equivalency of three-run relative accuracy audits versus six-run relative accuracy audits for characterizing CEMS (Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems) performance

On March 14, 1984, Appendix F, Quality Assurance Procedures: Procedure 1 Quality Assurance Requirements for Gas Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for Compliance was proposed for inclusion in 40 CFR 60. Several commenters on the proposal package requested that three-run relative accuracy audits without the 2.5% error confidence coefficient be allowed in lieu of the proposed six-run relative accuracy audit. This report compares the equivalency of three-run versus six-run relative accuracy audits for characterizing gas CEMS performance, utilizing a tentative three-run relative accuracy criterion of < or = 15% applied to test data compiled under the EPA-funded field audit program to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the Procedure 1 quality-assurance requirements. The results of this comparison indicate that the three-run < or = 15% criterion was slightly more difficult to meet than was the six-run, < or = 25% criterion.