# Appendix A

UAM Base-Year Model Performance Statistics

and Graphical Evaluation

# Statistical Analyses* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfSubRegional DescriptionsSubRegion 000 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CATI Catalina Isl (AV) 44 24 368.338 3696.859CATA Catalina AP (AV) 43 25 360.827 3701.062CLEM San ClemenSDCAPCD 43 13 360.772 3642.687ROSA Rosa 11 38 201.011 3767.582SNI San Nicholas Island 23 21 260.383 3682.870SubRegion 001 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------LOMP Lompoc-4350 Constell 7 54 182.435 3845.052GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 19 47 241.171 3813.608ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 4 71 167.308 3932.630CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 25 46 274.784 3809.034ECSP El Capitan State Par 15 48 222.842 3815.987GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 12 48 206.051 3818.354GAVW Gaviota West-NW Of C 12 48 206.051 3818.354GCTY Grover City-9 Le Sag 5 63 170.360 3891.772GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 12 49 207.757 3823.853GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 12 48 207.582 3818.305LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 15 48 221.421 3819.730LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 19 49 244.541 3824.616LPHS Lompoc-HS&P Facility 8 54 187.080 3846.744LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 7 52 183.708 3837.602MOBY Morro Bay-Morro Bay 2 69 156.221 3920.083NIPO Nipomo-1300 Guadalup 5 61 174.522 3880.511PTCL Point Conception Lig 7 48 183.013 3817.260SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 21 47 251.846 3811.467SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 4 67 168.001 3910.379SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 8 59 186.376 3870.837SYAP Santa Ynez-Airport R 14 51 218.752 3832.766UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 18 47 236.471 3810.039VBPP Vandenberg AFB-Sts P 4 51 168.222 3832.590SubRegion 002 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 31 43 303.549 3791.740EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 28 44 286.748 3795.806OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 29 47 291.723 3812.339PRTG Piru-2SW, 2815 Teleg 37 46 332.978 3805.960SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 40 43 345.024 3792.811THOS Oak View-5500 Casita 26 46 279.337 3807.076TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 36 42 328.007 3785.712LAGP Point Mugu USN 32 40 309.499 3775.930SubRegion 003 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 47 41 380.176 3781.205RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 43 41 360.232 3783.329CALB Calabasas (AV) 41 40 351.388 3779.520CSUN Van Nuys NOAA 43 42 362.563 3786.899SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 42 46 358.986 3806.024WILS Mount WilsCE-CERT 51 42 402.367 3787.571SubRegion 004 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------LKAR Lake Arrowhead-27400 67 42 481.577 3786.003AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 54 40 415.477 3777.125BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 73 35 512.325 3752.730FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 61 39 453.879 3773.162GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 55 40 421.624 3777.071LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 64 30 469.097 3725.054LGRE Crestline-Lake Grego 66 42 475.441 3787.865PERR Perris-237 .5 N "D" 66 32 478.397 3737.963PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 60 46 449.457 3808.298POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 57 38 430.791 3769.607RDLD Redlands-500 N. Dear 68 38 486.156 3767.515RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 63 37 461.521 3762.040SANB San Bernardino-24302 66 39 475.402 3773.081SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 58 39 438.493 3771.402ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 59 39 440.031 3771.392CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 62 45 458.830 3803.663CAJC Cajon MDAQMD 62 45 458.894 3800.736MBLD Azusa CARB 59 42 442.827 3788.654TCCC Temecula SCAQMD 68 26 485.065 3709.556SubRegion 005 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 54 33 416.706 3741.999CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 54 30 415.015 3725.381ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 58 28 436.612 3719.670HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 45 35 373.661 3753.563LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 48 39 386.188 3770.040LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 53 35 412.180 3753.128LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 48 35 389.069 3753.370NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 49 33 390.482 3742.264PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 50 39 398.512 3771.747VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 44 38 366.166 3768.454PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 51 37 403.031 3762.458PVSP Palos Verdes (AV) 46 31 376.317 3734.613SubRegion 006 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ALPN Alpine-2300 Victoria 75 11 523.403 3630.800CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 70 6 495.309 3608.603DMMC Del Mar-Miracosta Co 66 14 476.632 3645.581ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 72 10 506.243 3627.079ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 69 17 493.780 3664.031OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 64 19 465.824 3673.327OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 72 5 506.257 3604.909SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 68 11 489.079 3630.779SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 68 8 485.940 3617.850BLKM Black MounSDCAPCD 68 14 489.203 3649.069PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 63 20 463.087 3675.247REDM Fallbrook SDCAPCD 67 24 482.254 3695.518SMPK Deer SprinSDCAPCD 68 19 487.881 3671.612SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 66 11 476.604 3633.479TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 71 4 502.161 3595.415TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 68 4 489.151 3597.222TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 71 4 501.409 3598.441VCEN Valley CenSDCAPCD 70 20 497.722 3676.871WSPR Warner SprSDCAPCD 76 22 529.371 3686.862SubRegion 007 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 34 68 318.335 3917.192BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 34 67 315.231 3913.556ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 38 64 337.652 3896.481EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 37 67 331.858 3911.381OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 34 69 318.448 3922.739SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 29 71 294.407 3930.657SubRegion 008 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 50 60 396.640 3878.977HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 65 46 473.963 3808.197LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 50 52 397.707 3838.298VICT Victorville-14029 Am 65 48 470.773 3817.551TEHP Monolith CE-CERT 45 62 374.316 3886.345SubRegion 009 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 99 8 643.784 3615.183CLXC Calexico-900 Grant S 99 8 640.658 3615.138EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 98 10 635.792 3628.008INDO Indio-46-990 Jackson 85 30 574.140 3728.987JOSH Joshua Tree National 82 38 556.905 3769.525MEXI Mexicali 1 101 7 650.302 3610.045MEXT Mexicali 2 101 5 654.966 3604.664MEXU Mexicali 3 100 7 645.747 3611.053PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 79 34 543.172 3745.428TNPM Twentynine Palms-607 88 40 587.597 3777.153CLXE Calexico CARB 101 8 650.856 3616.181MEXA Mexicali CARB 100 7 647.525 3614.356* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0000 SubRegion 20 10.0 20 3.8 13 -7 0.38 -4.5 4.5 -0.56 0.56 -0.23Subregional Peak: 12.8 14 -6 1.28 (at cell 40 x 37)CATA Catalina AP (AV) 1 7.0 0 3.5 0 0 0.49 -0.5 0.5 -11.15 11.15 -99.00CLEM San ClemenSDCAPCD 19 10.0 20 3.8 13 -7 0.38 -0.6 0.6 -0.59 0.59 -0.23* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 7 8.0 13 6.0 16 3 0.76 -1.7 1.7 -0.23 0.23 0.29Subregional Peak: 8.8 14 1 1.11 (at cell 08 x 66)ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 4 8.0 13 5.9 14 1 0.74 -0.3 0.3 -0.40 0.40 0.87LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 3 7.0 15 6.0 16 1 0.86 -0.2 0.2 -0.53 0.53 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 30 9.0 12 9.6 16 4 1.07 -2.3 2.7 -0.29 0.34 -0.13Subregional Peak: 9.9 15 3 1.10 (at cell 39 x 43)OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 3 8.0 11 5.1 12 1 0.63 -0.4 0.4 -2.94 3.43 0.74PRTG Piru-2SW, 2815 Teleg 3 7.0 11 6.5 13 2 0.93 -0.2 0.2 -2.94 3.43 0.74SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 7 9.0 12 9.6 16 4 1.07 -0.1 0.3 -1.26 1.47 -0.23TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 3 7.0 12 5.9 14 2 0.84 -0.2 0.2 -2.94 3.43 -99.00LAGP Point Mugu USN 14 9.0 11 6.3 13 2 0.70 -0.4 0.4 -0.63 0.73 -0.03* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 23 10.0 13 12.0 18 5 1.20 -0.5 2.1 -0.05 0.27 -0.08Subregional Peak: 15.7 15 2 1.57 (at cell 42 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 2 9.0 13 6.2 13 0 0.69 -0.3 0.3 -0.58 3.08 -99.00RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 3 8.0 12 8.9 14 2 1.12 -0.1 0.3 -0.39 2.06 -0.83CALB Calabasas (AV) 3 8.0 11 8.9 13 2 1.11 -0.1 0.3 -0.39 2.06 -0.83CSUN Van Nuys NOAA 4 10.0 13 8.5 14 1 0.85 -0.3 0.3 -0.29 1.54 0.37SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 4 10.0 13 8.9 15 2 0.89 -0.1 0.1 -0.29 1.54 0.57WILS Mount WilsCE-CERT 7 9.0 14 12.0 18 4 1.33 0.2 0.3 -0.17 0.88 -0.65* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 134 14.0 16 17.8 18 2 1.27 1.0 2.6 0.13 0.31 0.35Subregional Peak: 18.7 17 1 1.33 (at cell 74 x 36)LKAR Lake Arrowhead-27400 16 14.0 16 17.8 18 2 1.27 0.1 0.5 1.12 2.62 0.17AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 5 10.0 14 8.9 14 0 0.89 -0.1 0.1 3.58 8.39 0.56BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 12 13.0 15 17.2 17 2 1.32 0.1 0.3 1.49 3.50 0.71FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 5 10.0 14 11.3 16 2 1.13 0.1 0.3 3.58 8.39 -0.27GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 6 10.0 12 10.1 15 3 1.01 0.0 0.1 2.98 6.99 0.51LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 9 10.0 13 14.3 15 2 1.43 0.5 0.6 1.99 4.66 0.36LGRE Crestline-Lake Grego 8 12.0 14 16.5 17 3 1.37 0.3 0.3 2.24 5.24 -0.01PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 10 9.0 18 10.2 19 1 1.13 0.0 0.2 1.79 4.19 0.25POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 3 9.0 13 8.6 14 1 0.96 0.0 0.2 5.96 13.98 0.03RDLD Redlands-500 N. Dear 9 12.0 14 17.0 16 2 1.41 0.3 0.3 1.99 4.66 0.51RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 8 12.0 15 12.6 14 -1 1.05 0.1 0.2 2.24 5.24 0.67SANB San Bernardino-24302 6 11.0 14 14.0 15 1 1.27 0.1 0.3 2.98 6.99 0.03SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 4 9.0 13 10.6 16 3 1.18 0.2 0.3 4.47 10.49 -0.91ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 4 9.0 14 10.7 16 2 1.19 0.2 0.2 4.47 10.49 0.11CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 2 8.0 14 8.3 15 1 1.04 0.0 0.0 8.94 20.97 -99.00CAJC Cajon MDAQMD 9 10.0 14 8.8 15 1 0.88 -0.3 0.3 1.99 4.66 0.65MBLD Azusa CARB 15 13.0 14 17.4 17 3 1.34 0.1 0.3 1.19 2.80 0.20TCCC Temecula SCAQMD 3 8.0 18 13.3 17 -1 1.67 0.7 0.7 5.96 13.98 0.22* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 19 10.0 14 8.8 15 1 0.88 -1.5 1.9 -0.19 0.23 0.30Subregional Peak: 14.7 17 3 1.47 (at cell 60 x 32)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 2 7.0 13 8.8 15 2 1.26 0.2 0.2 -1.77 2.22 -99.00ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 4 10.0 14 7.7 13 -1 0.77 -0.1 0.1 -0.88 1.11 0.66LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 2 8.0 13 4.2 13 0 0.53 -0.5 0.5 -1.77 2.22 -99.00LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 1 9.0 14 7.2 14 0 0.80 -0.2 0.2 -3.54 4.44 -99.00PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 5 9.0 14 5.7 12 -2 0.63 -0.3 0.3 -0.71 0.89 -0.61PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 5 9.0 13 7.5 14 1 0.83 -0.2 0.2 -0.71 0.89 0.67* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 49 11.0 0 11.1 13 13 1.01 -2.3 2.8 -0.28 0.35 -0.35Subregional Peak: 14.8 17 17 1.35 (at cell 81 x 06)ALPN Alpine-2300 Victoria 4 9.0 11 9.1 13 2 1.01 0.0 0.2 -3.38 4.23 -0.61ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 4 8.0 16 6.4 14 -2 0.80 -0.4 0.4 -3.38 4.23 -0.38SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 3 9.0 15 4.8 14 -1 0.54 -0.4 0.4 -4.51 5.64 -0.50BLKM Black MounSDCAPCD 9 11.0 0 8.0 13 13 0.72 -0.6 0.6 -1.50 1.88 -0.76REDM Fallbrook SDCAPCD 14 9.0 10 11.1 13 3 1.23 -0.1 0.2 -0.97 1.21 0.31SMPK Deer SprinSDCAPCD 9 9.0 15 6.3 12 -3 0.71 -0.3 0.3 -1.50 1.88 -0.19SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 1 8.0 17 3.9 17 0 0.49 -0.5 0.5 -13.53 16.91 -99.00VCEN Valley CenSDCAPCD 1 7.0 11 8.1 11 0 1.16 0.2 0.2 -13.53 16.91 -99.00WSPR Warner SprSDCAPCD 4 8.0 13 5.7 12 -1 0.71 -0.2 0.2 -3.38 4.23 -0.99* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 47 12.0 15 8.3 17 2 0.69 -2.1 2.2 -0.24 0.26 0.17Subregional Peak: 11.7 17 2 0.97 (at cell 42 x 66)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 8 9.0 11 6.8 15 4 0.76 -0.3 0.3 -1.44 1.52 -0.80BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 9 9.0 11 7.2 15 4 0.80 -0.3 0.3 -1.28 1.36 -0.17ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 11 12.0 15 8.3 17 2 0.69 -0.2 0.2 -1.05 1.11 0.47EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 8 12.0 13 8.2 17 4 0.68 -0.1 0.2 -1.44 1.52 0.06OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 7 8.0 11 6.4 14 3 0.80 -0.3 0.3 -1.64 1.74 -0.19SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 4 8.0 16 5.8 16 0 0.72 -0.2 0.2 -2.88 3.05 0.83* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 26 10.0 17 9.8 17 0 0.98 -1.6 2.0 -0.20 0.25 0.10Subregional Peak: 16.2 19 2 1.62 (at cell 66 x 44)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 8 10.0 17 7.0 16 -1 0.70 -0.3 0.3 -0.65 0.82 0.87HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 6 9.0 16 9.8 17 1 1.08 0.1 0.1 -0.86 1.10 0.40LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 3 8.0 10 5.4 11 1 0.67 -0.3 0.3 -1.72 2.19 0.00TEHP Monolith CE-CERT 9 9.0 17 6.9 16 -1 0.76 -0.2 0.2 -0.57 0.73 0.12* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 70 12.0 19 12.9 15 -4 1.07 -1.6 2.9 -0.18 0.37 0.09Subregional Peak: 17.9 17 -2 1.49 (at cell 75 x 36)CLXC Calexico-900 Grant S 21 10.0 13 8.7 14 1 0.87 -0.5 0.5 -0.59 1.23 0.86EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 9 7.0 10 7.9 14 4 1.13 -0.1 0.1 -1.38 2.86 0.86JOSH Joshua Tree National 12 12.0 19 8.4 20 1 0.70 -0.2 0.2 -1.04 2.15 0.78MEXI Mexicali 1 8 8.0 8 11.9 16 8 1.49 0.0 0.5 -1.55 3.22 -0.46MEXT Mexicali 2 5 10.0 21 12.9 15 -6 1.29 0.4 0.6 -2.49 5.15 -0.88PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 8 11.0 18 8.6 19 1 0.78 -0.1 0.1 -1.55 3.22 0.84MEXA Mexicali CARB 7 8.0 13 11.1 15 2 1.39 0.3 0.3 -1.78 3.68 -0.15* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0000 SubRegion 14 9.0 19 5.2 20 1 0.58 -3.0 3.0 -0.41 0.41 -0.14Subregional Peak: 17.4 19 0 1.94 (at cell 56 x 25)CATI Catalina Isl (AV) 2 7.0 17 4.4 18 1 0.62 -0.4 0.4 -2.90 2.90 -99.00CATA Catalina AP (AV) 6 7.0 13 5.2 20 7 0.74 -0.4 0.4 -0.97 0.97 -99.00CLEM San ClemenSDCAPCD 6 9.0 19 4.1 19 0 0.45 -0.5 0.5 -0.97 0.97 0.62* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 30 10.0 14 10.0 16 2 1.00 -1.5 2.0 -0.18 0.26 -0.04Subregional Peak: 22.6 14 0 2.26 (at cell 14 x 62)ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 3 7.0 11 5.5 13 2 0.78 -0.3 0.3 -1.84 2.63 -99.00CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 5 10.0 14 6.9 14 0 0.69 -0.2 0.2 -1.11 1.58 0.85GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 1 7.0 16 5.8 16 0 0.83 -0.2 0.2 -5.53 7.89 -99.00GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 2 7.0 10 6.6 13 3 0.94 -0.2 0.2 -2.77 3.94 -99.00GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 1 7.0 16 5.9 16 0 0.84 -0.2 0.2 -5.53 7.89 -99.00LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 4 7.0 13 10.0 16 3 1.43 0.1 0.3 -1.38 1.97 -99.00LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 10 10.0 14 9.5 18 4 0.95 -0.2 0.3 -0.55 0.79 -0.29SYAP Santa Ynez-Airport R 4 8.0 10 5.2 13 3 0.64 -0.4 0.4 -1.38 1.97 -0.68* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 47 10.0 14 7.2 15 1 0.72 -2.4 2.4 -0.29 0.30 -0.28Subregional Peak: 11.7 16 2 1.17 (at cell 39 x 48)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 1 7.0 15 6.2 15 0 0.89 -0.1 0.1 -13.83 13.94 -99.00OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 2 7.0 11 5.1 11 0 0.72 -0.3 0.3 -6.91 6.97 -99.00PRTG Piru-2SW, 2815 Teleg 4 8.0 13 6.6 15 2 0.83 -0.2 0.2 -3.46 3.49 -0.37SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 10 9.0 13 7.2 15 2 0.80 -0.2 0.2 -1.38 1.39 0.10THOS Oak View-5500 Casita 10 10.0 14 7.0 18 4 0.70 -0.2 0.2 -1.38 1.39 0.54TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 6 8.0 17 6.1 13 -4 0.76 -0.2 0.2 -2.30 2.32 -0.39LAGP Point Mugu USN 14 10.0 18 5.3 15 -3 0.53 -0.5 0.5 -0.99 1.00 -0.40* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 32 14.0 11 11.2 17 6 0.80 -2.2 3.0 -0.20 0.32 -0.23Subregional Peak: 11.7 18 7 0.84 (at cell 52 x 41)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 5 11.0 14 9.6 16 2 0.87 -0.1 0.2 -1.30 2.08 0.13RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 3 12.0 12 7.7 13 1 0.64 -0.3 0.3 -2.17 3.47 -0.19CALB Calabasas (AV) 9 11.0 11 8.2 15 4 0.75 -0.4 0.4 -0.72 1.16 0.27CSUN Van Nuys NOAA 9 14.0 11 9.3 14 3 0.66 -0.2 0.4 -0.72 1.16 -0.63SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 2 9.0 12 7.1 12 0 0.79 -0.1 0.1 -3.26 5.20 -99.00WILS Mount WilsCE-CERT 4 9.0 4 11.2 17 13 1.25 0.1 0.3 -1.63 2.60 -0.48* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 140 19.0 14 19.3 17 3 1.01 -0.6 2.4 -0.04 0.25 0.28Subregional Peak: 19.9 17 3 1.05 (at cell 63 x 30)LKAR Lake Arrowhead-27400 19 15.0 15 8.4 14 -1 0.56 -0.3 0.3 -0.28 1.87 0.34AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 6 12.0 12 8.4 16 4 0.70 -0.2 0.2 -0.88 5.91 -0.40BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 14 12.0 17 14.7 17 0 1.22 0.2 0.3 -0.38 2.53 0.64FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 8 13.0 14 11.3 16 2 0.87 0.0 0.2 -0.66 4.44 0.40GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 2 10.0 12 7.7 12 0 0.77 -0.2 0.2 -2.64 17.74 -99.00LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 10 11.0 14 19.3 17 3 1.75 0.5 0.5 -0.53 3.55 0.72LGRE Crestline-Lake Grego 8 13.0 14 8.0 14 0 0.62 -0.1 0.2 -0.66 4.44 0.30PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 8 7.0 0 7.9 0 0 1.13 -0.1 0.2 -0.66 4.44 -99.00POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 4 12.0 13 9.4 13 0 0.79 0.1 0.2 -1.32 8.87 0.65RDLD Redlands-500 N. Dear 8 17.0 15 13.3 16 1 0.78 0.0 0.2 -0.66 4.44 0.24RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 8 19.0 14 11.4 15 1 0.60 -0.2 0.2 -0.66 4.44 0.58SANB San Bernardino-24302 9 15.0 14 12.6 17 3 0.84 0.0 0.2 -0.59 3.94 0.01SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 7 11.0 13 11.1 14 1 1.01 -0.1 0.1 -0.75 5.07 0.72ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 7 11.0 14 11.0 14 0 1.00 0.0 0.0 -0.75 5.07 0.97CAJC Cajon MDAQMD 4 7.0 13 6.7 14 1 0.96 -0.1 0.1 -1.32 8.87 -99.00MBLD Azusa CARB 12 12.0 14 6.2 0 -14 0.52 -0.4 0.4 -0.44 2.96 -0.38TCCC Temecula SCAQMD 6 10.0 15 15.6 18 3 1.56 0.6 0.6 -0.88 5.91 0.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 33 11.0 14 12.2 15 1 1.11 -2.0 2.7 -0.23 0.32 0.22Subregional Peak: 19.5 15 1 1.77 (at cell 57 x 27)ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 5 11.0 14 12.2 15 1 1.11 0.1 0.3 -1.51 2.14 0.05LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 4 9.0 14 8.1 15 1 0.90 -0.2 0.3 -1.88 2.67 0.04LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 2 7.0 13 7.5 13 0 1.07 0.1 0.1 -3.77 5.35 -99.00PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 7 11.0 12 8.8 16 4 0.80 -0.3 0.4 -1.08 1.53 -0.03VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 4 9.0 13 9.3 14 1 1.03 -0.3 0.3 -1.88 2.67 0.95PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 5 9.0 11 6.9 15 4 0.77 -0.4 0.4 -1.51 2.14 -0.41PVSP Palos Verdes (AV) 6 9.0 19 8.6 14 -5 0.96 -0.3 0.4 -1.26 1.78 -0.16* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 104 12.0 9 16.1 18 9 1.34 0.1 2.5 0.02 0.30 0.19Subregional Peak: 20.0 18 9 1.67 (at cell 64 x 25)ALPN Alpine-2300 Victoria 7 11.0 13 13.3 14 1 1.21 0.3 0.3 0.26 4.45 0.41CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 6 10.0 11 8.7 13 2 0.87 -0.2 0.2 0.30 5.20 -0.01ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 3 10.0 12 9.9 14 2 0.99 0.2 0.3 0.60 10.39 -0.96ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 3 8.0 11 7.9 18 7 0.99 -0.1 0.1 0.60 10.39 -0.38OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 1 7.0 12 8.3 12 0 1.18 0.2 0.2 1.81 31.17 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 5 12.0 9 7.9 12 3 0.66 -0.3 0.3 0.36 6.23 -0.38SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 5 10.0 14 7.2 12 -2 0.72 -0.2 0.2 0.36 6.23 0.22SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 3 9.0 14 7.5 13 -1 0.84 -0.1 0.2 0.60 10.39 -0.08BLKM Black MounSDCAPCD 12 10.0 13 9.2 10 -3 0.92 -0.1 0.2 0.15 2.60 0.31REDM Fallbrook SDCAPCD 14 12.0 14 16.1 18 4 1.34 0.3 0.4 0.13 2.23 0.19SMPK Deer SprinSDCAPCD 12 10.0 12 10.3 19 7 1.03 0.0 0.3 0.15 2.60 0.22SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 7 10.0 13 6.3 13 0 0.63 -0.5 0.5 0.26 4.45 0.28TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 5 9.0 12 9.8 13 1 1.09 -0.1 0.2 0.36 6.23 0.00TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 4 10.0 9 7.6 12 3 0.76 -0.5 0.5 0.45 7.79 -0.32VCEN Valley CenSDCAPCD 6 10.0 15 11.6 14 -1 1.16 0.3 0.3 0.30 5.20 0.33WSPR Warner SprSDCAPCD 11 10.0 17 11.3 11 -6 1.13 0.3 0.3 0.16 2.83 -0.66* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 59 13.0 15 9.0 16 1 0.70 -3.1 3.1 -0.35 0.36 0.24Subregional Peak: 10.6 17 2 0.82 (at cell 44 x 66)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 9 10.0 11 7.2 15 4 0.72 -0.3 0.4 -2.32 2.36 -0.42BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 10 10.0 11 7.4 15 4 0.74 -0.4 0.4 -2.09 2.12 0.33ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 12 13.0 15 7.8 16 1 0.60 -0.3 0.3 -1.74 1.77 0.53EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 10 11.0 12 9.0 16 4 0.82 -0.3 0.3 -2.09 2.12 0.20OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 9 9.0 11 6.8 16 5 0.75 -0.4 0.4 -2.32 2.36 0.39SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 9 9.0 12 6.0 16 4 0.67 -0.3 0.3 -2.32 2.36 0.60* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 46 11.0 17 8.0 15 -2 0.73 -2.0 2.1 -0.26 0.27 0.11Subregional Peak: 10.4 18 1 0.94 (at cell 47 x 66)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 16 11.0 17 6.9 20 3 0.62 -0.3 0.3 -0.75 0.79 0.56HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 10 7.0 8 8.0 15 7 1.14 -0.2 0.2 -1.20 1.26 -99.00LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 6 7.0 9 7.2 10 1 1.03 -0.2 0.2 -2.00 2.11 -99.00VICT Victorville-14029 Am 11 8.0 10 6.7 14 4 0.83 -0.3 0.3 -1.09 1.15 -0.24TEHP Monolith CE-CERT 3 8.0 12 5.2 12 0 0.65 -0.4 0.4 -4.00 4.21 0.87* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 80 11.0 11 12.8 16 5 1.16 -0.9 2.5 -0.11 0.33 0.08Subregional Peak: 18.0 18 7 1.63 (at cell 103 x 06)CLXC Calexico-900 Grant S 23 10.0 11 8.6 14 3 0.86 -0.4 0.4 -0.38 1.16 0.74EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 6 7.0 9 7.5 14 5 1.08 -0.1 0.2 -1.45 4.43 0.74INDO Indio-46-990 Jackson 3 7.0 11 9.3 13 2 1.33 0.3 0.3 -2.90 8.87 -99.00JOSH Joshua Tree National 12 8.0 0 6.5 8 8 0.81 -0.2 0.2 -0.72 2.22 -0.12MEXI Mexicali 1 11 8.0 7 12.4 15 8 1.55 0.1 0.4 -0.79 2.42 0.05MEXT Mexicali 2 6 11.0 11 12.8 16 5 1.16 0.1 0.4 -1.45 4.43 -0.15MEXU Mexicali 3 5 7.0 12 10.8 15 3 1.54 0.4 0.4 -1.74 5.32 -0.15PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 7 9.0 19 9.3 18 -1 1.04 0.0 0.2 -1.24 3.80 0.54MEXA Mexicali CARB 7 7.0 11 9.9 15 4 1.42 0.2 0.3 -1.24 3.80 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0000 SubRegion 6 8.0 3 4.1 8 5 0.52 -3.4 3.4 -0.45 0.45 -0.29Subregional Peak: 18.0 18 15 2.26 (at cell 38 x 37)CLEM San ClemenSDCAPCD 6 8.0 3 4.1 8 5 0.52 -0.5 0.5 -0.45 0.45 -0.29* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 27 9.0 11 7.5 14 3 0.84 -2.0 2.0 -0.25 0.25 0.21Subregional Peak: 20.5 17 6 2.28 (at cell 12 x 64)ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 4 9.0 11 6.0 14 3 0.66 -0.3 0.3 -1.66 1.70 -0.51CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 2 8.0 13 7.5 14 1 0.94 0.0 0.1 -3.33 3.41 -99.00GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 2 7.0 13 5.5 14 1 0.79 -0.2 0.2 -3.33 3.41 -99.00GAVW Gaviota West-NW Of C 2 7.0 13 5.5 14 1 0.79 -0.2 0.2 -3.33 3.41 -99.00GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 5 8.0 13 5.7 15 2 0.72 -0.3 0.3 -1.33 1.36 0.25LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 4 7.0 11 5.3 14 3 0.76 -0.3 0.3 -1.66 1.70 -99.00LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 8 9.0 13 6.5 12 -1 0.73 -0.2 0.2 -0.83 0.85 -0.06* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 49 13.0 11 11.0 14 3 0.85 -1.3 2.2 -0.13 0.25 0.29Subregional Peak: 27.6 15 4 2.12 (at cell 38 x 48)PRTG Piru-2SW, 2815 Teleg 8 11.0 15 10.0 14 -1 0.91 0.0 0.1 -0.77 1.56 0.31SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 10 13.0 11 11.0 14 3 0.85 -0.2 0.3 -0.62 1.25 0.17THOS Oak View-5500 Casita 10 9.0 16 8.2 17 1 0.91 -0.1 0.1 -0.62 1.25 -0.36TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 7 8.0 10 10.8 16 6 1.35 0.2 0.3 -0.88 1.78 -0.48LAGP Point Mugu USN 14 11.0 18 8.9 14 -4 0.81 -0.3 0.4 -0.44 0.89 0.74* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 34 13.0 12 15.4 17 5 1.18 0.0 4.0 0.06 0.44 -0.33Subregional Peak: 24.9 16 4 1.91 (at cell 39 x 49)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 4 9.0 12 10.0 14 2 1.11 -0.1 0.2 0.49 3.73 0.26RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 4 9.0 12 11.4 14 2 1.26 0.0 0.3 0.49 3.73 -0.72CALB Calabasas (AV) 8 11.0 11 15.4 17 6 1.40 0.3 0.5 0.24 1.86 -0.88CSUN Van Nuys NOAA 7 12.0 11 13.7 15 4 1.14 -0.2 0.5 0.28 2.13 -0.72SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 8 13.0 12 15.3 16 4 1.17 0.0 0.5 0.24 1.86 -0.30WILS Mount WilsCE-CERT 3 10.0 14 13.2 15 1 1.32 0.4 0.4 0.65 4.97 0.05* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 143 17.0 16 18.6 18 2 1.10 1.4 3.5 0.18 0.40 0.28Subregional Peak: 19.3 17 1 1.14 (at cell 63 x 42)LKAR Lake Arrowhead-27400 23 17.0 16 18.0 19 3 1.06 -0.2 0.4 1.13 2.48 0.72AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 3 9.0 11 10.0 13 2 1.11 -0.2 0.3 8.66 19.03 -0.90BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 9 9.0 15 10.4 18 3 1.16 0.0 0.1 2.89 6.34 0.29FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 6 12.0 13 17.2 15 2 1.43 0.3 0.6 4.33 9.52 -0.27LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 9 9.0 12 11.0 16 4 1.22 0.3 0.3 2.89 6.34 0.31LGRE Crestline-Lake Grego 15 15.0 14 18.6 18 4 1.24 0.2 0.4 1.73 3.81 0.26PERR Perris-237 .5 N "D" 6 13.0 14 10.2 15 1 0.78 0.0 0.1 4.33 9.52 0.68PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 12 11.0 17 16.3 20 3 1.48 0.3 0.4 2.16 4.76 0.29POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 4 9.0 12 14.6 14 2 1.62 0.3 0.3 6.49 14.27 0.39RDLD Redlands-500 N. Dear 8 15.0 14 11.6 16 2 0.78 -0.2 0.2 3.25 7.14 0.57RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 6 13.0 12 14.7 15 3 1.13 0.0 0.2 4.33 9.52 0.21SANB San Bernardino-24302 7 14.0 13 14.9 16 3 1.07 0.1 0.3 3.71 8.16 0.22SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 5 13.0 13 16.2 15 2 1.24 0.2 0.4 5.20 11.42 -0.07ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 5 13.0 14 16.3 15 1 1.25 0.3 0.3 5.20 11.42 0.38CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 5 11.0 17 17.6 19 2 1.60 0.7 0.7 5.20 11.42 -0.13CAJC Cajon MDAQMD 9 12.0 18 17.8 19 1 1.48 0.6 0.6 2.89 6.34 0.63MBLD Azusa CARB 10 12.0 14 18.1 17 3 1.51 0.8 0.8 2.60 5.71 -0.28TCCC Temecula SCAQMD 1 7.0 12 9.9 12 0 1.42 0.4 0.4 25.98 57.10 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 6 8.0 11 9.9 13 2 1.24 -3.0 4.4 -0.43 0.62 0.26Subregional Peak: 17.5 15 4 2.19 (at cell 60 x 32)PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 3 8.0 11 9.9 13 2 1.24 0.1 0.3 -0.85 1.24 -0.86PVSP Palos Verdes (AV) 3 7.0 3 0.2 6 3 0.03 -1.0 1.0 -0.85 1.24 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 36 11.0 11 11.2 12 1 1.02 -1.0 2.1 -0.13 0.27 0.39Subregional Peak: 19.2 17 6 1.75 (at cell 67 x 14)ALPN Alpine-2300 Victoria 11 10.0 10 9.7 15 5 0.97 0.0 0.2 -0.41 0.90 0.57ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 2 8.0 10 9.5 11 1 1.19 0.2 0.2 -2.27 4.94 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 2 8.0 9 4.5 10 1 0.57 -0.4 0.4 -2.27 4.94 -99.00REDM Fallbrook SDCAPCD 9 10.0 10 9.6 10 0 0.96 -0.2 0.3 -0.51 1.10 0.79SMPK Deer SprinSDCAPCD 1 8.0 9 6.9 9 0 0.86 -0.1 0.1 -4.55 9.89 -99.00VCEN Valley CenSDCAPCD 4 11.0 11 11.2 12 1 1.02 0.2 0.2 -1.14 2.47 -0.33WSPR Warner SprSDCAPCD 7 9.0 14 4.9 18 4 0.55 -0.4 0.4 -0.65 1.41 0.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 59 14.0 13 11.7 18 5 0.84 -3.1 3.3 -0.32 0.35 0.07Subregional Peak: 12.2 18 5 0.87 (at cell 37 x 67)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 9 11.0 12 7.6 18 6 0.69 -0.4 0.4 -2.12 2.29 -0.48BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 10 11.0 13 8.7 16 3 0.79 -0.4 0.4 -1.91 2.06 0.17ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 15 10.0 12 7.6 19 7 0.76 -0.3 0.3 -1.27 1.38 0.29EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 10 14.0 13 11.7 18 5 0.84 -0.2 0.3 -1.91 2.06 -0.22OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 7 10.0 12 7.5 17 5 0.75 -0.5 0.5 -2.73 2.95 -0.33SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 8 10.0 14 6.3 17 3 0.63 -0.3 0.3 -2.39 2.58 0.58* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 44 13.0 16 17.7 19 3 1.36 0.3 3.4 0.05 0.40 0.31Subregional Peak: 20.7 19 3 1.59 (at cell 45 x 53)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 14 11.0 17 9.8 22 5 0.89 -0.3 0.3 0.15 1.25 0.45HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 11 13.0 16 17.7 19 3 1.36 0.3 0.5 0.19 1.59 0.17LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 7 11.0 17 15.8 20 3 1.43 0.2 0.4 0.30 2.50 -0.52VICT Victorville-14029 Am 12 13.0 17 16.8 20 3 1.29 0.2 0.4 0.18 1.46 0.44* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 30 8.0 0 8.6 14 14 1.07 -2.4 2.5 -0.32 0.34 0.34Subregional Peak: 10.1 20 20 1.26 (at cell 74 x 40)CLXC Calexico-900 Grant S 24 8.0 0 8.6 14 14 1.07 -0.4 0.4 -0.40 0.42 0.53EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 1 7.0 15 8.0 15 0 1.15 0.1 0.1 -9.61 10.07 -99.00JOSH Joshua Tree National 3 8.0 22 5.7 21 -1 0.72 -0.2 0.2 -3.20 3.36 0.26TNPM Twentynine Palms-607 2 7.0 20 6.0 21 1 0.86 -0.2 0.2 -4.80 5.03 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfSubRegional DescriptionsSubRegion 001 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------LOMP Lompoc-4350 Constell 7 54 182.435 3845.052GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 19 47 241.171 3813.608ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 4 71 167.308 3932.630CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 25 46 274.784 3809.034ECSP El Capitan State Par 15 48 222.842 3815.987GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 12 48 206.051 3818.354GAVW Gaviota West-NW Of C 12 48 206.051 3818.354GCTY Grover City-9 Le Sag 5 63 170.360 3891.772GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 12 49 207.757 3823.853GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 12 48 207.582 3818.305LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 15 48 221.421 3819.730LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 19 49 244.541 3824.616LPHS Lompoc-HS&P Facility 8 54 187.080 3846.744LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 7 52 183.708 3837.602PTCL Point Conception Lig 7 48 183.013 3817.260SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 21 47 251.846 3811.467SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 4 67 168.001 3910.379SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 8 59 186.376 3870.837UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 18 47 236.471 3810.039VBPP Vandenberg AFB-Sts P 4 51 168.222 3832.590SubRegion 002 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 31 43 303.549 3791.740EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 28 44 286.748 3795.806OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 29 47 291.723 3812.339SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 40 43 345.024 3792.811THOS Oak View-5500 Casita 26 46 279.337 3807.076TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 36 42 328.007 3785.712SubRegion 003 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 47 41 380.176 3781.205RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 43 41 360.232 3783.329CALB Calabasas (AV) 41 40 351.388 3779.520SubRegion 004 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------LKAR Lake Arrowhead-27400 67 42 481.577 3786.003AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 54 40 415.477 3777.125BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 73 35 512.325 3752.730FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 61 39 453.879 3773.162GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 55 40 421.624 3777.071LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 64 30 469.097 3725.054PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 60 46 449.457 3808.298POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 57 38 430.791 3769.607RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 63 37 461.521 3762.040SANB San Bernardino-24302 66 39 475.402 3773.081SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 58 39 438.493 3771.402ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 59 39 440.031 3771.392CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 62 45 458.830 3803.663SubRegion 005 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 54 33 416.706 3741.999CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 54 30 415.015 3725.381HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 45 35 373.661 3753.563LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 48 39 386.188 3770.040LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 53 35 412.180 3753.128LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 48 35 389.069 3753.370NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 49 33 390.482 3742.264PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 50 39 398.512 3771.747VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 44 38 366.166 3768.454PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 51 37 403.031 3762.458SubRegion 006 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 70 6 495.309 3608.603ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 72 10 506.243 3627.079ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 69 17 493.780 3664.031OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 64 19 465.824 3673.327OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 72 5 506.257 3604.909SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 68 11 489.079 3630.779SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 68 8 485.940 3617.850PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 63 20 463.087 3675.247SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 66 11 476.604 3633.479TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 71 4 502.161 3595.415TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 68 4 489.151 3597.222TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 71 4 501.409 3598.441SubRegion 007 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 34 68 318.335 3917.192BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 34 67 315.231 3913.556ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 38 64 337.652 3896.481EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 37 67 331.858 3911.381OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 34 69 318.448 3922.739SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 29 71 294.407 3930.657SubRegion 008 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 50 60 396.640 3878.977HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 65 46 473.963 3808.197LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 50 52 397.707 3838.298VICT Victorville-14029 Am 65 48 470.773 3817.551SubRegion 009 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 99 8 643.784 3615.183MEXI Mexicali 1 101 7 650.302 3610.045MEXT Mexicali 2 101 5 654.966 3604.664MEXU Mexicali 3 100 7 645.747 3611.053PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 79 34 543.172 3745.428TNPM Twentynine Palms-607 88 40 587.597 3777.153CLXE Calexico CARB 101 8 650.856 3616.181MEXA Mexicali CARB 100 7 647.525 3614.356* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 46 3.0 22 3.6 22 0 1.19 -1.3 1.4 -0.59 0.66 -0.15Subregional Peak: 4.4 21 -1 1.46 (at cell 21 x 47)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 2 2.0 22 2.9 22 0 1.45 0.3 0.3 -13.51 15.21 -99.00ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 6 3.0 22 1.5 6 -16 0.51 -0.6 0.6 -4.50 5.07 -0.40ECSP El Capitan State Par 6 3.0 21 0.4 23 2 0.14 -0.9 0.9 -4.50 5.07 0.64GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 1 2.0 21 0.3 21 0 0.15 -0.8 0.8 -27.01 30.43 -99.00GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 5 2.0 10 0.1 10 0 0.05 -1.0 1.0 -5.40 6.09 -99.00GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 3 2.0 16 0.4 23 7 0.18 -0.9 0.9 -9.00 10.14 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 13 2.0 7 3.6 22 15 1.78 -0.4 0.6 -2.08 2.34 -99.00SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 4 2.0 20 0.6 22 2 0.32 -0.7 0.7 -6.75 7.61 -99.00SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 5 3.0 21 1.7 7 -14 0.57 -0.5 0.5 -5.40 6.09 0.07UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 1 2.0 23 2.1 23 0 1.05 0.0 0.0 -27.01 30.43 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 43 5.0 0 4.9 22 22 0.98 -0.7 1.0 -0.26 0.37 0.69Subregional Peak: 5.8 22 22 1.16 (at cell 37 x 40)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 6 3.0 21 3.2 23 2 1.07 -0.2 0.4 -1.88 2.62 0.09EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 2 2.0 22 1.3 23 1 0.65 -0.4 0.4 -5.63 7.86 -99.00OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 7 2.0 0 0.8 22 22 0.41 -0.8 0.8 -1.61 2.25 -99.00SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 16 5.0 0 4.9 22 22 0.98 -0.3 0.3 -0.70 0.98 0.61TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 12 4.0 7 4.2 22 15 1.04 0.0 0.2 -0.94 1.31 0.67* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 58 10.0 8 8.8 20 12 0.88 -0.6 1.6 0.00 0.36 0.42Subregional Peak: 12.6 21 13 1.26 (at cell 46 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 10.0 8 8.8 20 12 0.88 -0.3 0.3 0.01 0.91 0.43RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 20 7.0 8 6.0 20 12 0.86 0.1 0.4 0.01 1.05 0.38CALB Calabasas (AV) 15 6.0 8 4.9 4 -4 0.82 0.3 0.4 0.01 1.40 0.40* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 210 11.0 8 8.2 21 13 0.74 -0.9 1.7 -0.12 0.38 0.35Subregional Peak: 12.4 3 -5 1.12 (at cell 60 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 23 8.0 8 8.2 21 13 1.02 0.0 0.3 -1.12 3.49 -0.12BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 14 6.0 0 6.8 22 22 1.13 0.2 0.6 -1.84 5.73 0.34FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 23 10.0 9 7.3 22 13 0.73 -0.1 0.3 -1.12 3.49 0.25GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 23 7.0 8 4.6 19 11 0.66 -0.2 0.3 -1.12 3.49 -0.15LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 11 4.0 5 4.8 7 2 1.19 0.1 0.2 -2.35 7.29 0.70PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 3 2.0 19 0.4 21 2 0.18 -0.9 0.9 -8.61 26.73 -99.00POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 11.0 8 6.6 20 12 0.60 -0.3 0.3 -1.12 3.49 0.17RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 20 7.0 7 6.8 7 0 0.98 -0.2 0.3 -1.29 4.01 0.84SANB San Bernardino-24302 23 7.0 21 6.6 22 1 0.94 -0.4 0.5 -1.12 3.49 0.46SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 22 7.0 7 7.6 21 14 1.08 0.0 0.4 -1.17 3.64 0.27ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 22 7.0 8 7.7 20 12 1.11 0.1 0.4 -1.17 3.64 0.10CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 3 3.0 19 0.7 20 1 0.24 -0.8 0.8 -8.61 26.73 -0.12* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 209 10.0 8 10.1 20 12 1.01 0.9 1.8 0.36 0.54 0.43Subregional Peak: 11.7 19 11 1.17 (at cell 49 x 38)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 23 6.0 8 7.6 21 13 1.27 0.3 0.5 3.30 4.92 0.10CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 14 3.0 7 5.5 21 14 1.82 0.4 0.6 5.42 8.08 0.21HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 17 4.0 7 6.4 8 1 1.59 0.4 0.7 4.46 6.65 0.16LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 23 10.0 8 10.1 20 12 1.01 0.6 0.6 3.30 4.92 0.52LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 8.0 10 6.7 0 -10 0.83 0.1 0.4 3.30 4.92 0.19LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 23 8.0 8 8.7 10 2 1.08 -0.1 0.3 3.30 4.92 0.33NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 23 9.0 10 8.7 10 0 0.97 0.6 0.6 3.30 4.92 0.74PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 22 10.0 10 9.9 20 10 0.99 0.3 0.4 3.45 5.14 0.20VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 18 4.0 8 6.3 23 15 1.56 0.9 0.9 4.21 6.28 0.49PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 23 10.0 10 7.7 21 11 0.77 0.3 0.4 3.30 4.92 0.38* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 176 7.0 7 6.7 23 16 0.96 0.5 1.1 0.26 0.42 0.25Subregional Peak: 9.2 23 16 1.32 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 15 3.0 6 4.9 20 14 1.62 0.6 0.6 3.09 4.98 0.00ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 22 6.0 7 4.7 21 14 0.78 0.0 0.2 2.11 3.39 0.76ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 21 4.0 9 4.2 7 -2 1.06 0.1 0.3 2.21 3.55 0.43OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 11 2.0 0 5.4 7 7 2.72 0.6 0.6 4.22 6.79 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 23 7.0 7 4.7 21 14 0.67 0.1 0.4 2.02 3.25 -0.19SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 21 3.0 7 5.0 7 0 1.67 0.4 0.5 2.21 3.55 0.58SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 21 5.0 21 3.9 7 -14 0.77 0.0 0.2 2.21 3.55 0.50PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 9 3.0 0 4.2 6 6 1.39 0.2 0.3 5.15 8.29 -0.14TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 19 7.0 8 6.4 23 15 0.91 0.1 0.4 2.44 3.93 0.50TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 1 2.0 6 2.1 6 0 1.05 0.1 0.1 46.38 74.65 -99.00TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 13 4.0 7 6.7 23 16 1.69 1.0 1.0 3.57 5.74 -0.17* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 62 6.0 21 7.6 2 -19 1.27 -0.4 1.6 -0.02 0.58 0.12Subregional Peak: 8.7 2 -19 1.44 (at cell 34 x 69)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 18 6.0 21 5.0 20 -1 0.84 0.0 0.3 -0.07 2.00 0.62BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 12 6.0 22 4.4 21 -1 0.73 0.0 0.2 -0.10 2.99 0.48ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 2 4.0 6 0.3 5 -1 0.07 -0.9 0.9 -0.61 17.96 -99.00EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 7 4.0 3 2.3 20 17 0.58 -0.6 0.7 -0.17 5.13 -0.47OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 11 3.0 3 7.6 2 -1 2.54 1.2 1.2 -0.11 3.27 -0.12SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 12 4.0 23 1.1 22 -1 0.28 -0.7 0.7 -0.10 2.99 0.47* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 25 5.0 6 3.9 2 -4 0.78 -1.8 2.0 -0.60 0.70 -0.04Subregional Peak: 8.0 2 -4 1.61 (at cell 65 x 49)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 6 5.0 6 0.4 0 -6 0.08 -0.9 0.9 -2.51 2.92 0.25HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 8 5.0 22 3.9 2 -20 0.78 -0.1 0.5 -1.88 2.19 -0.14LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 11 3.0 0 1.2 23 23 0.40 -0.8 0.8 -1.37 1.59 0.78* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 54 8.0 20 6.7 21 1 0.84 -0.9 1.3 -0.14 0.32 0.48Subregional Peak: 7.5 21 1 0.93 (at cell 100 x 07)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 6 4.0 20 3.5 6 -14 0.89 -0.1 0.2 -1.24 2.90 0.56MEXI Mexicali 1 8 7.0 20 6.7 21 1 0.96 -0.1 0.3 -0.93 2.17 0.81MEXT Mexicali 2 7 8.0 20 3.3 22 2 0.41 -0.7 0.7 -1.06 2.49 0.75MEXU Mexicali 3 10 7.0 20 5.9 21 1 0.84 -0.1 0.2 -0.74 1.74 0.88PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 10 4.0 1 3.4 0 -1 0.86 -0.1 0.3 -0.74 1.74 0.58CLXE Calexico CARB 4 7.0 21 3.5 21 0 0.49 -0.3 0.3 -1.86 4.35 0.87MEXA Mexicali CARB 9 5.0 20 5.7 21 1 1.13 0.3 0.3 -0.83 1.93 0.56* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 75 4.0 6 2.7 7 1 0.68 -1.5 1.5 -0.67 0.67 0.19Subregional Peak: 3.3 7 1 0.82 (at cell 21 x 47)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 14 3.0 7 1.4 6 -1 0.46 -0.7 0.7 -3.57 3.57 0.10ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 10 3.0 21 0.5 7 -14 0.16 -0.9 0.9 -5.00 5.00 -0.17CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 2 2.0 18 0.6 19 1 0.30 -0.7 0.7 -25.01 25.01 -99.00ECSP El Capitan State Par 10 4.0 6 0.5 1 -5 0.12 -0.9 0.9 -5.00 5.00 -0.37GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 3 2.0 11 0.2 20 9 0.10 -0.9 0.9 -16.68 16.68 -99.00GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 1 2.0 6 0.3 6 0 0.16 -0.8 0.8 -50.03 50.03 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 19 4.0 7 2.7 7 0 0.68 -0.4 0.4 -2.63 2.63 0.69SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 5 3.0 6 0.6 0 -6 0.20 -0.8 0.8 -10.01 10.01 0.28SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 8 3.0 7 0.8 7 0 0.26 -0.7 0.7 -6.25 6.25 0.54UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 3 2.0 0 1.7 0 0 0.87 -0.6 0.6 -16.68 16.68 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 54 6.0 7 3.3 7 0 0.55 -1.4 1.4 -0.44 0.48 0.34Subregional Peak: 5.2 0 -7 0.86 (at cell 37 x 40)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 17 4.0 21 3.3 0 -21 0.83 -0.5 0.5 -1.40 1.54 -0.08EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 7 3.0 22 1.0 23 1 0.34 -0.6 0.6 -3.40 3.73 0.55OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 1 2.0 7 0.2 7 0 0.10 -0.9 0.9 -23.83 26.10 -99.00SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 16 6.0 7 3.3 7 0 0.55 -0.4 0.4 -1.49 1.63 0.40TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 13 6.0 21 3.2 6 -15 0.54 -0.3 0.4 -1.83 2.01 -0.10* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 63 11.0 10 4.9 20 10 0.44 -2.3 2.7 -0.36 0.50 0.21Subregional Peak: 9.0 0 -10 0.82 (at cell 46 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 11.0 10 4.4 0 -10 0.40 -0.6 0.6 -1.00 1.37 -0.19RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 23 9.0 8 4.9 20 12 0.54 -0.4 0.4 -1.00 1.37 0.89CALB Calabasas (AV) 17 5.0 2 4.7 4 2 0.93 0.0 0.5 -1.35 1.85 0.38* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 202 14.0 8 7.5 6 -2 0.53 -2.2 2.6 -0.40 0.51 0.20Subregional Peak: 13.5 3 -5 0.96 (at cell 64 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 23 9.0 8 5.8 23 15 0.65 -0.6 0.6 -3.51 4.46 -0.13BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 12 6.0 23 6.8 22 -1 1.14 0.0 0.4 -6.73 8.55 0.62FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 23 7.0 20 5.5 22 2 0.79 -0.5 0.5 -3.51 4.46 0.68GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 21 8.0 12 1.3 23 11 0.16 -0.7 0.7 -3.85 4.89 -0.48LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 10 3.0 0 3.3 22 22 1.11 0.1 0.3 -8.08 10.26 -0.12POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 14.0 8 5.2 6 -2 0.37 -0.6 0.6 -3.51 4.46 0.02RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 21 7.0 7 7.5 6 -1 1.07 -0.2 0.3 -3.85 4.89 0.85SANB San Bernardino-24302 23 7.0 21 6.6 6 -15 0.94 -0.4 0.5 -3.51 4.46 0.73SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 23 7.0 20 6.2 6 -14 0.89 -0.3 0.5 -3.51 4.46 0.04ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 23 7.0 21 6.3 6 -15 0.90 -0.3 0.5 -3.51 4.46 0.22* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 209 17.0 10 10.2 20 10 0.60 -0.1 2.0 0.16 0.44 0.20Subregional Peak: 15.5 19 9 0.91 (at cell 57 x 29)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 23 9.0 9 10.2 20 11 1.13 0.4 0.5 1.44 3.97 0.18CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 14 3.0 7 9.5 20 13 3.18 1.2 1.2 2.36 6.52 -0.26HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 21 7.0 8 7.0 7 -1 1.00 0.2 0.5 1.57 4.35 -0.03LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 23 17.0 10 7.4 0 -10 0.44 -0.1 0.2 1.44 3.97 0.20LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 11.0 9 6.6 21 12 0.60 -0.2 0.3 1.44 3.97 -0.10LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 23 13.0 9 8.3 8 -1 0.64 0.0 0.3 1.44 3.97 0.49NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 17 13.0 9 8.5 9 0 0.65 0.5 0.5 1.95 5.37 0.74PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 23 13.0 11 5.6 6 -5 0.43 -0.2 0.3 1.44 3.97 0.10VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 20 9.0 8 5.4 0 -8 0.60 -0.1 0.3 1.65 4.57 0.51PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 22 11.0 8 9.8 20 12 0.89 0.4 0.5 1.50 4.15 0.02* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 196 9.0 8 7.6 20 12 0.84 0.5 1.5 0.23 0.52 0.29Subregional Peak: 10.7 0 -8 1.19 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 16 5.0 9 5.6 9 0 1.13 0.4 0.4 2.85 6.34 0.66ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 18 5.0 7 4.4 7 0 0.87 -0.2 0.2 2.54 5.63 0.37ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 18 7.0 20 6.9 7 -13 0.99 0.0 0.3 2.54 5.63 0.32OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 14 3.0 3 5.1 23 20 1.71 0.2 0.6 3.26 7.24 0.31OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 23 9.0 8 4.6 0 -8 0.51 -0.3 0.4 1.99 4.41 -0.04SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 23 5.0 8 7.6 20 12 1.52 0.4 0.5 1.99 4.41 0.85SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 20 6.0 8 7.0 9 1 1.17 0.1 0.5 2.28 5.07 0.44PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 11 3.0 0 4.3 7 7 1.43 0.2 0.5 4.15 9.22 -0.28SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 8 2.0 5 7.0 7 2 3.48 1.6 1.6 5.71 12.67 -99.00TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 18 6.0 7 6.9 1 -6 1.15 0.1 0.4 2.54 5.63 0.52TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 10 5.0 8 4.4 22 14 0.89 0.2 0.5 4.57 10.14 0.37TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 17 5.0 9 7.4 1 -8 1.48 0.9 0.9 2.69 5.96 0.29* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 66 6.0 22 5.0 20 -2 0.83 -1.1 1.5 -0.28 0.48 0.35Subregional Peak: 7.3 0 -22 1.22 (at cell 28 x 60)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 23 5.0 0 5.0 20 20 0.99 -0.3 0.3 -0.79 1.38 0.73BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 14 6.0 22 4.2 20 -2 0.69 -0.3 0.3 -1.30 2.26 0.50ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 4 3.0 6 0.9 1 -5 0.29 -0.8 0.8 -4.54 7.92 -0.36EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 3 4.0 19 1.4 19 0 0.35 -0.7 0.7 -6.05 10.56 0.99OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 9 3.0 5 4.5 3 -2 1.51 0.6 0.6 -2.02 3.52 0.28SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 13 4.0 0 1.4 2 2 0.34 -0.7 0.7 -1.40 2.44 0.39* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 18 4.0 0 5.5 3 3 1.36 0.3 1.3 0.15 0.54 0.32Subregional Peak: 8.4 2 2 2.11 (at cell 65 x 48)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 2 3.0 3 0.2 7 4 0.07 -0.9 0.9 1.32 4.82 -99.00HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 8 4.0 0 5.5 3 3 1.36 0.7 0.8 0.33 1.20 0.24LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 8 3.0 4 3.1 5 1 1.05 -0.1 0.1 0.33 1.20 0.77* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 34 7.0 19 7.2 21 2 1.03 -1.1 1.8 -0.27 0.57 0.34Subregional Peak: 8.0 21 2 1.14 (at cell 100 x 07)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 4 5.0 20 2.9 20 0 0.57 -0.6 0.6 -2.28 4.84 0.91MEXI Mexicali 1 4 6.0 19 5.8 20 1 0.96 -0.1 0.5 -2.28 4.84 0.19MEXT Mexicali 2 5 7.0 19 2.0 20 1 0.28 -0.7 0.7 -1.82 3.88 0.68MEXU Mexicali 3 6 7.0 6 5.4 20 14 0.77 -0.1 0.4 -1.52 3.23 -0.04PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 8 2.0 1 1.8 5 4 0.92 -0.5 0.5 -1.14 2.42 -0.04CLXE Calexico CARB 1 2.0 19 2.0 19 0 1.01 0.0 0.0 -9.12 19.38 -99.00MEXA Mexicali CARB 6 6.0 19 7.2 21 2 1.20 0.3 0.8 -1.52 3.23 0.25* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 46 3.0 20 0.7 7 -13 0.23 -1.9 1.9 -0.91 0.91 -0.03Subregional Peak: 1.0 7 -13 0.32 (at cell 20 x 47)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 5 2.0 0 0.6 7 7 0.28 -0.9 0.9 -8.39 8.39 -99.00ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 11 3.0 20 0.3 6 -14 0.10 -0.9 0.9 -3.81 3.81 -0.65CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 1 2.0 8 0.2 8 0 0.09 -0.9 0.9 -41.94 41.94 -99.00ECSP El Capitan State Par 4 3.0 3 0.2 6 3 0.06 -0.9 0.9 -10.49 10.49 -0.51GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 10 2.0 10 0.0 20 10 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -4.19 4.19 -99.00GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 1 2.0 18 0.0 18 0 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -41.94 41.94 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 10 3.0 8 0.7 7 -1 0.23 -0.9 0.9 -4.19 4.19 0.35SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 1 2.0 7 0.4 7 0 0.22 -0.8 0.8 -41.94 41.94 -99.00SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 3 2.0 5 0.1 5 0 0.07 -0.9 0.9 -13.98 13.98 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 53 4.0 6 3.3 6 0 0.83 -1.4 1.4 -0.55 0.55 0.49Subregional Peak: 4.3 0 -6 1.08 (at cell 34 x 41)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 13 3.0 7 1.9 0 -7 0.65 -0.5 0.5 -2.26 2.26 0.03EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 7 3.0 6 1.3 6 0 0.42 -0.6 0.6 -4.19 4.19 0.49SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 18 4.0 6 3.3 6 0 0.83 -0.5 0.5 -1.63 1.63 0.36TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 15 4.0 6 1.9 7 1 0.48 -0.6 0.6 -1.96 1.96 0.85* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 68 10.0 8 4.6 7 -1 0.46 -2.9 2.9 -0.56 0.59 0.47Subregional Peak: 6.9 23 15 0.69 (at cell 45 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 9.0 9 4.3 5 -4 0.48 -0.6 0.6 -1.65 1.74 -0.10RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 23 10.0 8 4.6 7 -1 0.46 -0.6 0.6 -1.65 1.74 0.75CALB Calabasas (AV) 22 8.0 8 3.8 7 -1 0.47 -0.4 0.5 -1.73 1.82 0.52* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 200 10.0 7 6.2 0 -7 0.62 -2.4 2.4 -0.56 0.58 0.55Subregional Peak: 8.5 0 -7 0.85 (at cell 64 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 23 9.0 7 6.2 0 -7 0.69 -0.5 0.5 -4.90 5.06 0.81BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 7 4.0 0 2.9 0 0 0.73 -0.6 0.6 -16.09 16.64 0.31FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 23 7.0 7 4.4 0 -7 0.62 -0.5 0.5 -4.90 5.06 0.80GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 23 9.0 8 4.8 6 -2 0.53 -0.5 0.6 -4.90 5.06 0.76LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 9 4.0 5 2.2 0 -5 0.55 -0.5 0.6 -12.52 12.94 -0.65POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 10.0 7 4.8 7 0 0.48 -0.7 0.7 -4.90 5.06 0.86RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 19 10.0 7 4.7 0 -7 0.47 -0.7 0.7 -5.93 6.13 0.40SANB San Bernardino-24302 23 6.0 0 4.2 0 0 0.69 -0.8 0.8 -4.90 5.06 0.63SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 23 5.0 6 4.6 7 1 0.92 -0.4 0.5 -4.90 5.06 0.16ULDS Upland-155 "D" St 23 5.0 0 4.5 7 7 0.90 -0.4 0.5 -4.90 5.06 0.20CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 4 2.0 3 1.4 3 0 0.70 -0.6 0.6 -28.16 29.12 0.20* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 193 8.0 9 6.6 6 -3 0.82 -0.4 1.4 -0.12 0.43 0.51Subregional Peak: 12.8 0 -9 1.61 (at cell 55 x 28)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 23 5.0 7 6.2 0 -7 1.25 -0.1 0.5 -1.01 3.57 0.64CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 6 3.0 5 5.9 5 0 1.95 0.2 0.7 -3.87 13.70 0.95HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 20 7.0 8 5.9 6 -2 0.85 0.2 0.4 -1.16 4.11 0.48LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 23 8.0 9 6.6 6 -3 0.82 -0.1 0.3 -1.01 3.57 0.25LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 5.0 6 5.9 8 2 1.18 -0.3 0.4 -1.01 3.57 0.91LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 23 7.0 7 6.2 6 -1 0.89 -0.1 0.5 -1.01 3.57 0.28NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 13 4.0 6 6.0 6 0 1.51 -0.2 0.5 -1.79 6.32 0.82PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 20 6.0 7 4.7 0 -7 0.78 -0.3 0.3 -1.16 4.11 0.66VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 20 7.0 9 6.4 6 -3 0.91 -0.1 0.4 -1.16 4.11 0.13PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 22 5.0 8 5.9 6 -2 1.19 -0.3 0.5 -1.06 3.74 0.72* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 152 6.0 7 6.9 6 -1 1.15 -0.2 1.6 -0.04 0.70 -0.02Subregional Peak: 9.5 1 -6 1.58 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 7 3.0 8 6.9 6 -2 2.30 0.7 1.2 -0.83 15.21 -0.11ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 12 4.0 8 1.2 7 -1 0.31 -0.7 0.7 -0.48 8.87 0.11ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 21 5.0 6 2.5 7 1 0.49 -0.7 0.7 -0.28 5.07 0.63OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 13 3.0 5 4.5 6 1 1.50 0.3 0.4 -0.44 8.19 0.41OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 20 5.0 0 3.6 6 6 0.71 -0.6 0.7 -0.29 5.32 0.33SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 23 3.0 0 5.5 7 7 1.82 0.4 0.4 -0.25 4.63 0.68SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 3 2.0 4 5.6 6 2 2.80 1.6 1.6 -1.93 35.49 -99.00PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 12 2.0 0 3.7 6 6 1.83 0.1 0.5 -0.48 8.87 -99.00SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 5 2.0 5 4.5 7 2 2.23 1.0 1.0 -1.16 21.29 -99.00TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 14 6.0 7 6.7 2 -5 1.11 0.1 0.8 -0.41 7.61 0.12TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 8 2.0 0 6.2 0 0 3.09 0.0 1.1 -0.72 13.31 0.12TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 14 4.0 8 6.4 1 -7 1.61 0.0 0.7 -0.41 7.61 0.06* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 59 8.0 21 5.9 23 2 0.74 -1.9 2.3 -0.42 0.61 0.02Subregional Peak: 6.8 23 2 0.85 (at cell 34 x 69)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 21 6.0 21 3.7 1 -20 0.61 -0.5 0.5 -1.19 1.72 0.58BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 14 8.0 21 3.2 6 -15 0.40 -0.5 0.5 -1.79 2.58 -0.19ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 1 2.0 6 0.4 6 0 0.18 -0.8 0.8 -25.04 36.11 -99.00OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 9 4.0 4 5.9 23 19 1.48 0.6 0.7 -2.78 4.01 0.04SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 14 5.0 22 0.9 0 -22 0.18 -0.9 0.9 -1.79 2.58 -0.01* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 22 6.0 6 3.9 5 -1 0.64 -1.4 1.5 -0.56 0.60 0.67Subregional Peak: 4.2 5 -1 0.70 (at cell 65 x 49)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 1 2.0 5 0.1 5 0 0.07 -0.9 0.9 -12.33 13.25 -99.00HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 5 3.0 2 2.6 3 1 0.85 0.0 0.2 -2.47 2.65 0.34LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 13 3.0 4 1.0 5 1 0.35 -0.8 0.8 -0.95 1.02 0.56VICT Victorville-14029 Am 3 6.0 6 3.9 5 -1 0.64 -0.3 0.3 -4.11 4.42 -0.44* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO2 (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 15 2.0 20 0.9 9 -11 0.43 -1.5 1.5 -0.74 0.74 -99.00Subregional Peak: 3.1 0 -20 1.53 (at cell 76 x 35)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 1 2.0 20 0.4 20 0 0.19 -0.8 0.8 -11.11 11.11 -99.00MEXU Mexicali 3 1 2.0 21 0.5 21 0 0.23 -0.8 0.8 -11.11 11.11 -99.00PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 4 2.0 5 0.8 7 2 0.39 -0.7 0.7 -2.78 2.78 -99.00TNPM Twentynine Palms-607 1 2.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -11.11 11.11 -99.00MEXA Mexicali CARB 8 2.0 9 0.9 9 0 0.43 -0.7 0.7 -1.39 1.39 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfSubRegional DescriptionsSubRegion 000 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------SNI San Nicholas Island 23 21 260.383 3682.870SubRegion 001 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 19 47 241.171 3813.608ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 4 71 167.308 3932.630CPGB Carpinteria-Gobernad 25 46 274.784 3809.034ECSP El Capitan State Par 15 48 222.842 3815.987GAVE Gaviota East-N Of Ch 12 48 206.051 3818.354GAVW Gaviota West-NW Of C 12 48 206.051 3818.354GCTY Grover City-9 Le Sag 5 63 170.360 3891.772GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 12 49 207.757 3823.853GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 12 48 207.582 3818.305LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 15 48 221.421 3819.730LOSP Los Padres NF-Paradi 19 49 244.541 3824.616LPHS Lompoc-HS&P Facility 8 54 187.080 3846.744LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 7 52 183.708 3837.602PTCL Point Conception Lig 7 48 183.013 3817.260SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 21 47 251.846 3811.467SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 4 67 168.001 3910.379SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 8 59 186.376 3870.837UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 18 47 236.471 3810.039VBPP Vandenberg AFB-Sts P 4 51 168.222 3832.590SubRegion 002 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 31 43 303.549 3791.740EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 28 44 286.748 3795.806OJAI Ojai-1768 Maricopa H 29 47 291.723 3812.339SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 40 43 345.024 3792.811THOS Oak View-5500 Casita 26 46 279.337 3807.076TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 36 42 328.007 3785.712SubRegion 003 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 47 41 380.176 3781.205RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 43 41 360.232 3783.329CALB Calabasas (AV) 41 40 351.388 3779.520SubRegion 004 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 54 40 415.477 3777.125BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 73 35 512.325 3752.730FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 61 39 453.879 3773.162GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 55 40 421.624 3777.071LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 64 30 469.097 3725.054PHEL Phelan-Beekley & Phe 60 46 449.457 3808.298POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 57 38 430.791 3769.607RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 63 37 461.521 3762.040SANB San Bernardino-24302 66 39 475.402 3773.081SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 58 39 438.493 3771.402CAJB Cajon Pass (AV) 62 45 458.830 3803.663MBLD Azusa CARB 59 42 442.827 3788.654SubRegion 005 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 54 33 416.706 3741.999CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 54 30 415.015 3725.381HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 45 35 373.661 3753.563LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 48 39 386.188 3770.040LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 53 35 412.180 3753.128LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 48 35 389.069 3753.370NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 49 33 390.482 3742.264PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 50 39 398.512 3771.747VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 44 38 366.166 3768.454PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 51 37 403.031 3762.458SubRegion 006 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 70 6 495.309 3608.603ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 72 10 506.243 3627.079ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 69 17 493.780 3664.031OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 64 19 465.824 3673.327OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 72 5 506.257 3604.909SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 68 11 489.079 3630.779SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 68 8 485.940 3617.850PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 63 20 463.087 3675.247SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 66 11 476.604 3633.479TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 71 4 502.161 3595.415TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 68 4 489.151 3597.222TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 71 4 501.409 3598.441SubRegion 007 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 34 68 318.335 3917.192BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 34 67 315.231 3913.556ARVN Arvin-20401 Bear Mtn 38 64 337.652 3896.481EDSN Edison-Johnson Farm 37 67 331.858 3911.381OLDL Oildale-3311 Manor S 34 69 318.448 3922.739SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 29 71 294.407 3930.657SubRegion 008 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 50 60 396.640 3878.977HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 65 46 473.963 3808.197LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 50 52 397.707 3838.298VICT Victorville-14029 Am 65 48 470.773 3817.551SubRegion 009 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 99 8 643.784 3615.183MEXT Mexicali 2 101 5 654.966 3604.664MEXU Mexicali 3 100 7 645.747 3611.053PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 79 34 543.172 3745.428TNPM Twentynine Palms-607 88 40 587.597 3777.153CLXE Calexico CARB 101 8 650.856 3616.181MEXA Mexicali CARB 100 7 647.525 3614.356* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 8 6.0 22 0.8 7 -15 0.13 -2.8 2.8 -0.95 0.95 -0.26Subregional Peak: 5.3 7 -15 0.88 (at cell 07 x 58)ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 2 3.0 6 0.0 5 -1 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -3.81 3.81 -99.00ECSP El Capitan State Par 5 6.0 22 0.0 1 -21 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -1.52 1.52 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 1 2.0 7 0.8 7 0 0.39 -0.6 0.6 -7.61 7.61 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 20 10.0 6 7.9 5 -1 0.79 -2.3 2.5 -0.69 0.73 0.76Subregional Peak: 8.7 5 -1 0.87 (at cell 40 x 43)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 5 4.0 5 0.7 23 18 0.18 -0.9 0.9 -2.75 2.92 -0.92EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 2 2.0 2 0.0 2 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -6.87 7.29 -99.00SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 9 10.0 6 7.9 5 -1 0.79 -0.5 0.6 -1.53 1.62 0.76TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 4 5.0 6 1.4 5 -1 0.28 -0.6 0.6 -3.43 3.64 -0.36* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 30 11.0 6 20.2 5 -1 1.84 2.5 3.9 0.90 1.18 0.33Subregional Peak: 34.4 5 -1 3.13 (at cell 43 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 16 11.0 6 10.6 5 -1 0.96 0.0 0.5 1.70 2.21 0.74RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 10 7.0 6 20.2 5 -1 2.89 1.8 1.8 2.71 3.54 0.73CALB Calabasas (AV) 4 2.0 0 11.0 7 7 5.52 2.3 2.3 6.79 8.86 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 62 23.0 6 26.4 5 -1 1.15 0.9 4.5 0.37 0.91 0.31Subregional Peak: 66.3 4 -2 2.88 (at cell 59 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 6 10.0 7 7.7 5 -2 0.77 -0.4 0.6 3.83 9.44 0.06BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 3 3.0 0 1.3 23 23 0.43 -0.7 0.7 7.67 18.88 -0.14FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 12 13.0 5 12.7 3 -2 0.98 -0.1 0.6 1.92 4.72 0.12GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 1 2.0 8 0.5 8 0 0.23 -0.8 0.8 23.01 56.63 -99.00LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 2 7.0 5 4.7 6 1 0.67 -0.2 0.2 11.50 28.31 -99.00POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 13 23.0 6 11.2 6 0 0.49 -0.3 0.4 1.77 4.36 0.80RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 10 13.0 5 26.4 5 0 2.03 2.0 2.0 2.30 5.66 0.52SANB San Bernardino-24302 7 3.0 3 6.4 23 20 2.13 0.4 0.6 3.29 8.09 -0.48SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 8 7.0 5 24.0 5 0 3.43 1.4 1.5 2.88 7.08 0.69* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 96 16.0 5 53.4 7 2 3.34 8.7 9.5 2.11 2.29 0.41Subregional Peak: 71.5 5 0 4.47 (at cell 49 x 37)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 9 5.0 5 21.2 6 1 4.24 1.9 1.9 22.46 24.40 0.73CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 2 4.0 7 6.4 7 0 1.59 0.3 0.3 101.09 109.80 -99.00HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 8 7.0 6 28.2 7 1 4.03 3.8 4.2 25.27 27.45 0.65LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 13 12.0 6 40.7 5 -1 3.39 3.1 3.1 15.55 16.89 0.10LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 9 4.0 5 8.2 6 1 2.05 0.7 0.8 22.46 24.40 0.76LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 23 12.0 5 27.1 6 1 2.26 0.5 1.0 8.79 9.55 0.67NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 7 7.0 10 53.4 7 -3 7.63 5.9 5.9 28.88 31.37 0.16PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 10 7.0 6 13.2 5 -1 1.88 1.8 1.9 20.22 21.96 0.37VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 5 5.0 6 21.9 6 0 4.37 3.5 3.5 40.43 43.92 0.64PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 10 16.0 5 24.4 5 0 1.53 1.8 1.8 20.22 21.96 0.80* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 43 5.0 6 14.6 7 1 2.92 3.0 3.7 1.24 1.47 0.20Subregional Peak: 34.2 23 17 6.85 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 6 5.0 6 11.7 7 1 2.34 1.3 1.3 8.90 10.56 0.54ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 3 3.0 6 8.8 7 1 2.95 1.8 1.8 17.80 21.12 0.92ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 10 5.0 6 9.1 6 0 1.83 0.7 0.8 5.34 6.34 0.91OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 3 3.0 4 14.1 6 2 4.71 2.3 2.3 17.80 21.12 0.08OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 4 4.0 6 1.7 10 4 0.42 -0.6 0.6 13.35 15.84 -0.51SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 3 2.0 6 14.6 7 1 7.31 4.1 4.1 17.80 21.12 -99.00SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 5 5.0 7 10.4 7 0 2.08 0.9 0.9 10.68 12.67 0.83PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 4 5.0 5 6.3 6 1 1.27 0.0 1.1 13.35 15.84 -0.16TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 3 3.0 21 10.3 22 1 3.44 1.8 1.8 17.80 21.12 -0.08TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 2 2.0 6 8.9 7 1 4.43 2.9 2.9 26.69 31.68 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 11 7.0 6 18.0 0 -6 2.57 2.9 3.9 0.93 1.20 0.23Subregional Peak: 65.8 2 -4 9.40 (at cell 34 x 69)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 3 5.0 23 11.8 23 0 2.37 0.8 0.8 3.40 4.39 1.00BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 7 7.0 6 18.0 0 -6 2.57 1.2 1.4 1.46 1.88 -0.19SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 1 2.0 23 0.0 23 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 10.19 13.16 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 25 7.0 0 0.0 19 19 0.01 -2.9 2.9 -1.00 1.00 -0.22Subregional Peak: 27.8 3 3 3.97 (at cell 65 x 49)MOJP Mojave-923 Poole St 1 2.0 6 0.0 6 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -24.88 24.88 -99.00LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 24 7.0 0 0.0 19 19 0.01 -1.0 1.0 -1.04 1.04 -0.25* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 6 10.0 21 2.0 21 0 0.20 -3.5 3.5 -0.83 0.83 0.77Subregional Peak: 8.7 3 -18 0.87 (at cell 100 x 07)MEXT Mexicali 2 3 5.0 21 0.9 22 1 0.17 -0.8 0.8 -1.67 1.67 -0.70MEXU Mexicali 3 2 10.0 21 2.0 21 0 0.20 -0.8 0.8 -2.50 2.50 -99.00CLXE Calexico CARB 1 2.0 21 0.3 21 0 0.16 -0.8 0.8 -5.00 5.00 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 22 11.0 6 1.3 7 1 0.12 -3.5 3.5 -0.97 0.97 0.36Subregional Peak: 1.8 7 1 0.16 (at cell 21 x 47)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 2 5.0 7 0.1 7 0 0.03 -1.0 1.0 -10.62 10.62 -99.00ATAS Atascadero-6005 Lewi 1 2.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -21.24 21.24 -99.00ECSP El Capitan State Par 5 5.0 6 0.0 7 1 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -4.25 4.25 -0.25GCTY Grover City-9 Le Sag 2 4.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -10.62 10.62 -99.00GTCC Gaviota-GTC C 1 Mi E 1 2.0 6 0.0 6 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -21.24 21.24 -99.00LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 2 2.0 6 0.1 7 1 0.04 -1.0 1.0 -10.62 10.62 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 4 11.0 6 1.3 7 1 0.12 -0.9 0.9 -5.31 5.31 -0.20SMSB Santa Maria-500 S Br 4 6.0 6 0.2 8 2 0.04 -1.0 1.0 -5.31 5.31 -0.79UCSB UCSB West Campus-Arc 1 2.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -21.24 21.24 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 22 13.0 6 9.6 5 -1 0.74 -2.2 3.4 -0.48 0.91 0.39Subregional Peak: 11.0 4 -2 0.85 (at cell 40 x 43)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 5 3.0 7 0.8 7 0 0.26 -0.9 0.9 -2.09 4.02 0.77EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 5 5.0 5 0.1 8 3 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -2.09 4.02 -0.83SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 8 13.0 6 9.6 5 -1 0.74 0.2 1.0 -1.31 2.51 0.22TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 4 8.0 5 1.7 7 2 0.21 -0.7 0.7 -2.62 5.02 -0.73* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 28 17.0 6 20.3 5 -1 1.19 0.2 5.7 0.43 1.10 0.03Subregional Peak: 37.3 5 -1 2.19 (at cell 43 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 13 17.0 6 5.3 5 -1 0.31 -0.7 0.7 0.93 2.36 0.81RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 10 12.0 6 20.3 5 -1 1.69 1.0 1.0 1.21 3.07 0.67CALB Calabasas (AV) 5 4.0 1 16.5 6 5 4.12 2.3 2.3 2.42 6.14 -0.79* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 71 23.0 6 25.2 3 -3 1.10 -3.4 6.1 -0.31 0.90 0.23Subregional Peak: 63.4 4 -2 2.76 (at cell 64 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 17 11.0 7 1.3 23 16 0.12 -0.9 0.9 -1.29 3.76 0.04BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 6 4.0 0 2.7 1 1 0.67 -0.4 0.5 -3.66 10.65 0.18FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 9 8.0 0 7.4 23 23 0.93 0.1 0.9 -2.44 7.10 -0.46LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 2 4.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -10.99 31.95 -99.00POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 13 23.0 6 2.1 23 17 0.09 -0.9 0.9 -1.69 4.91 0.51RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 12 20.0 6 25.2 3 -3 1.26 0.3 0.7 -1.83 5.32 0.66SANB San Bernardino-24302 7 5.0 5 8.9 3 -2 1.77 1.4 1.5 -3.14 9.13 -0.22SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 5 9.0 6 3.5 22 16 0.39 -0.6 0.7 -4.40 12.78 -0.08* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 120 19.0 5 35.1 5 0 1.85 4.1 6.5 1.22 1.62 0.33Subregional Peak: 47.5 0 -5 2.50 (at cell 49 x 37)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 13 12.0 7 30.9 5 -2 2.57 2.6 2.8 11.28 14.98 0.62CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 2 2.0 6 13.3 6 0 6.65 5.4 5.4 73.33 97.36 -99.00HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 15 12.0 6 23.7 5 -1 1.98 1.4 1.8 9.78 12.98 0.54LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 16 19.0 5 16.6 0 -5 0.88 0.5 0.7 9.17 12.17 0.50LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 11 12.0 6 9.9 5 -1 0.83 0.3 1.0 13.33 17.70 0.30LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 22 12.0 7 31.4 5 -2 2.62 0.3 0.9 6.67 8.85 0.65NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 8 12.0 9 35.1 5 -4 2.92 5.7 5.7 18.33 24.34 -0.37PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 9 8.0 6 7.6 0 -6 0.94 0.1 0.9 16.29 21.63 -0.27VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 10 14.0 6 19.1 7 1 1.37 0.3 0.5 14.67 19.47 0.82PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 14 16.0 7 26.6 2 -5 1.66 1.0 1.4 10.48 13.91 0.12* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 60 9.0 8 21.0 1 -7 2.33 2.4 3.8 0.94 1.48 0.29Subregional Peak: 44.2 0 -8 4.91 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 7 4.0 6 13.3 6 0 3.33 2.8 2.8 8.01 12.70 0.45ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 5 4.0 6 3.1 5 -1 0.77 -0.4 0.4 11.22 17.78 0.56ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 6 5.0 6 1.8 5 -1 0.37 -0.8 0.8 9.35 14.82 0.77OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 3 3.0 8 13.7 6 -2 4.55 1.9 2.1 18.70 29.64 -0.36OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 6 3.0 6 4.4 1 -5 1.48 0.0 0.8 9.35 14.82 -0.33SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 7 7.0 7 14.2 21 14 2.03 1.7 1.7 8.01 12.70 -0.03SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 6 9.0 8 17.4 7 -1 1.93 1.3 1.4 9.35 14.82 0.40PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 9 3.0 5 6.7 6 1 2.24 -0.1 1.1 6.23 9.88 0.23TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 5 7.0 22 21.0 1 -21 3.00 2.0 2.3 11.22 17.78 -0.43TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 3 2.0 8 2.3 8 0 1.15 -0.3 0.4 18.70 29.64 -0.43TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 3 3.0 22 11.6 6 -16 3.87 2.9 2.9 18.70 29.64 -1.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 23 6.0 5 15.4 0 -5 2.56 3.4 5.3 1.33 1.93 0.05Subregional Peak: 41.0 0 -5 6.83 (at cell 34 x 69)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 7 4.0 5 15.4 0 -5 3.84 3.0 3.0 4.36 6.34 0.09BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 9 5.0 1 14.0 1 0 2.79 1.9 1.9 3.39 4.93 0.37SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 7 6.0 5 0.1 7 2 0.01 -1.0 1.0 4.36 6.34 -0.36* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 25 6.0 5 0.2 18 13 0.03 -2.8 2.8 -0.98 0.98 0.11Subregional Peak: 18.1 3 -2 3.02 (at cell 65 x 48)LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 23 6.0 5 0.2 7 2 0.03 -1.0 1.0 -1.07 1.07 0.29VICT Victorville-14029 Am 2 3.0 19 0.2 18 -1 0.07 -0.9 0.9 -12.29 12.29 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 3 2.0 6 0.8 20 14 0.42 -1.5 1.5 -0.76 0.76 -99.00Subregional Peak: 6.1 22 16 3.04 (at cell 100 x 07)MEXU Mexicali 3 1 2.0 6 0.0 6 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -2.27 2.27 -99.00MEXA Mexicali CARB 2 2.0 19 0.8 20 1 0.42 -0.6 0.6 -1.13 1.13 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 6 2.0 7 0.1 8 1 0.04 -2.0 2.0 -0.99 0.99 -99.00Subregional Peak: 0.2 9 2 0.11 (at cell 07 x 58)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 1 2.0 7 0.0 7 0 0.01 -1.0 1.0 -5.93 5.93 -99.00ECSP El Capitan State Par 2 2.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -2.96 2.96 -99.00GTCB Nojoqui Pass-GTC B H 1 2.0 22 0.0 22 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -5.93 5.93 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 2 2.0 7 0.1 8 1 0.04 -1.0 1.0 -2.96 2.96 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 13 8.0 6 0.2 7 1 0.03 -4.1 4.1 -0.98 0.98 -0.15Subregional Peak: 2.6 0 -6 0.33 (at cell 40 x 45)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 4 5.0 6 0.2 7 1 0.05 -1.0 1.0 -3.18 3.18 -0.61EMMA Emma Wood State Beac 4 6.0 5 0.0 5 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -3.18 3.18 0.85SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 2 8.0 6 0.1 5 -1 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -6.35 6.35 -99.00TOMP Thousand Oaks-9 2323 3 6.0 6 0.2 7 1 0.04 -1.0 1.0 -4.24 4.24 -0.50* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 29 11.0 6 5.8 0 -6 0.53 -2.9 3.4 -0.61 0.85 -0.09Subregional Peak: 17.3 0 -6 1.57 (at cell 43 x 39)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 13 7.0 1 1.6 0 -1 0.22 -0.9 0.9 -1.37 1.89 -0.03RSDA Reseda-18330 Gault S 11 11.0 6 5.8 0 -6 0.53 -0.3 0.9 -1.62 2.23 -0.28CALB Calabasas (AV) 5 5.0 6 2.3 5 -1 0.47 -0.6 0.6 -3.56 4.91 0.10* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 57 25.0 6 11.0 1 -5 0.44 -4.5 5.0 -0.60 0.81 0.48Subregional Peak: 33.2 0 -6 1.33 (at cell 64 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 18 14.0 6 2.4 7 1 0.17 -0.8 0.9 -1.90 2.57 0.62BANH Banning-135 N Allesa 1 2.0 1 0.0 1 0 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -34.11 46.30 -99.00FONT Fontana-14360 Arrow 5 12.0 6 5.6 0 -6 0.47 -0.1 0.9 -6.82 9.26 -0.45GLDR Glendora-840 Laurel 3 4.0 8 2.1 7 -1 0.52 -0.5 0.5 -11.37 15.43 0.81LELS Lake Elsinore-506 W 2 4.0 6 0.0 7 1 0.00 -1.0 1.0 -17.06 23.15 -99.00POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 12 25.0 6 8.8 7 1 0.35 -0.8 0.8 -2.84 3.86 0.93RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 8 17.0 5 11.0 1 -4 0.65 -0.6 0.6 -4.26 5.79 -0.08SANB San Bernardino-24302 6 3.0 0 4.5 0 0 1.51 -0.5 0.8 -5.69 7.72 0.16SNBO San Bernardino-ARB 2 7.0 6 9.3 6 0 1.33 1.5 1.5 -17.06 23.15 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 110 18.0 6 15.0 0 -6 0.83 -0.7 3.6 -0.01 1.03 0.21Subregional Peak: 26.2 3 -3 1.45 (at cell 52 x 34)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 6 8.0 5 14.0 5 0 1.75 1.7 2.0 -0.21 18.84 0.57CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 3 3.0 6 4.2 5 -1 1.41 0.3 0.4 -0.42 37.68 -0.17HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 14 13.0 5 7.6 3 -2 0.58 0.0 0.8 -0.09 8.07 0.42LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 15 18.0 6 15.0 0 -6 0.83 0.1 1.3 -0.08 7.54 0.08LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 6 5.0 5 14.2 7 2 2.84 1.5 2.1 -0.21 18.84 0.46LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 19 9.0 7 6.4 7 0 0.71 -0.8 0.8 -0.07 5.95 0.92NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 8 6.0 5 6.2 6 1 1.03 -0.3 0.8 -0.16 14.13 0.70PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 7 17.0 6 4.3 0 -6 0.25 -0.4 0.7 -0.18 16.15 -0.77VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 14 8.0 5 13.9 0 -5 1.74 -0.1 0.7 -0.09 8.07 0.61PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 18 18.0 5 11.7 3 -2 0.65 -0.1 1.2 -0.07 6.28 0.29* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 47 9.0 6 8.9 0 -6 0.99 -2.0 2.5 -0.63 0.85 -0.03Subregional Peak: 28.0 0 -6 3.11 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 5 2.0 5 3.8 5 0 1.88 -0.1 0.6 -5.90 8.00 -99.00ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 2 2.0 7 0.1 8 1 0.03 -1.0 1.0 -14.76 19.99 -99.00ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 3 9.0 6 0.2 7 1 0.02 -1.0 1.0 -9.84 13.33 -0.90OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 5 4.0 4 1.4 7 3 0.35 -0.8 0.8 -5.90 8.00 -0.34OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 4 4.0 5 0.3 7 2 0.07 -1.0 1.0 -7.38 10.00 -0.58SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 8 6.0 5 2.8 7 2 0.47 -0.6 0.6 -3.69 5.00 0.79PEND Camp Del MSDCAPCD 8 5.0 4 1.0 7 3 0.19 -0.9 0.9 -3.69 5.00 -0.41SOLM La Jolla SDCAPCD 1 2.0 6 6.1 6 0 3.06 2.1 2.1 -29.51 39.98 -99.00TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 3 4.0 6 0.5 5 -1 0.12 -0.9 0.9 -9.84 13.33 -0.86TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 6 3.0 8 2.0 1 -7 0.67 -0.8 0.8 -4.92 6.66 -0.19TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 2 3.0 0 8.9 0 0 2.96 0.5 1.5 -14.76 19.99 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 22 10.0 21 13.9 0 -21 1.39 -1.4 4.9 0.11 1.34 -0.23Subregional Peak: 22.2 0 -21 2.22 (at cell 34 x 69)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 8 6.0 22 13.9 0 -22 2.32 1.0 1.8 0.31 3.69 -0.58BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 9 10.0 21 10.8 1 -20 1.08 -0.1 1.2 0.27 3.28 -0.28SHFT Shafter-548 Walker S 5 7.0 6 0.0 7 1 0.01 -1.0 1.0 0.49 5.91 -0.25* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: NO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 1.0 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 38 9.0 6 5.0 3 -3 0.56 -2.8 2.8 -0.88 0.88 0.33Subregional Peak: 6.4 3 -3 0.72 (at cell 65 x 48)LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 23 9.0 6 0.1 8 2 0.01 -1.0 1.0 -1.46 1.46 -0.28VICT Victorville-14029 Am 15 5.0 2 5.0 3 1 1.01 -0.7 0.7 -2.23 2.23 0.75* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfSubRegional DescriptionsSubRegion 001 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 19 47 241.171 3813.608LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 15 48 221.421 3819.730LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 7 52 183.708 3837.602SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 21 47 251.846 3811.467SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 4 67 168.001 3910.379VBPP Vandenberg AFB-Sts P 4 51 168.222 3832.590SubRegion 002 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 31 43 303.549 3791.740SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 40 43 345.024 3792.811SubRegion 003 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 47 41 380.176 3781.205SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 42 46 358.986 3806.024SubRegion 004 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 54 40 415.477 3777.125POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 57 38 430.791 3769.607RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 63 37 461.521 3762.040SANB San Bernardino-24302 66 39 475.402 3773.081MBLD Azusa CARB 59 42 442.827 3788.654SubRegion 005 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 54 33 416.706 3741.999CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 54 30 415.015 3725.381ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 58 28 436.612 3719.670HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 45 35 373.661 3753.563LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 48 39 386.188 3770.040LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 53 35 412.180 3753.128LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 48 35 389.069 3753.370NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 49 33 390.482 3742.264PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 50 39 398.512 3771.747VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 44 38 366.166 3768.454PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 51 37 403.031 3762.458SubRegion 006 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 70 6 495.309 3608.603ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 72 10 506.243 3627.079ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 69 17 493.780 3664.031OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 64 19 465.824 3673.327OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 72 5 506.257 3604.909SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 68 11 489.079 3630.779SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 68 8 485.940 3617.850TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 71 4 502.161 3595.415TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 68 4 489.151 3597.222TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 71 4 501.409 3598.441SubRegion 007 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 34 68 318.335 3917.192BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 34 67 315.231 3913.556SubRegion 008 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 65 46 473.963 3808.197LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 50 52 397.707 3838.298VICT Victorville-14029 Am 65 48 470.773 3817.551SubRegion 009 Contains the Following Sites:Site Site Description Xcell Ycell XPos(km) YPos(km)---- -------------------------------- ------ ------ --------- ---------CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 99 8 643.784 3615.183EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 98 10 635.792 3628.008MEXI Mexicali 1 101 7 650.302 3610.045MEXT Mexicali 2 101 5 654.966 3604.664MEXU Mexicali 3 100 7 645.747 3611.053PALM Palm Springs-Fs 590 79 34 543.172 3745.428CLXE Calexico CARB 101 8 650.856 3616.181MEXA Mexicali CARB 100 7 647.525 3614.356* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 22 1.0 7 0.7 22 15 0.68 -0.7 0.7 -0.67 0.67 -99.00Subregional Peak: 1.5 7 0 1.52 (at cell 07 x 58)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 7 1.0 7 0.7 22 15 0.68 -0.6 0.6 -2.10 2.10 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 3 1.0 11 0.4 17 6 0.36 -0.7 0.7 -4.90 4.90 -99.00SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 12 1.0 7 0.4 7 0 0.45 -0.7 0.7 -1.23 1.23 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 19 2.0 5 1.7 4 -1 0.85 -0.3 0.5 -0.26 0.47 0.40Subregional Peak: 2.0 7 2 0.99 (at cell 37 x 40)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 4 1.0 5 0.5 22 17 0.52 -0.6 0.6 -1.26 2.21 0.40SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 15 2.0 5 1.7 4 -1 0.85 -0.2 0.4 -0.34 0.59 0.34* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 46 3.0 6 2.6 0 -6 0.86 -0.4 0.7 -0.27 0.50 0.36Subregional Peak: 5.5 5 -1 1.83 (at cell 43 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 3.0 6 2.6 0 -6 0.86 0.0 0.4 -0.53 1.00 0.20SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 23 3.0 6 1.1 23 17 0.38 -0.6 0.6 -0.53 1.00 0.35* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 85 4.0 6 3.4 3 -3 0.85 -0.1 0.6 0.00 0.37 0.47Subregional Peak: 4.3 4 -2 1.08 (at cell 59 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 23 3.0 7 3.4 3 -4 1.14 0.0 0.4 0.00 1.35 0.27POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 4.0 6 2.5 5 -1 0.62 0.0 0.3 0.00 1.35 0.51RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 17 2.0 5 2.6 5 0 1.28 0.2 0.4 -0.01 1.83 0.44SANB San Bernardino-24302 22 2.0 0 2.2 23 23 1.11 -0.2 0.3 0.00 1.41 0.75* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 177 3.0 6 6.0 5 -1 2.02 0.8 1.0 0.70 0.86 0.39Subregional Peak: 8.0 5 -1 2.66 (at cell 47 x 38)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 23 2.0 5 4.2 6 1 2.11 0.8 0.9 5.39 6.59 0.46ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 19 1.0 5 2.1 5 0 2.15 0.3 0.5 6.53 7.97 -99.00HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 6 2.0 6 4.2 7 1 2.09 0.8 1.2 20.66 25.25 0.51LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 23 3.0 6 6.0 5 -1 2.02 0.9 0.9 5.39 6.59 0.61LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 2.0 5 3.3 6 1 1.66 0.6 0.8 5.39 6.59 0.03LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 20 2.0 5 4.4 7 2 2.19 0.2 0.6 6.20 7.57 0.39NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 18 2.0 7 5.9 7 0 2.93 0.7 1.0 6.89 8.42 0.51PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 18 2.0 6 3.5 22 16 1.73 1.3 1.4 6.89 8.42 -0.30VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 4 1.0 6 4.7 6 0 4.75 2.4 2.4 31.00 37.87 -99.00PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 23 3.0 5 3.6 23 18 1.21 0.4 0.6 5.39 6.59 0.52* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 187 4.0 7 4.8 23 16 1.19 0.1 0.5 0.11 0.44 0.39Subregional Peak: 8.3 23 16 2.07 (at cell 72 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 22 2.0 6 2.2 0 -6 1.10 0.3 0.5 0.93 3.77 0.26ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 18 2.0 7 2.2 7 0 1.09 0.3 0.4 1.13 4.61 0.48ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 24 2.0 5 2.3 6 1 1.14 0.1 0.4 0.85 3.46 0.55OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 10 1.0 4 2.7 7 3 2.66 0.2 0.6 2.04 8.30 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 23 3.0 6 1.7 23 17 0.57 -0.1 0.3 0.88 3.61 0.05SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 19 2.0 6 2.3 7 1 1.17 0.1 0.3 1.07 4.37 0.46SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 22 1.0 0 1.8 7 7 1.81 -0.1 0.3 0.93 3.77 -99.00TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 20 4.0 7 4.6 23 16 1.14 0.0 0.6 1.02 4.15 0.40TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 9 1.0 6 1.3 23 17 1.28 -0.4 0.5 2.26 9.22 0.40TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 20 2.0 6 4.8 23 17 2.38 0.6 0.8 1.02 4.15 0.25* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 23 2.0 21 2.3 7 -14 1.14 0.0 0.5 0.01 0.40 -0.30Subregional Peak: 2.6 7 -14 1.32 (at cell 33 x 67)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 15 2.0 21 2.3 7 -14 1.14 0.0 0.4 0.02 0.61 -0.34BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 8 1.0 0 1.9 7 7 1.90 0.1 0.4 0.04 1.15 -0.34* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 36 2.0 21 0.9 0 -21 0.47 -0.7 0.7 -0.60 0.60 0.25Subregional Peak: 1.4 2 -19 0.71 (at cell 65 x 49)HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 23 2.0 21 0.9 0 -21 0.47 -0.5 0.5 -0.95 0.95 0.39LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 13 2.0 0 0.4 0 0 0.19 -0.7 0.7 -1.68 1.68 0.60* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 216 (08/04) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 69 90.0 16 3.4 2 -14 0.04 -2.0 2.3 -0.17 0.45 -0.07Subregional Peak: 4.8 3 -13 0.05 (at cell 100 x 07)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 10 3.0 20 3.2 3 -17 1.06 0.4 0.7 -1.14 3.12 -0.20MEXI Mexicali 1 9 3.0 19 3.2 21 2 1.07 -0.1 0.3 -1.27 3.47 0.77MEXT Mexicali 2 13 6.0 21 2.0 22 1 0.34 -0.5 0.5 -0.88 2.40 0.85MEXU Mexicali 3 9 90.0 16 3.0 21 5 0.03 -0.1 0.6 -1.27 3.47 -0.59CLXE Calexico CARB 6 5.0 21 1.6 21 0 0.33 -0.4 0.4 -1.90 5.21 0.82MEXA Mexicali CARB 22 4.0 20 3.4 2 -18 0.84 -0.2 0.3 -0.52 1.42 0.70* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 54 2.0 6 0.9 7 1 0.44 -0.7 0.7 -0.64 0.64 0.59Subregional Peak: 2.0 14 8 0.98 (at cell 14 x 62)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 23 1.0 0 0.6 0 0 0.55 -0.6 0.6 -1.51 1.51 -99.00LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 5 1.0 5 0.4 8 3 0.38 -0.7 0.7 -6.96 6.96 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 14 2.0 6 0.9 7 1 0.44 -0.5 0.5 -2.48 2.48 0.72SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 12 1.0 0 0.3 16 16 0.27 -0.8 0.8 -2.90 2.90 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 25 3.0 6 1.7 4 -2 0.57 -0.6 0.7 -0.44 0.61 0.28Subregional Peak: 1.9 4 -2 0.62 (at cell 40 x 43)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 13 1.0 6 0.5 7 1 0.47 -0.6 0.6 -0.85 1.18 0.28SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 12 3.0 6 1.7 4 -2 0.57 -0.2 0.6 -0.92 1.28 0.09* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 35 4.0 6 1.4 6 0 0.35 -1.3 1.3 -0.62 0.62 0.45Subregional Peak: 4.2 5 -1 1.06 (at cell 43 x 40)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 4.0 6 1.4 6 0 0.35 -0.6 0.6 -0.95 0.95 0.36SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 12 3.0 5 1.0 0 -5 0.33 -0.6 0.6 -1.82 1.82 0.16* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 79 4.0 6 2.3 5 -1 0.58 -0.9 0.9 -0.45 0.50 0.30Subregional Peak: 4.3 4 -2 1.07 (at cell 65 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 23 3.0 5 1.1 0 -5 0.38 -0.6 0.6 -1.55 1.73 0.01POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 4.0 6 1.1 6 0 0.27 -0.6 0.6 -1.55 1.73 0.49RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 9 3.0 5 2.3 5 0 0.77 -0.2 0.3 -3.95 4.41 0.72SANB San Bernardino-24302 23 2.0 0 2.2 0 0 1.12 -0.3 0.4 -1.55 1.73 0.78MBLD Azusa CARB 1 1.0 10 0.2 10 0 0.22 -0.8 0.8 -35.57 39.70 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 200 4.0 5 4.5 2 -3 1.13 0.3 0.9 0.37 0.62 0.22Subregional Peak: 5.5 6 1 1.38 (at cell 50 x 34)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 21 3.0 7 4.2 5 -2 1.40 1.1 1.1 3.57 5.91 0.19CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 12 1.0 5 2.9 6 1 2.93 1.0 1.0 6.25 10.35 -99.00ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 8 2.0 5 1.8 0 -5 0.92 0.1 0.3 9.37 15.52 0.21HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 9 3.0 6 3.7 6 0 1.24 0.6 0.6 8.33 13.79 0.66LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 23 4.0 5 3.2 0 -5 0.81 0.0 0.3 3.26 5.40 0.34LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 3.0 5 2.7 5 0 0.89 0.0 0.3 3.26 5.40 0.41LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 22 3.0 7 4.5 6 -1 1.50 0.3 0.7 3.41 5.64 0.05NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 19 3.0 9 4.1 6 -3 1.36 0.7 0.8 3.95 6.53 0.38PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 23 3.0 11 3.1 0 -11 1.04 0.2 0.6 3.26 5.40 -0.20VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 17 3.0 7 3.4 7 0 1.15 0.1 0.4 4.41 7.30 0.60PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 23 4.0 7 4.5 2 -5 1.13 0.4 0.7 3.26 5.40 0.11* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 183 5.0 7 5.8 0 -7 1.16 0.2 0.7 0.18 0.52 0.47Subregional Peak: 11.2 1 -6 2.25 (at cell 72 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 20 2.0 6 2.5 6 0 1.25 0.4 0.6 1.67 4.78 0.27ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 18 2.0 5 1.3 0 -5 0.65 -0.1 0.2 1.86 5.31 0.48ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 18 2.0 5 1.5 7 2 0.75 -0.1 0.2 1.86 5.31 0.49OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 11 1.0 5 2.3 7 2 2.35 0.2 0.6 3.04 8.69 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 23 3.0 7 1.9 0 -7 0.63 -0.2 0.4 1.45 4.16 0.07SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 21 2.0 7 2.8 21 14 1.40 0.3 0.6 1.59 4.55 0.18SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 20 2.0 6 3.2 22 16 1.62 0.1 0.5 1.67 4.78 0.61TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 19 5.0 7 5.6 1 -6 1.12 0.2 0.5 1.76 5.03 0.47TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 13 2.0 7 2.2 23 16 1.10 -0.1 0.5 2.57 7.35 0.24TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 20 3.0 22 5.8 0 -22 1.93 1.0 1.0 1.67 4.78 0.45* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 25 2.0 22 1.9 7 -15 0.93 -0.3 0.5 -0.25 0.51 -0.12Subregional Peak: 2.3 6 -16 1.15 (at cell 33 x 67)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 15 2.0 22 1.9 7 -15 0.93 -0.3 0.5 -0.41 0.85 -0.14BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 10 1.0 0 1.7 6 6 1.74 -0.2 0.5 -0.62 1.27 -0.14* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 55 17.0 7 0.8 0 -7 0.05 -1.9 1.9 -0.72 0.72 0.21Subregional Peak: 1.1 0 -7 0.06 (at cell 67 x 44)HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 23 1.0 0 0.8 0 0 0.79 -0.6 0.6 -1.72 1.72 -99.00LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 11 2.0 5 0.5 6 1 0.24 -0.7 0.7 -3.59 3.59 0.73VICT Victorville-14029 Am 21 17.0 7 0.8 1 -6 0.05 -0.9 0.9 -1.88 1.88 0.38* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 217 (08/05) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 53 4.0 19 4.0 21 2 1.01 -0.5 0.8 -0.27 0.59 0.30Subregional Peak: 6.1 22 3 1.53 (at cell 100 x 07)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 7 3.0 20 2.3 21 1 0.77 -0.2 0.6 -2.01 4.47 0.21EC9S El Centro-150 9th St 3 2.0 21 0.5 21 0 0.26 -0.7 0.7 -4.69 10.44 0.99MEXI Mexicali 1 10 4.0 19 3.2 21 2 0.79 0.0 0.6 -1.41 3.13 0.29MEXT Mexicali 2 18 4.0 19 1.1 20 1 0.28 -0.5 0.5 -0.78 1.74 0.53CLXE Calexico CARB 4 1.0 6 1.6 20 14 1.64 -0.2 0.5 -3.52 7.83 -99.00MEXA Mexicali CARB 11 4.0 19 4.0 21 2 1.01 -0.1 0.8 -1.28 2.85 0.28* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0001 SubRegion 33 1.0 0 0.5 1 1 0.48 -0.7 0.7 -0.75 0.75 -99.00Subregional Peak: 1.5 17 17 1.49 (at cell 12 x 64)GLWF Goleta-380 W Fairvie 11 1.0 0 0.5 1 1 0.48 -0.7 0.7 -2.25 2.25 -99.00LFC1 Capitan-LFC #1 Las F 1 1.0 11 0.3 11 0 0.27 -0.7 0.7 -24.72 24.72 -99.00LPSH Lompoc-128 S 'H' St 1 1.0 8 0.3 8 0 0.27 -0.7 0.7 -24.72 24.72 -99.00SBWC Santa Barbara-3 W. C 4 1.0 7 0.3 7 0 0.30 -0.7 0.7 -6.18 6.18 -99.00SLOM San Luis Obispo-1160 16 1.0 6 0.2 7 1 0.23 -0.8 0.8 -1.55 1.55 -99.00* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0002 SubRegion 35 2.0 5 0.9 23 18 0.46 -0.6 0.6 -0.57 0.57 0.08Subregional Peak: 2.5 14 9 1.23 (at cell 37 x 48)ELRO El Rio-Rio Mesa Scho 13 1.0 4 0.4 7 3 0.42 -0.6 0.6 -1.55 1.55 0.08SVAL Simi Valley-5400 Coc 22 2.0 5 0.9 23 18 0.46 -0.5 0.5 -0.91 0.91 -0.01* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0003 SubRegion 41 2.0 0 1.1 22 22 0.54 -0.7 0.8 -0.47 0.48 -0.20Subregional Peak: 2.3 0 0 1.13 (at cell 43 x 39)BRBK Burbank-228 W Palm A 23 2.0 0 1.1 22 22 0.54 -0.5 0.5 -0.84 0.86 -0.67SCLR Santa ClarSCAQMD 18 2.0 5 0.9 23 18 0.45 -0.5 0.5 -1.08 1.10 -0.42* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0004 SubRegion 75 4.0 6 1.5 0 -6 0.36 -0.8 0.8 -0.48 0.48 0.50Subregional Peak: 2.9 7 1 0.72 (at cell 54 x 38)AZSA Azusa-803 N Loren Av 20 4.0 6 1.3 7 1 0.32 -0.4 0.4 -1.79 1.79 0.76POMA Pomona-924 N. Garey 23 4.0 6 1.4 7 1 0.34 -0.5 0.5 -1.55 1.56 0.55RUBI Rubidoux-5888 Missio 9 3.0 6 0.5 23 17 0.18 -0.7 0.7 -3.97 3.99 0.19SANB San Bernardino-24302 23 2.0 0 1.5 0 0 0.73 -0.5 0.5 -1.55 1.56 0.62* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0005 SubRegion 189 3.0 5 3.9 6 1 1.30 0.0 0.5 0.02 0.46 0.40Subregional Peak: 5.1 0 -5 1.69 (at cell 54 x 30)ANAH Anahiem-1610 S Harbo 23 2.0 5 3.9 6 1 1.95 0.3 0.8 0.16 3.77 0.53CMMV Costa Mesa-2850 Mesa 5 1.0 5 3.2 5 0 3.25 1.1 1.2 0.73 17.36 -99.00ELTR El Toro-23022 El Tor 4 1.0 9 1.4 10 1 1.38 -0.1 0.5 0.91 21.69 -99.00HAWH Hawthorne-5234 W. 12 17 3.0 5 2.1 7 2 0.69 0.1 0.3 0.22 5.10 0.52LANM Los Angeles-1630 N M 21 3.0 6 2.2 0 -6 0.72 0.0 0.3 0.17 4.13 0.15LHAB La Habra-621 W. Lamb 23 2.0 3 3.2 7 4 1.61 0.1 0.6 0.16 3.77 0.71LYNW Lynwood-11220 Long B 19 2.0 5 2.3 7 2 1.14 -0.2 0.3 0.19 4.57 0.94NLGB Long Beach-3648 N Lo 15 2.0 5 2.3 7 2 1.15 -0.2 0.5 0.24 5.79 0.73PDSW Pasadena-752 S. Wils 23 3.0 6 1.7 0 -6 0.57 -0.2 0.3 0.16 3.77 0.16VALA W Los Angeles-VA Hos 16 2.0 0 2.1 0 0 1.07 0.0 0.2 0.23 5.42 0.71PICO Pico Rivera-3713 San 23 2.0 5 2.8 0 -5 1.41 0.0 0.5 0.16 3.77 0.34* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0006 SubRegion 153 3.0 5 4.5 2 -3 1.50 -0.2 0.7 -0.20 0.61 0.18Subregional Peak: 6.9 3 -2 2.31 (at cell 70 x 04)CHVT Chula Vista-80 E "J" 9 1.0 4 2.7 6 2 2.67 0.3 0.9 -3.32 10.41 -99.00ECAJ El Cajon-1155 Redwoo 12 1.0 0 0.7 10 10 0.66 -0.5 0.5 -2.49 7.80 -99.00ESCO Escondido-600 E. Val 23 3.0 5 0.8 23 18 0.28 -0.4 0.4 -1.30 4.07 0.40OCEA Oceanside-1701 Missi 10 1.0 0 1.5 0 0 1.52 0.0 0.4 -2.98 9.36 -99.00OTAY Otay-1100 Paseo Inte 16 2.0 0 1.7 6 6 0.85 -0.4 0.5 -1.87 5.85 0.51SDOV San Diego-5555 Overl 22 2.0 6 1.8 0 -6 0.91 -0.1 0.4 -1.36 4.26 0.27SD12 San Diego-330A 12th 7 1.0 4 2.1 5 1 2.13 0.3 0.8 -4.26 13.38 -99.00TILM Tijuana 1 CARB 18 3.0 6 4.5 2 -4 1.50 0.0 0.9 -1.66 5.20 0.15TIPL Tijuana 2 CARB 15 1.0 0 2.3 0 0 2.34 -0.5 0.8 -1.99 6.24 0.15TITT Tijuana 3 CARB 21 2.0 0 3.9 1 1 1.97 -0.1 0.7 -1.42 4.46 0.33* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0007 SubRegion 32 2.0 5 1.3 7 2 0.66 -0.8 0.8 -0.54 0.56 -0.32Subregional Peak: 1.5 7 2 0.76 (at cell 33 x 67)BKGS Bakersfield-1138 Gol 21 2.0 5 1.3 7 2 0.66 -0.5 0.5 -0.82 0.85 -0.39BLFC Bakersfield-5558 Cal 11 2.0 6 1.1 7 1 0.55 -0.6 0.6 -1.56 1.63 -0.20* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0008 SubRegion 60 8.0 7 0.8 20 13 0.10 -2.1 2.1 -0.73 0.73 0.24Subregional Peak: 1.2 19 12 0.15 (at cell 45 x 53)HESP Hesperia-17288 Olive 22 1.0 0 0.7 20 20 0.74 -0.6 0.6 -2.00 2.00 -99.00LANC Lancaster-315 W. Pon 17 3.0 6 0.6 20 14 0.21 -0.7 0.7 -2.58 2.58 0.14VICT Victorville-14029 Am 21 8.0 7 0.8 20 13 0.10 -0.9 0.9 -2.09 2.09 0.49* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *Pollutant: CO (pphm) Project: UAM6.21 Base Case (97df) Simulation ID: 97dfStatistics were calculated for the 24-hour period of DOY 218 (08/06) 1997Included were data-pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 0.2 (pphm)------- Peak Concentrations -------- --- Comparisons with Observations ---Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean NormalizedSite Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------0009 SubRegion 62 1.0 5 0.8 23 18 0.78 -0.6 0.6 -0.65 0.65 -99.00Subregional Peak: 1.1 0 -5 1.08 (at cell 93 x 13)CALE Calexico-Calexico HS 19 1.0 5 0.6 23 18 0.56 -0.6 0.6 -2.12 2.12 -99.00MEXI Mexicali 1 8 1.0 6 0.4 7 1 0.39 -0.7 0.7 -5.02 5.02 -99.00MEXT Mexicali 2 16 1.0 1 0.2 8 7 0.25 -0.8 0.8 -2.51 2.51 -99.00MEXA Mexicali CARB 19 1.0 5 0.8 23 18 0.78 -0.6 0.6 -2.12 2.12 -99.00

# Graphical Analyses

# Figure A-1

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of O3 for August 4, 1997

# Figure A-2

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of O3 for August 5, 1997

# Figure A-3

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of O3 for August 6, 1997

# Figure A-4

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of NO 2 

# for August 4, 1997

# Figure A-5

Distribution of Predicted and Residual (P-O ) Concentrations as a Function of Observed

Concentrations of NO 2 

# for August 5, 1997

# Figure A-6

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of NO 2 

# for August 6, 1997

# Figure A-7

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of NO for August 4, 1997

# Figure A-8

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of NO for August 5, 1997

# Figure A-9

Distribution of predicted and residual (P-O ) concentrations as a function of observed

concentrations of NO for August 6, 1997

# Figure A-10

O3 prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 4, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-11

O3 prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 5, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-12

O3 prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 6, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-13

NO 2 

# prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 4, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-14

NO 2 

# prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 5, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-15

NO 2 

# prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 6, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-16

NO prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 4, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-17

NO prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 5, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-18

NO prediction bias, error and residual stratif ied by concentration for August 6, 1997.

The shaded area represents the overall performance goals.

# Figure A-19a

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19b

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19c

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19d

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19e

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19f

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19g

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19h

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19i

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19j

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19k

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19l

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19m

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19n

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19o

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19p

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-19q

Comparison between simulated and measured NO 2 

# concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20a

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20b

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20c

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20d

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20e

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20f

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20g

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20h

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20i

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20j

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20k

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20l

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20m

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20n

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20o

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20p

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-20q

Comparison between simulated and measured NO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21a

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21b

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21c

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21d

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21e

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21f

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21g

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21h

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21i

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21j

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21k

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21l

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21m

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21n

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21o

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21p

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-21q

Comparison between simulated and measured CO concentrations (pphm) at air quality

monitoring stations in the SCOS97 study domain for August 3-7, 1997.

# Figure A-22a

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 100 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22b

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 200 PST, August 4, 1997. 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

6.0

4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

6.0

# Figure A-22c

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 300 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22d

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 400 PST, August 4, 1997. 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0 6.0

# Figure A-22e

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 500 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22f

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 600 PST, August 4, 1997. 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 6.0 6.0

6.0

4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

6.0 6.0

6.0

6.0 8.0

# Figure A-22g

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 700 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22h

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 800 PST, August 4, 1997. 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0

6.0 6.0 6.0

6.0 8.0

4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0 6.0

6.0 6.0

6.0 6.0 6.0 8.0

8.0 8.0

8.0

# Figure A-22i

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 900 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22j

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1000 PST, August 4, 1997. 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0

6.0 6.0

6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

6.0 6.0 8.0

8.0

8.0

4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

6.0 6.0

6.0 6.0

6.0 8.0

8.0

8.0

8.0

# Figure A-22k

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1100 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22l

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1200 PST, August 4, 1997. 4 4 4

4

4

6 6 6 6 6 6

6

6

6

6 6

6 8

8

8 8 8

8

4 6 6 6 6

6 6

6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6

6 6

8

8

8

8 8 8 8 8

10 10

10

# Figure A-22m

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1300 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22n

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1400 PST, August 4, 1997. 4 4

6 6 6

6 6

6 6

6 6

6 6

6 6

6

8 8 8 8 8 8

8

8 8 8

8 10 10

10 10

12 12

4 4

6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6 6

6 6

6

8 8 8

8 8

8 8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10 10

10 10

12 12 12

# Figure A-22o

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1500 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22p

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1600 PST, August 4, 1997. 4

4 6 6 6

6

6

6 6

6 6 6

6 6

8 8 8

8 8 8 8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10

10

10 10

10

12 12

12 12

12

14 14

4 4 4

6 6 6

6

6

6 6

6 6

6 6

6

6

8 8 8

8 8 8

8 8

8

8

8 8 10

10 10 10

10 10 10

10

10 12 12 12

12 12

14 14 14

14

16

# Figure A-22q

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1700 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22r

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1800 PST, August 4, 1997. 4

4 4

6 6 6

6 6

6

6 6

6 6

6 6

8 8 8

8 8

8 8

8

8

8 8

10 10 10 10 10 10

10

10 10

12 12 12

12 12

12

14 14 14

14

16 16

4

4 4

4

4

4

6 6 6 6 6 6

6

6 6

6 6

6

6

8 8 8

8 8 8

8 8

8

8

8

8 10 10 10 10 10

10

10 12 12 12 12

12 12

14 14 14

14

16 16

# Figure A-22s

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1900 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22t

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2000 PST, August 4, 1997. 4 4 4

4

4 4 4

4 4 4

6 6 6 6 6 6

6 6

6 6

6 8 8 8 8 8 8

8

8

8 8

10 10 10 10

10

10 12

12 12 12

12

14 14

14 16

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4 4

4

4

4

4

4 4

4

6 6 6 6 6

6 6

6

6

6

6

6 6

8 8 8 8 8 8

8

8

8

10 10 10 10 10

10 12 12

12

# Figure A-22u

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2100 PST, August 4, 1997.

Figure A-22v

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2200 PST, August 4, 1997. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4 4 4

4

4

4

4

4

4 6

6 6 6 6

6

6

6

6

6 6 6

8 8 8 8

8

8

8 10 10

10

4

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4 4

4 4

4 4 4

4

4

4 4

6 6

6 6 6 6 6 6

6

6

8 8 8 8

8 8

# Figure A-22w

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2300 PST, August 4, 1997. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4 4 4

4

4

4

4 4

4

4

4 4

4 6

6 6

6 6 6 6

6

8 8 8

# Figure A-23a

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 100 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23b

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 200 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4 4 4 4

4 4

4

4

4

4

4

4 4

4 4

4 6 6 6

6

6 6

6

4

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4

4

4

4 4

4

4

4 6 6 6

6 6

6 6

# Figure A-23c

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 300 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23d

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 400 PST, August 5, 1997. 4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0

6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

4

4 4 4 4 4 4

4

4 4

4 4 4

4

6

6 6 6

6 6 6

# Figure A-23e

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 500 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23f

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 600 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4

4 4 4

4 4

4 4 4

4

6

6 6 6

6 6 6

8 8

4

4

4 4 4 4 4

4

4 4 4

6 6

6

6 6

6

8

8 8

8

10

# Figure A-23g

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 700 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23h

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 800 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4 4 4 4

4 4 4

4 4

4

4 4 4

4 4

6 6

6 6

6 6

6

8 8

8

8

10 10

4

4

4 4 4 4 4 4

4 6 6 6 6

6 6 6 6

8 8

8

10 10

# Figure A-23i

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 900 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23j

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1000 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4 4 4

4

4 4

4 6 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

8 8

8 10

4 4

4 4 4

4

4

6 6 6 6

6 6 6 6

6

6

8 8

8

10

# Figure A-23k

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1100 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23l

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1200 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4 4

6

6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6 6 6

6

6 6

8 8

8

8

8 10

10

4 6 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

6 6

6 6 6 6

6

8

8 8 8

8

8

8

10 10

10

# Figure A-23m

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1300 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23n

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1400 PST, August 5, 1997. 4 6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6 6

6

6 6

8 8 8 8

8

8 8 8

8 8

10 10 10 10

10

10

10

4 6 6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6 6 6

6

8 8 8

8 8

8

8 8 8

8

10 10 10 10

10

10

10 12 12

12

# Figure A-23o

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1500 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23p

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1600 PST, August 5, 1997. 4 6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6

6 6

6

8 8 8 8

8 8

8

8 8 8

8

10 10 10 10

10 12 12 12

12

14 14

14

14

4 6 6 6

6

6 6 6 6

6

6

8 8 8

8 8 8

8 8

8

8

10 10 10 10

10 10

12 12 12

12

14 14 14

14 16 16

16

# Figure A-23q

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1700 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23r

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1800 PST, August 5, 1997. 4 6 6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6

6

8 8 8 8

8 8 8

8

8 10 10 10 10

10 10

12 12 12

12

14 14 14

14 16 16

4

4

6 6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6

6 6

6

8 8 8 8

8 8

8 8 8

8

8

10 10 10 10

10

10

12 12 12 12

14 14

14 16

16

# Figure A-23s

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1900 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23t

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2000 PST, August 5, 1997. 4 4

4 4

4 4

6 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

6 6 6 6

8 8 8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10 10

10 12 12 12 12

14 14

14 16

4 4

4

4 4

4

4

4

4 4 4 4 4 4

4

4

6 6 6 6 6

6

6 6

6

8 8 8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10

10 10

12 12 12

# Figure A-23u

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2100 PST, August 5, 1997.

Figure A-23v

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2200 PST, August 5, 1997. 4

4

4 4 4 4 4 4

4

4

4 4

4

4 4

6

6 6 6 6

6 6

8

8 8 8 8

10 10

10 12

4

4

4

4 4 4 4 4

4

4

4 4 4

4

6

6 6

6

6

6

6 6 6

8

8 8

8 8

10

12

# Figure A-23w

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2300 PST, August 5, 1997. 4 4

4

4 4 4 4 4

4 4 4

4 4 4

6

6 6 6

8

10

# Figure A-24a

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 100 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24b

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 200 PST, August 6, 1997. 4

4

4

4 4 4 4

4 4 4 4

4

6

8

10

4 4

4

4

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

4

6

8

10

# Figure A-24c

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 300 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24d

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 400 PST, August 6, 1997. 4

4

4

4 4

4

4 4

4 4 4 4

4

6

8

10

4

4 4

4

4 4

4

4 4 4 4

4

6

8

10

# Figure A-24e

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 500 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24f

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 600 PST, August 6, 1997. 4

4 4 4

4

4

4

4 4

4

4

4 4

4 4 4 4

4

6

8

4 4 4 4

4

4 4

4

4

4

4 4 4 4 4

4

4

6

8

# Figure A-24g

Layer-1 predicted ozone (p phm) 700 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24h

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 800 PST, August 6 1997. 4 4 4 4

4

4 4

4

4

4 4

4

4 4 4 4

4

4

4 6

6 6

8

4

4 4

4

4 4

4 4 4 4 4 4

6 6

6 6 6

8

# Figure A-24i

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 900 PST, August 6 1997.

Figure A-22j

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1000 PST, August 4, 1997. 4

4 4 4

4 4 4 4 4

6 6 6 6

6 6 6 6

8 8

4 4 4

4 4

6 6

6 6 6

6

6 6

6

6

6

6 6

8 8

8

# Figure A-24k

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1100 PST, August 6 1997.

Figure A-24l

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1200 PST, August 6 1997. 4

6 6 6 6

6

6 6 6

6 6 6

6

6

6 6 6

8

8 8

8

8 8

10

4

6 6 6

6 6

6

6

6 6 6

6

8

8 8 8

8 8 8

8

8

10 10

10 10

12

# Figure A-24m

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1300 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24n

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1400 PST, August 6, 1997. 6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6 6

6

8 8

8 8 8 8

8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10

10 10 10

12

12

6 6 6 6

6 6

6 6 6

6

8 8

8 8 8

8 8

8

8 10 10 10

10 10 10

10 10

10

10 10 12 12

12 12 12

14

14 14

# Figure A-24o

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1500 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24p

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1600 PST, August 6, 1997. 6 6 6 6

6

6

6

6 6

6

6

8 8

8 8 8

8

8 8

8

8 10 10

10 10 10

10

10

10

12 12 12 12

12

12

12 14 14

14 14 14

16 16

4 4

6 6 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

8 8

8 8 8 8

8 8

8

8

8 10 10

10 10 10

10 10

10

10 12

12 12 12 12

12 12

12 14 14

14 14 14

14 16

16

# Figure A-24q

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1700 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24r

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1800 PST, August 6, 1997. 4

4 4

6 6 6

6 6

6

6

6 6

8 8

8 8 8

8

8

8 8

8 8

10 10

10 10 10

10 10

10

12 12

12 12 12

12

12

12 14 14 14 14

14 14

14 16 16

18

4

4

4 4

6 6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6

8 8

8 8 8

8

8 8

8

10 10 10 10 10

10

10 10

10 12 12 12 12

12 12

12

12 14 14 14 14

14 14

14 16 16 16 16

18

# Figure A-24s

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 1900 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24t

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2000 PST, August 6, 1997. 4 4 4

4 6 6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6

8 8 8 8 8

8

8 8

8

10 10 10 10 10

10

10 10

10 12 12 12 12

12

12 12

12 14 14 14 14

14 14

14 16 16 16

4 4

4 4 4 4

6 6 6 6 6

6

6

6 6

8 8 8 8 8

8

8 8 8

10 10 10 10 10 10

10

10 12 12 12 12

12 12

12

12 14 14 14

14 14

14 16

16 16

# Figure A-24u

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2100 PST, August 6, 1997.

Figure A-24v

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2200 PST, August 6, 1997. 4 4

4 4

4 4 4

6 6 6

6 6

6

6

6 6

8 8 8

8 8 8

8

8 8

10 10 10

10 10 10

10

10 12 12

12

12 12 12

12 12 14

14

14 14 14

14 16

4

4 4 4

4 4

4

4

4 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

6

6 6 6

8 8 8

8 8

8

8 8

10

10

10 10 10 10 10

10 10

12 12 12

12

12 12

12 12

14

14

14 14

# Figure A-24w

Layer-1 predicted ozone (pphm) 2300 PST, August 6, 1997. 4

4

4 4 4

4

4

4 4

6 6 6 6

6 6 6

6

6

6

6 8 8 8

8 8

8

8

8 8

10

10

10 10

10 10 10

10

10 12 12

12

12 12 12 12

# Sensitivity Analyses

# Figure A-25

Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with zero-boundary co nditions Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-26

Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with zero-initial conditions Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) 

# b. a.

# Figure A-27

Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with only biogenic emissions Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) 

# b. a.

# Figure A-28

Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with no biogenic emissions Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-29

Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with double biogenic emissions Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) 

# b. a.

# Figure A-30

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with zero stationary source emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# b. a.

# Figure A-31

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with zero mobile source emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-32

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Opttion-1 emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-33

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-2 emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-34

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-1 emissions with biogenic emissions reduced by 1/3:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-35

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-2 emissions with biogenic emissions reduced by 1/3:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-36

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-1 emissions with biogenic emissions reduced by 1/3

in the Cleveland Forrest: Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-37

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-2 emissions with biogenic emissions reduced by 1/3

in the Cleveland Forrest: Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-38

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-1 emissions with doubled biogenic emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# b. a.

# Figure A-39

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-2 emissions with doubled biogenic emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) and Aug. 6, 1997 (b), episodes 

# b. a.

# Figure A-40

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-1 emissions with weekend emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) assumed as Saturday and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) assumed as Sunday 

# b. a.

# Figure A-41

2010 Maximum predicted ozone (pphm) with Option-2 emissions with weekend emissions:

Aug. .5, 1997 (a) assumed as Saturday and Aug. 6, 1997 (b) assumed as Sunday 

# a.

b.

# Figure A-42a

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42b

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42c

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42d

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42e

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42f

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42g

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42h

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42i

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42j

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42k

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42l

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42m

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42n

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42o

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42p

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42q

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42r

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42s

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42t

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42u

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42v

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42w

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-42x

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero boundary conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43a

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43b

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43c

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43d

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43e

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43f

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43g

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43h

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43i

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43j

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43k

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43l

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43m

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43n

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43o

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43p

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43q

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43r

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43s

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43t

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43u

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43v

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43w

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-43x

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero initial conditions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44a

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44b

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44c

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44d

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44e

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44f

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44g

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44h

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44i

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44j

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44k

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44l

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44m

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44n

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44o

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44p

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44q

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44r

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44s

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45t

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44u

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44v

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44w

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44x

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and zero biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45a

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45b

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45c

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45d

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45e

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45f

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45g

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45h

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45i

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45j

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45k

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45l

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45m

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45n

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45o

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45p

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45q

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45r

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45s

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-44t

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45u

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45v

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45w

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode

# Figure A-45x

Comparison between model simulation arb97b and doubled biogenic emissions for the August 1997

meteorological episode