{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.049204052098408106, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0612638687891944, 'mean_word_length': 4.605405405405405, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Measurement of low breath-alcohol concentrations: laboratory studies and field experience.

Recent federal rules and traffic law changes impose breath-alcohol thresholds of 0.02 and 0.04 g/210 L upon some classes of motor vehicle operators, such as juveniles and commercial vehicle operators. In federally regulated alcohol testing in the workplace, removal of covered workers from safety-sensitive duties, and other adverse actions, also occur at breath-alcohol concentrations (BrACs) of 0.02 and 0.04 g/210 L. We therefore studied performance of vapor-alcohol and breath-alcohol measurement at low alcohol concentrations in the laboratory and in the field, with current-generation evidential analyzers. We report here chiefly our field experience with evidential breath-alcohol testing of drinking drivers on paired breath samples using 62 Intoxilyzer 5000-D analyzers, for BrACs of 0-0.059 g/210 L. The data from 62 law enforcement breath-alcohol testing sites were collected and pooled, with BrACs recorded to three decimal places, and otherwise carried out under the standard Oklahoma evidential breath-alcohol testing protocol. For 2105 pooled simulator control tests at 0.06-0.13 g/210 L the mean +/- SD of the differences between target and result were -0.001 +/- 0.0035 g/210 L and 0.003 +/- 0.0023 g/210 L for signed and absolute differences, respectively (spans -0.016-0.010, 0.000-0.016). For 2078 paired duplicate breath-alcohol measurements with the Intoxilyzer 5000-D, the mean +/- SD difference (BrAC1-BrAC2) were 0.002 +/- 0.0026 (span 0-0.020 g/210 L). Variability of breath-alcohol measurements was related inversely to the alcohol concentration. Ninety-nine percent prediction limits for paired BrAC measurements correspond to a 0.020 g/210 L maximum absolute difference, meeting the NSC/CAOD recommendation that paired breath-alcohol analysis results within 0.02 g/210 L shall be deemed to be in acceptable agreement. We conclude that the field system for breath-alcohol analysis studied by us can and does perform reliably and accurately at low BrACs.