### DATE: SUBJECT:

FROM:

TO: THRU: UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY REGION III 1650 Arch Street**Philadelp~ia,** 

### Pennsylvania 19103 

### JUN 1

### S 2013
Technical Support DocumentRegarding Monitoring Data -Pennsylvania; Determinations ofAttainment ofthe 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Standards for the Liberty-ClairtonNonattainment Area 

### Maria A. 

### Pino, SeniorAir Quality 

### Planning

# ~s**U-!9** Office ofAir ProgramPlanning Loretta Hyden, Environmental Engineer

# ~~L Office ofAir Monitoring & Analysis

# ~ File
(_

--**--~** -=- z:c-__**.-~- ~------------·)**  Cristina Femandez, Associate Director Office ofAir ProgramPlanning
This documentprovides a technical review ofthe air quality monitoring dataused to supportthe Environmental ProtectionAgency's (EPA's) proposed determination that Liberty-Clairton, PA annual PM2.5 nonattainment area (the Liberty-ClairtonArea) has attained the 1997 annual fine particulate (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by its statutory attainment date andEPA's proposed clean data determination for the Liberty-Clairton Area.


### I. BACKGROUND On July 16, 1997, EPA established an annual PM2.5NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (J..tg/m3) based on a 3-year average ofannual mean PM2.5 concentrations (62 FR 38652, July 18, 1997). See 40 CFR 50.7. The 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS was based on significant evidence andnumerous health studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with exposures to particulate matter. On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), EPApublished its nonattainment area designations for the 1997 annual PM2.5NAAQS based upon air quality monitoring datafor calendar years 2001-2003. These designations, effective onApril 5, 2005, included the Liberty-Clairton Area as a nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PM2.5NAAQS. The Liberty-Clairton Area is comprised ofthe following portion ofAllegheny County: the boroughs ofLincoln, Glassport, Liberty, and PortVue and the City ofClairton. See 40 CFR 81.339 (Pennsylvania). The Liberty-Clairton Areais surrounded by, but separate and distinct from the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area.II. EVALUATION OF AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA 

### A. Monitoring NetworkAdequacy EPA has previously determined that the PM2 .5 monitoring network for the Liberty-Clairton Area is adequate. EPA found that the number ofmonitors in the Liberty-Clairton Area meets the minimum regulatory requirements given in 40 CFRpart 58, appendix D, section 4.7, and that the monitoring network in place is in accordance with the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania's most recent annual monitoring networkplan approved by EPA, as required by 40 CFR58.10. 1 The Liberty-Clairton Areahas inplace a total oftwo PM2
.smonitoring sites, whose data was eligible for comparison to the 1997 annual PM2 . 5 NAAQS. All monitors inthe network measure ambient air quality by following one ofEPA's approved FEM, FRM, or ARM, in accordance with 40 CFRpart 53 and part 58.
B. Data Requirements The criteria for determining ifan area is attaining the 1997 annual PM2 .5 NAAQS are set out in 40 CFR 50.13 and appendixN. The annual PM2.s NAAQS is met when the annual design value is less than or equal to 15.0 j..tg/m 3

. Three years ofvalid annual means are required to produce a valid annual standard design value. A year meets data completeness requirements when at least 75 percent ofthe scheduled sampling days for each quarter have valid data. Quarterly data capture rates (expressed as a percentage) are specifically calculated as the number ofcreditable samples for the quarter divided bythe number ofscheduled samples for the quarter, theresult then multiplied by 100 and rounded to the nearest integer. The use ofless than complete datais subject to the approval ofEPA, which may consider factors such as monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring diligence, and nearby concentrations in determining whether to use such data. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFRpart 58, and must be recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS). The data supporting attainment ofthe standard mustbe complete in accordance with 40 CFRpart 50, appendix N.
C. Certified Air Quality Monitoring Data, 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 The Commonwealth ofPennsylvania submitted quality assured air quality monitoring data for the Liberty-Clairton Area into AQS. The Commonwealth then certified that data. There are two monitors inthe area, one 

### inLiberty Borough and one inthe City ofClairton. Attached is a "Design Value Report" from AQS, containing annual PM2.5 data for the Liberty-ClairtonArea for 2009-2011 and 2010-2012. Tables 1 and 2, below, summarizes the report.

1Allegheny County's 2012 annual ambient monitoring network plan was approved by EPA in a February 21, 2013 letter from Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III, to Dr. Ronald Voorhees, MD, MPH Acting Director ofthe Allegheny Health Department.



### 2

### Table 1: 2009-2011 

### Lb i**er~** 

### -Clairton Area Annual

### PM2.sMonitoringData & 

### Completcness Annual Mean 2009-2011 Complete Quarters Complete Location Site ID Design Value 2009 2010 2011 (J.Lg/mJ) 2009 2010 2011 Data? Liberty 

### 420030064 15.0 16.0 14.0 15.0 4 4 4 Yes Borough City of 420033007 11.3 12
.5 10.7 11.5* 4 4 3 No Clairton *The annual destgn value for the Clmrton stte reflects mcomplete quarterly data dunng 2011. 

### Table 2: 2010-2012**Libe•·~** 

### -Clairton Area Annual PM z.s MonitoringData & 

### Completeness Annual Mean 2010-2012 Complete Quarters Complete Location Site ID Design Value 2010 2011 2012 (J.Lg/m3) 2010 2011 2012 Data? Liberty 

### 420030064 16.0 14.0 14.3 14.8 4 4 4 Yes Borough City of 420033007 12.5 10.7 9.4 10.9* 4 3 4 No Clairton *The annual design value for the Clairton site reflects incomplete quarterly data during 2011. The design values for bothmonitors in the Liberty-Clairton Area are 15.0 J..tg/m3 

### or less, for the 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 monitoring periods. However, while most ofthe monitoring data for both monitoring periods meets the completeness criteria outlined above, the monitor inthe City ofClairton has less than complete data for one calendar quarter of2011.


### D. Data Completeness Issues The Clairton monitoring site (42-003-3007) did not meetthe completeness requirement for the 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 monitoring periods. The Clairton site was incomplete for one quarter of2011 due to unreliable laboratory analysis results. For this particular monitor, the data substitutiontests described in EPA's April 1999 guidance document "Guideline on Data Handling Conventions for the PMNAAQS" could not be used to show attainment ofthe 1997 annual PM2.5 

### standard for the 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 monitoring periods. Thus, EPA addressed the missing data ofthe incomplete monitor by applying a statistical procedure, described below, in order to determine a "diagnostic" annual design value for the monitor for 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 monitoring periods. Details ofthe statistical analyses are set out in Appendices Band C ofthis document. 1. 

### Description ofEPA's StatisticalMethod The general concept ofthe statistical method used is to determine whether an incomplete monitor (target monitor) would have met the 1997 annual PM2.5

### NAAQS by replacing the missing data of the target monitor with data from another monitor (candidate monitor) located within or in the vicinity ofthe nonattainment area. The first step ofthe statistical method is to establish a linear regressionrelationship between the target monitor and the candidate monitor, and then to use the

3linear regression to fill in the missing data for the target monitor in any quarter ofthethree-year period that did not satisfy the 75 percent completeness requirements based on actual observations. A "diagnostic annual design value" for the monitoring period is calculated with the imputed data and then checked with an additional statistical technique, referred to as bootstrapping, to verify ifthe monitor has attained the 1997 annual PM2 . 5 NAAQS. The diagnostic annual design value is used tojudge whether a monitoring location would likely have monitored attainment ofthe 1997 annual PM2 .5NAAQS had the monitor collected complete valid data during this time. The candidate monitor is selected based on 3 different aspects: correlation value, quarterly data captured, and site pairing. The correlation value (R2 ) from the linearregression should indicate a "strong" linear relationship ofthe PM2 .5data from the candidate monitor and the target monitor. Then, the mean ofthe quarterly data captured (expressed inpercentage) which provides the average data collection rate at each site, should determine that the site has sufficient data during the missing period ofthe target monitor. Additionally, pairing the site data assists in establishing more precise comparisons withfewer observations. The target monitor in this analysis is the Clairton monitor (at site 42-003-3007). The methodology is used to appropriately fill inthe missing data of2011 for this monitor, tojudge whether the monitoring location would likely have monitored attainment ofthe 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS had the monitor collected complete valid data during this time. The PM2 .5 monitoring network withinthe Liberty-Clairton Areahas two annual PM2 .5 monitoring locations. The Liberty monitor (site 42-003-0064) was selected as the candidate monitor, because itmeets the eligibility requirements described below. 

### 2. Eligibility EPA established criteriato assure that the diagnostic annual design values estimated by the method are robust enoughto allow consideration ofthe results in a weight ofevidence decision. EPA established criteria for boththe operating period ofthe candidate monitor and the number ofdays ofsamples that the candidate monitor and each ofthe possible target monitors have in common. EPAhas not established bright lines or specific requirements for determining diagnostic annual design values for monitors with less than complete data. Operating Time In order to establish a significantrelationship betweenthe monitors, the candidate monitor must have operated during the monitoring period inthe nonattainment area (i.e., during 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 inthe Liberty-Clairton Area). The candidate monitor is not required to have complete data in all12 quarters ofeach 3-year period, yet should have collected sufficient observations to fill inthe missing days ofthe target monitor, for the target monitor to satisfy the 75 percent completeness in each quarter. Pairedsamples Pairs ofsample data for the target monitor and the candidate monitor from the most recent 20-



### 4

### quarter period ofoperation ofthe target monitor were used. The "period ofoperation" ofthe target monitor was based on the date ofthe last reported sample from the monitor. The candidate monitor had at least 100 historical sample pairs in common with the target monitor during this period. When there were more than 100 pairs inthe 20-quarterperiod all available pairs were used. In addition to the 100 pairs over the 20 quarters, the candidate monitor had at least 20 paired days ofdata in common with the target monitor for each calendar quarter (adding together the number ofdays in a given calendar quarter [Q1, Q2, Q3, or Q4] across the 20-quarter period). Forthis analysis, the one candidate site (Liberty) metthe eligibility criteria of 100 pairs over the 20-quarters, and had at least 20 paired days ofdata in common with the target monitor for each calendar quarter. 

### 3. Method for Determining Diagnostic Annual Design Values The following includes a step-by-step explanation ofthe methodology used to determine the diagnostic annual design value for the targetmonitor (Clairton). Results are discussed in detail inthe following section. 

### Step 1- Organize data and perform linear regression(s) between target monitor and possible candidate monitors. All the available paired data within the period limit (see 

### the Eligibility section) was used to develop a linear regression to predict target concentrations from candidate concentrations. A regression was performed for eachpossible pairing that met the criteriautilized for 1 00 data points and 20 data points per calendar quarter (across all years) in the most recent 20 quarters for each potential candidate monitor in the nonattainment area. 

### Step 

### 2

- Select candidate site The following steps were used to select the candidate monitor: (1) 

### All possible candidate monitors were placed in order ofhighest correlation (based on thehighest "R-squared" ofthe linear regression) with the target monitor. (2) Using the regression equation relating concentrations at the target monitor and the candidate monitor, estimates ofthe 24-hour average concentrations were made at the target monitor for all missing scheduled days inthe initially incomplete quarter, during the most recent three-year period atthe target monitor. Estimates were only made for days on which a concentrationis available at the candidate monitor. Estimates were not made for any days inthe quarter for which the target monitorhad 75 percent or more complete data initially. The estimates were combined with any reported data atthe target monitor during the recent 3-year period, and the data capture rates were computed for the originally incomplete quarter. The computation ofthese data capture rates was based on the assumption thatthe required sampling frequency for the target monitor was recorded. Ifthe candidate monitor had a lower sampling frequency than the target monitor, some

5missing scheduled days for the target were not substituted for the regression-based estimates. Whenthe candidate monitor had a lower sampling frequency thanthe target monitor, the target monitor sampling schedule was assumed to be a combination ofthe target and candidate monitors schedules, weighted bythe number oforiginallypresent and originally missing scheduled days at the target monitor. (3) Ifafter performing the process in step 2, the results produced al112 quarters at the target monitor having at least 75 percent ofscheduled values, the potential candidate monitor was selected as the candidate monitor for the remaining steps. Ifthe 75 percent ofthe scheduled values for the target monitor were not obtained, then step 2 was repeated for the next best correlated site. This process was repeated until the target monitorhad 75 percent ofits scheduled values. Forthe analysis ofthe Liberty-ClairtonArea during 2009-2011 and 2010-2012, this step was completed for the one potential candidate monitor, the Liberty monitor (at site 42-003-0064). The Liberty site was selected as the candidate monitor for the Clairtonmonitor. 

### Step 3

- Diagnostic annual designvalue computed The diagnostic three-year averaged annual design values for 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 were calculated using the actual observations ofthe target monitor and the regression-based estimates ofdaily concentrations. The 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 annual diagnostic design values computed for the Clairtonmonitor were belowthe 1997 annual 

### PM2.5 standard level, 15.0 l-lg/m3

. 

### Step 4- Statistical confidence ofa diagnostic annual design value belowthe NAAQS In order to showthat there is, at most, a 10 percentprobabilitythatthe actual annual design value (had the Clairton monitor operated more days) was above the 1997 annual 

### PM2.5NAAQS, further analysis was performed as follows: (1) Residuals were calculated from the regression. (2) A bootstrap analysis was performed, repeating the regression-based substitution in Step 2 but adding to each estimated 24-hour value that substitutes for a missing scheduled monitored value a plus or minus residual that has beenrandomly drawn (with replacement) from the pool ofregression residuals. This step randomly applies real residuals from the linear regression to the imputed current-period targetvalues. (3) Repeat (2) for a total of 1000 runs. (4) For each ofthe 1000 bootstrap trials, the 3-year annual design value was calculated. This will provide a pseudo confidence interval for the partially imputed current-period annual design value for the target monitor. (5) Since none ofthe 1000 runs resulted in diagnostic annual design values above the 1997 annual 

### PM2.s NAAQS, the Clairton monitor was consideredto have met the 1997

6

### annual PM2
.sNAAQS. 

### 4. Statistical Results for the Clairton Monitoring Site (42-003-3007) (Clairton) In the statistical analyses conducted for the Liberty-Clairton Area, summarized in Appendices B and C, the target monitor, Clairton (site 42-003-3007), is identified as Site A and the candidate site, Liberty (site 42-003-0064), is identified as Site B. The Liberty monitor had the highest correlation with the Clairton monitor and met the operating period and paired data eligibility criteria for being a candidate site. 

### 2009-2011: Appendix B Page 3 ofAppendix B shows the 2009-2011 annual design values and data capture rates for the monitoring sites in the Liberty-Clairton Area. The results ofthe linear regression between the Clairton and Liberty monitors for the 2009-2011 annual design value are shown on page 4 of Appendix B. Estimates for the deficient quarterly data for 2009-2011 were made. Missing data was filled in so that the Clairton monitor had complete quarters for 2009-2011 for the purpose of this analysis. A 2009-2011-diagnostic annual design value of 11.7 )lg/m3 

### was calculated for the Clairton monitor, as shown onpage 5 ofAppendix B. The statistical confidence ofthe diagnostic annual design value was checked using the method outlined above. None ofthe 1000 bootstrapping trials resulted in a violating annual design value, which provides statistical confidence that the Clairton monitor is attaining the 1997 annual PM2
.sNAAQS. The results of the 1000 bootstrap trials are provided onpage 6 ofAppendix B. 

### 2010-2012: Appendix C Page 2 ofAppendix C shows the 2010-2012 annual design values and data capture rates for the monitoring sites in the Liberty-Clairton Area. The results ofthe linear regression between the Clairton and Liberty monitors for the 2010-2012 annual design value are shown on page 3 of Appendix C. Estimates for the deficient quarterly data for 2010-2012 were made. As a result of filling in the missing data, the Clairton monitor nowhad all complete quarters for 2010-2012. A 2010-2012 diagnostic annual design value of 11.0 )lg/m3 

### was calculated for the Clairtonmonitor, as shown on page 4 ofAppendix C. The statistical confidence ofthe diagnostic annual design value was checked using the method outlined in Step 4. None ofthe 1000 bootstrapping trials resulted in a violating annual design value, which provides statistical confidence that the Clairton monitor is attaining the 1997 annual PM2 .5

### NAAQS. The results ofthe 1000 bootstrap trials are provided onpage 5 ofAppendix C.


### III. CONCLUSION EPA has reviewed quality-assured, quality-controlled, and state certified 2009-2011 and 2010- 2012 ambient air quality monitoring data for the Liberty-Clairton Area. EPA has also conducted statistical analyses on this data, which was needed because one ofthe monitors has insufficient data capture for one calendar quarter in 2011. As shown in Tables 3 and 4, below, these analyses showthat design values for both monitors in the Liberty-Clairton Area are 15.0 Jlg/m3 

### or less for the 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 monitoring periods. Therefore, the Liberty-Clairton Area attained the 1997 annual PM2
.sNAAQS, considering 2009-2011 monitoring data, and continues to meet



### 7the 1997 annual PM2.5NAAQS, considering 2010-2012 monitoring data. T bl

3 a e: 2009-2011 L**iber~-** 

# clairton Area Annual

### PM 2.5 Monitoring Data & Completenes

### s Annual Mean 2009-2011 Complete Complete Location Site ID Design Value 

### Cuarters 2009 2010 2011 (ptg/m3) 2009 2010 2011 Data? Liberty 420030064 15.0 16.0 14.0 15.0 4 4 4 Yes Borough City of 420033007 11.3 12.5 10.7 11.5* 1 11.7** 4 4 3 No Clairton *The annual design value for the Clairton site reflects incomplete quarterly data during 2011. **EPA's statistical procedure was applied to address the missing data and calculate a "complete" design value. T bl 4 2010 2012 L 'b ty Cl
. t A A 

### IPM M 't

. 

### D t & 

### C l t 

### s

a e 

# . - 1 cr 

# - air on rea nnua 2.5 om onng a a omp1e enes 

# . Annual Mean 2010-2012 Complete Complete Location Site ID Design Value Quarters 2010 2011 2012 (ptg/m3) 2010 2011 2012 Data? Liberty 420030064 16.0 14.0 14.3 14.8 4 4 4 Yes Borough City of 420033007 12.5 10.7 9.4 10.9* 111.0** 4 3 4 No Clairton *The annual design value for the Clmrton site reflects incomplete quarterly data during 2011. **EPA's statistical procedure was applied to address the missing data and calculate a "complete" design value
ATTACHMENTS

- Appendix A: EPA AQS "DesignValue Report" (AMP480) dated June 5, 2013, containing PM2

### .s air quality data for 2009-2011 and 2010-2012 for the Liberty-Clairton Area

- Appendix B: Application oflmputation 

### I Bootstrap Protocol to Liberty/Clairton Annual Std Nonattainment Area- 2009-2011, Schmidt 9-16-2012

- Appendix C: Application oflmputation/Bootstrap Protocol to Liberty-Clairton 1997 NAAQS (Annual Std) Nonattainment Areafor the DesignValue Period, 2010-2012, Schmidt 6-3-2013

8UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
User ID: HXN DESIGN VALUE REPORT Report Request ID: ll046il.7 Report Code: At-lP480 GEOGRAPHIC SELECTIONS Tribal

Code State County Site Parameter POC City 42 42 003 003 0064 3007 PROTOCOL SELECTIONS Parameter Classification DESIGN VALUE Parameter Method Duration 88101 AQCR UAR CBSA CSA



# I SELECTED OPTIONS 

# I Option Type Option Value SINGLE EVENT PROCESSING EXCLUDE REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVBN'l'S WORI<PILE DELIHITER USER SITE METADATA**~1ERG8** PDF FILES QUARTERLY DATA IN WORY.FILE GLOBAL DATES Start Date End Date 2011 2012 STREET ADDRESS YES NO EPA Region

Selection Criteria Page 1 Jun. s, 2013**~lethod** Duration Begin Date End Date

APPLICABLE STAN!lARDS 

# l
Standard Description 

# I

PM25 24-hour 2006**~l 25**  Annual 2006]JNITED $TATES ENVIRONMENTAL PRO'l'EC'l;ION .AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM PRELIMni'ARY DESIGN VALUE REPORT**~** 1. Computed design valu
. es are a snapshot of the data at the**tim~** the report was run (may n. ot be all data for year)
. Repor t Date' Jun
. 5, 2013

2. Some PM2.5 24-bou.r: D Vs for incomplete data that are marked invalid here may be marked valid in tbe Official report due to additional analysis
. 3
. Armual Values not meeti ng completeness cJ:iteria are marked w . itb an asterisk (' * ' l
. Page 1 of 3UNITED STATES ENV'l:RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM PRELIMIKARY DESIGN VALUE REPORT Design Value Year: 2011 Report Date: Jun. 5, 2013

Pollutant: Site-LevelEM2. 5

- Local Conditions (8
. 8101) Standard Units: Micrograms/cubic mete· r (LC) (1 05 ) NAAQS Standard: PM25 24

-hour 2006 I PM25 Annual 2006 REPORT EXCLUDES MEASUREMENTS WITH REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENT FLAGS. Statistic: Annual Weighted Mean Level: 15 Statistic: Annual 98th Percentile Level: 35 State Name: 2010 Pennsylvania 2011 Site I.D I STREET ADDRESS 42

- 003

- 0064 I Cred. Comp. 98th I**~** Qrtrs .Perctil

339 4 38.0 2793 I>.'ASIUNGTON BLV'O 4

-

2-003

- 3007 LIBERTY 49 3 30.**3~ ~0~**  WADD&LL AVE, CLAIRTON Wtd. Me8Jl. 14
. 0 10.7*Cert& ICred.Comp. 98th Wtd. Cert& Eva1 IDays Qrtrs Percti1 Mean Eva1 34
.

2 4 48.8 16.0 55 4 28.2 1 2.5 I 2009 I Cred. Comp. 98th Wtd. I**~** Qrtrs Perctil Mean

346 4 45.3 15.0 53 4 25.9 1.1.3 24-Hour I**~ual** Cert& IDesign va1id IDesign Valid

EVal IVa1ue Ind. 1Va1ue Ind. 44 y 15.0 y 28 N ll .S N

Notes: 1. Computed design values are a snapshot of the data**a~** the time the report was run (may not be all data for year). 2. Some PM2.5 24

- bour DVs for incomplete data that are marked inValid bere may be marked valid in the Official report due to additional analysis. 3. Annual Values**no~ mee~ing** **comple~eness** criteria are marked with an asterisk ('*'). Page 2 of 3UNITE]) STATES .EN'VIRONMENTAL PROTB
. CTION AGENCY**A~R** QUALITY SYSTEM PRELIMINA:RY DB:SIGN VAI.UE RB:PORT Design Value Year: 2012 Report Date: Jun . 5, 2013

Pollutant: Site-LevelPM2.5

- Local**Conditions(88~01)** Standard Units: Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105) NAAQS Standard: PM 25 24-hour 2006 I**Pt~25** Annual 2006 REPORT EXCLUDES MEASUREMENTS WITH REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENT FLAGS. Statistic: Annual Weighted Mean Level: 15 Statistic: Annual 98th Percentile Level: 35 State Name: Pennsylvania 2CJcl.2 Site ID j ICred. Camp. 98th Wtd. cert&. J cred.Comp. STREET ADDRESS IDays Qrtrs Perctil Mean Bva1 J oays Qrtrs 2011 I 2010 I 24-Bour I Annual 98th Wtd
. Cert&. J Cred. Comp. 98th Wtd. Cert&. Joesign valid JDesign Valid Perctil**~ Sva~**  I Days Qrtrs Perctil.**~** Bval JValue .!!!!h JValue .!!!!h 42-003-0064 345 4 4
. 2.5 14.3 s 339 4 38.0 14
. 0 342 4 48.8 16.0 43 y 14..8 y 2743 WASHINGTON BLVD, LIBERTY 42-003-3007 54 4 19.2 9.4 s 49 l 30.J• 10.7* 55 4 28 .2 12.5 26 N 10.9 N 501 WADDELL AVE, CLAIRTON**~** 1. Computed design values are a snapshot of the data at the time the report was run (may not be all data for year)
. 2. Some PM2.5 24-bour DVs for incomplete data that are marked invalid here may be marked valid in the Official report due to additional analysis. 3. Annual Values not meeting completeness criteria are marked with an asterisk ('*'). Page 3 of 3

# Application of Imputation 

# I Bootstrap Protocol to Liberty/Clairton Annual Std Nonattainment Area- 2009-2011

Schmidt 9-16-2012

# Liberty/Clairton Annual Design Value History

Pennsylvania Allegheny Cot Liberty-Clairt· 420030064 21 Site A -7 PennsylvaniaAllegheny Cot Liberty-Clairt"" 420033007 20.8

- - 15.7

- 14.9 

### 1' Annual designations based on 2001-2003 data



# • OGC I Region 3 has requested that the draft imputation I bootstrap protocol be run for the Liberty Clairton annual standard nonattainment area, specifically forsite 420033007 that was incomplete forpart of2011. Hence, that site is the Site A in the analysis.

# Liberty/Clairton Sites 

# &2009-2011 DVs 

# & Data Capture

DV DV 20-quarter look 

## I DVSite DVSite

I Area Site A Site B 

### A status !! status nQairsQl nQairsQ2 nQairsQ3 nQairs04 Site A Site B corr Liberty-CI<r 420033007 ' 420033007 Liberty-Cic:"'420033007 "'420030064 11

.5 mc-a 11.5 inc-a 11

.5 mc-a 15 A 152 151 153 152 162 159 145 1 140 0

.790401

Site B 2011 Q4 SiteA -7 ""420033007 80% 81% 100% 87% 80% 93% 100% 87% 100% 80% 94% 47% Site B -7 "'420030064 92% 99% 100% 88% 84% 98% 95% 98% 93% 90% 98% 90%



### •Site 420030064 has, 1) the highestcorrelation with Site A 1 (and meets the3 criteria stated here), and2) sufficientpaired data to establish 

## a good relationship with site A 1, and. 3) sufficient (i.e., complete) data available in all quarters of2009-2011 to produce Site A 1 estimates for those 12 quarters. 

### And, it is the only othersite in the nonattainmentarea! 

### It

### is the Site B.

# Linear Regression Results
• The computed 420033003 (Site A1)- 420030064 (Site B) linear relationship is: Site A cone. 

# = 2.323568 + 0.999802 Site B cone.

v_a 60 

### N 

## = 602 

### * 

# * *
50 .J 

### R-square 

## = 0.62 

## *

# *

40

30

20**~*** 

# ***~** >!.** 

# **** * 

# ****~******* 

# * 

# =- 

# * 

# * ***~** 

# ** *****: ~t** * *7 

# * 

# **
.....***~** ....

## ~

# ** * * * \ 

# *

# *~* 

# * * * 

# * * * 

# *

* *

0 I I I I I I I I' I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' IiI I' I I' I iff I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00 v

_b 

## •The linear regression is based on the most recent 5 years (1/2007- 12/2011 of paired (Site A: Site B) data •The residuals from this model are used in the subsequent bootstrapping

# Imputation & Resulting Data Capture & DV Recalculation Before

year g gmean 2009 1 10.05 2009 2 11
.41 5384615 2009 3 12.98 2009 4 10.6 2010 1 13.166666667 2010 2 10.957142857 2010 3 13.2625 2010 4 12.492307692 2011 1 8.02 2011 2 11.091666667 2011 3 13.406666667 2011 4 10.342857143


# After

year g gmean 2009 1 10.05 2009 2 11.415384615 2009 3 12.98 2009 4 10.6 2010 1 13.166666667 2010 2 10.957142857 2010 3 13.2625 2010 4 12.492307692 2011 1 8.02 2011 2 11.091666667 2011 3 13.406666667 2011 4 13.016666667 gn nv 12 13 15 13 12 14 16 13 15 12 1 

# n 3

gn ny 12 13 15 13 12 14 16 13 15 12 

# rlh 3 dv

11.5

dv

. 11.7 

# I 2011 quarter 4 is deficient 

# I I Incomplete DV is 11

.5 

# I

I 2011 quarter 4 is now complete 

# I 'Complete' DV is 111

.7 

# I I

# Bootstrapping Residuals (& DV Recalculations)
• FYI Residual distribution for 

## 420033003 (Site A)- 420030064 (Site B) linear fit

n: 602 mean: 0 MAX: 31.878306371 MIN: -26.89800646 petS: -7.097063471 pct10: -4
. 845380801 pct15: -3
. 983499247 pct20: -3.257134989 pct25: -2.867767398 pct30: -2.323861254 pct35: -1
. 889032214 pct40: -1
. 390153994 pct45: -0
. 990587519 pct50: -0
.458996455 pct55: 0.0020694784 pct60: 0.4792493565 pct65: 1.0725946095 pct70: 1.8063018696 pct75: 2.4216001942 pct80: 3.4530638937 pct85: 4.5060471396 pct90: 6.8295555167 pct95: 8.9394996698 

## •This step randomly applies real residuals from the linear regression to the imputed current-period Site A values. •A 1000 bootstrap runs will provide a pseudo confidence interval for the partially imputed current-period design value**~** ct 10.8 3 10.9 5 11 9 11
. 1 19 11 . 2 28 11.3 64 

## • Bootstrap results (for a run of 1000): 11.4 79 11 . 5 120 I 1.6 133 11.7 125 11.8 119 

## •All 1000 simulations produced a passing DV 11. 9 94 12 82 12. 1 64 12.2 20 12.3 19 12.4 9 12.5 7 

## • Final result: 

# PASS (clean data determination) 12.6 1

# Application of Imputation 

# I Bootstrap Protocol to the Liberty-Clairton 1997 NAAQS (Annual Std) Nonattainment Area for the Design Value Period, 2010-2012

• Region 3 has requested that the draft imputation I bootstrap

protocol be run for the Liberty Clairton 1997 NAAQS (annual standard) nonattainment area, specifically forsite 420033007 that was incomplete forpart of2011. Hence, that site is the "Site A"in the analysis.

# Schmidt 6-3-2013

# 10-yearAnnual DV History

PA Allegheny Liberty-Clairt'420030064 Site**A~** PA Allegheny Liberty-Clairt"420033007 

### 1' Annual designations based on 2001-2003 data Site 420033007

### is incomplete in 2010-2012 

### i 

# 5-year (2008-2012) 

# # Data Pairs & Associated Correlation si1e 

### I Q1 

### I Q2 

### I Q3 

### I Q4 

### 420030064 840 878 900 842 T

o1al

### # obs 420033007 134 134 150 120 Correlation

• .....,....... •• • r

### Mathed pairs (by date) 

# Site-level Data Capture, 201 0-2012 Quarterly data capture % I Site



### - '10 01 '10 02 '10 03 '10 04 '11 01 '11 02 '11 03 '1104 '12 01 '12 02 '12 03 '12 04 420030064 84 

### 98 95 98 93 90 98

# • 96 

### 97 100 85 420033007 80 

### 93 100 87 100 80 94 

### 47 93 93 88 80 

### •Site 420030064 has, 1) the highestcorrelation (in the NAA) with Site A 1; and2) sufficient paired data to establish a good relationship with site A 1; and. 3) sufficient (i.e., complete) data available in key quarters of2010-2012 (i.e., those deficient in the Site A. And, it is the only othersite in the nonattainmentarea! 

### It is the Site B.

# Linear Regression Results
• The computed 420033003 (Site A 1)- 420030064 (Site B) linear relationship is: Site A cone. 

# =4.904607 + 0.422615 

# * Site B cone.

v_a

50 

## i N =264 R-square = 0.60 

# •The linearregression is 40-l 

# * based on the most recent 

# 5 * 

# years (112008- 1212012) 

# * 30 -l 

# ** * 

# / I of paired (Site A: Site B) 

# * * 

# * data * * 

# * * / * 20 -l**~~** 

# •The residuals from this l:

_ ,_ 

# ** 

# * model are used in the 

# * subsequent bootstrapping 

# *

0

-,, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 v_b

# Imputation 

# & Resulting Data Capture 

# & DV Recalculation Before

year gmean gn ny dv 2010 1 13. 166666667 24 2010 2 10.957142857 28 2010 3 13.2625 32 2010 4 12.492307692 26 2011 1 8.02 30 2011 2 11.091666667 24 2011 3 13.406666667 2011 4 10.342857143 

## 2011 Q4 is deficient 2012 1 9.5285714286 28 2012 2 8.2857142857 28 2012 3 10.992857143 28 2012 4 8.7416666667 24 3 10.9 

## Incomplete DVis 10.9 

# After

year a amean an ny dv 2010 1 13. 166666667 24 2010 2 10.957142857 28 2010 3 13.2625 32 2010 4 12.492307692 26 2011 1 8.02 30 2011 2 11.091666667 24 2011 3 13.406666667 

# db . 2011 Q4 is now complete 201 t 4 11.515384615 2012 1 9.5285714286 28 2012 2 8.2857142857 28 2012 3 10.992857143 28 2012 4 8.7416666667 24 

## . "Complete" D Vis 11. 0 3 11

# Bootstrapping Residuals (& DV·Recalculations)
• FYI Residual distribution for 

# 420033003 (Site A): 420030064 (Site B) linear fit

n: 264 mean: 0 MAX: 16.931283244 MIN: -15.82745631 petS: -5.149070332 pct10: -3.997402309 pct15: -3.388496325 pct20: -2.66051102 pct25: -2.298636375 pct30: -1.951605036 pct35: -1.51648163 pct40: -1.287295546 pct45: -0.96588124 pct50: -0.478989951 pct55: 0.0210433352 pct60: 0.4252127757 pct65: 0.9025976908 pct70: 1.388955163 pct75: 2.1591354032 pct80: 2.8603361823 pct85: 3.5859199286 pct90: 4.7912901483 pct95: 6.7895222661 

# • Using the entire distribution ofresiduals (overall stats shown to left), the next step randomly applies (i.e., adds) actual individual residuals from the linearregression to the imputed current-period Site A values. •A 1000 bootstrap runs willprovide 

# a pseudo confidence interval for the partially imputed Site A 2010-2012 design value

• Bootstrap results (for a run of 1000): _____gy_ ct 

### 10
. 6 5 10
. 7 17 10
. 8 143 

# •AII1000 simulations produced

# a passing DV 10
. 9 299 1 1 335 1 1 . 1 167 11 . 2 30 

# • Final result: 11.3 4 

# PASS (clean data determination)