# Ozone Health Risk Assessment

for Selected Urban Areas

# EPA 452/R-07-00 9 J ul y 2007



# Ozone Health Risk Assessment For Selected Urban Areas

By: Ellen Post Andreas Maier Hardee Mahoney Abt Associates, Inc. Bethesda, MD
Prepared for: Nancy Riley, Project Officer Harvey Richmond, Work Assignment Manager

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

Contract No. 68-D-03-002

Work Assignment 3-39 and 4-56

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Health and Environmental Impacts Division Ambient Standards Group Research Triangle Park, NC

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 i DISCLAIMER

This report is being furnished to th e U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Abt Associates Inc. in partial fu lfillment of Contract No. 68-D-03-002, Work Assignments 3-39 and 4-56. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessar ily reflect the views of the EPA or Abt Associates. Earlier drafts of this document were formally reviewed by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and made available for public comment. This document has been informed by the expert advice and comments received from the CASAC, as well as public comments submitted by several organizations, including environmental groups, industrial groups and companies, and State air pollution organizations. Any questions concerning this document should be addressed to Harvey Richmond, U.S. Environmental Protection Ag ency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, C504-06, Research Triang le Park, North Carolina 27711 (email: richmond.harvey@epa.gov).
Any analyses, interpretations, or conclu sions presented in this report based on hospitalization and mortality data obtained from outside sources, are credited to the authors and not the institutions providing the raw data. Furthermore, Abt Associates expressly understands that the Michigan Health and Ho spital Association has not performed an analysis of the hospitalization data obtained or warra nted the accuracy of this information and, therefore, it cannot be held responsible in any manner for the outcome.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 ii PREFACE TO JULY 2007 EDITION

This July 2007 edition contains revised l ung function risk estimates based on revised exposure estimates resulting from technical corrections to the exposure model made subsequent to the January 2007 editions of the Staff Paper and accompanying Technical Support Document (TSD). As noted in chapters 4 and 5 of the July 2007 edition of the Staff Paper, a small error was detected in the exposure model in January 2007 that resulted in small increases in the exposure estimates. This error has been corrected and the model runs have been redone, generally re sulting in small increases in the exposure estimates. The revised lung function risk estimates, based on the corrected exposure estimates, are generally slight ly higher than the original estimates presented in the January 2007 edition of the Staff Paper a nd accompanying TSD. The corrected lung function risk estimates for all children and for asthmatic children are presented in this edition of the TSD in Chapter 3 and associ ated appendices as we ll as in the July 2007 edition of the Staff Paper. Due to time constraints, however, the lung function risk estimates for active children, presented in A ppendix C of the TSD, were not revised. Also due to time constraints, the date on the footer was not updated to July 2007. Sections 1, 2, and 4 of this edition of the TS D and the results in the Appendices for health endpoints other than lung function remain unchanged with the exception of some minor corrections and updates to several references.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 iii 

# Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1-1
2 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS................................................................ 2-1 2.1 The Broad Empirical Basis for a Relationship Between O 3 

# and Adverse Health Effects ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Basic Structure of the Risk Assessment ....................................................... 2-2 2.3 Air Quality Considerations........................................................................... 2-4
3 ASSESSMENT OF RISK BASED ON CONTROLLED HUMAN EXPOSURE STUDIES .......................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Methods ........................................................................................................3-1 3.1.1 Selection of health endpoints ..............................................................3-1 3.1.2 Development of exposure-response functions .................................... 3-3 3.1.3 Approach to calculati ng risk estimates ............................................... 3-6 3.1.4 Selection of urban areas ......................................................................3-9 3.1.5 Addressing variability and uncertainty ............................................. 3-10 3.2 Results.........................................................................................................3-18 3.2.1 Assessment of lung function decrement associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of policy relevant background levels.............................................................................. 3-18 3.2.1.1 Results for all school age children.............................................3-18 3.2.1.2 Results for asthmatic school age children.................................. 3-26 3.2.2 Assessment of lung function decrement associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative daily maximum 8-hour standards............................................................... 3-29 3.2.2.1 Results for all locations for the current standard and the original set of seve n alternative standards, based on 2002 and 2004 air quality data................................................................... 3-29 3.2.2.2 Results for five locations for the current standard and two alternative standards, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data.................................................................................3-52 3.2.2.2.1 Results for all school age children.............................................3-52 3.2.2.2.2 Results for asthmatic school age children.................................. 3-60 3.3 Sensitivity Analyses.................................................................................... 3-68 3.3.1 PRB sensitivity analysis.................................................................... 3-68 3.3.2 Exposure-response functional form sensitivity analysis................... 3-76
4 ASSESSMENT OF RISK BASED ON EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES.......4-1
4.1 Methods ........................................................................................................4-1 4.1.1 General approach ................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Air quality considerations ................................................................... 4-5 4.1.3 Selection of health endpoints ..............................................................4-7 4.1.4 Selection of urban areas ......................................................................4-7

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 iv 4.1.5 Selection of epidemiological studies................................................... 4-8 4.1.6 A summary of selected health endpoi nts, urban areas and studies .....4-9 4.1.7 Selection of concentrat ion-response functions.................................. 4-11 4.1.8 Baseline health effects in cidence considerations ..............................4-22 4.1.9 Addressing uncertainty and variability .............................................4-26 4.1.9.1 Concentration-response functions.............................................. 4-31 4.1.9.1.1 Uncertainty associated with the appropriate model form .......... 4-32 4.1.9.1.2 Uncertainty associated with the estimated concentrationresponse functions in the study locations.............................. 4-32 4.1.9.1.3 Applicability of concentration- response functions in different locations ................................................................................4-35 4.1.9.1.4 Extrapolation beyond observed air quality levels......................4-36 4.1.9.2 The air quality data ....................................................................4-36 4.1.9.2.1 Adequacy of O 3 

# air quality data .................................................4-36 4.1.9.2.2 Estimation of PRB O 3 

# concentrations ........................................4-37 4.1.9.2.3 Simulation of reductions in O 3 

# concentrations to just meet the current or an alternative standard..........................................4-38 4.1.9.3 Baseline health effect s incidence rates ......................................4-38 4.1.9.3.1 Quality of incidence data ........................................................... 4-38 4.1.9.3.2 Lack of daily health e ffects incidence rates...............................4-40 4.2 Results.........................................................................................................4-40 4.2.1 Assessment of the health risk s associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in ex cess of policy relevant background levels ........4-41 4.2.1.1 Assessment of the health risk s associated with 2004 and 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in ex cess of policy relevant background levels ......................................................................4-41 4.2.1.2 Assessment of the mortality ri sks associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of policy relevant background levels in five urban areas............................................................ 4-60 4.2.2 Assessment of the reduced heal th risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet th e current and alternative 8-hour standards............................................................................................ 4-63 4.2.2.1 Results for all locations for the current standard and the original set of seven sta ndards, based on 2002 and 2004 air quality data.................................................................................4-63 4.2.2.2 Results for five locations for the current standard and two alternative standards, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data...............................................................................4-102 4.3 Sensitivity Analyses.................................................................................. 4-113
5 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 5-1

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 v 

# List of Tables

Table 3-1. Study-Specific Ozone Expos ure-Response Data for Lung Function Decrements .......................................................................................................... 3-4 Table 3-2. Urban Areas Used in the Cont rolled Human Studie s-Portion of the O 3 

# Risk Assessment and Their O 3 

# Seasons............................................................. 3-10 Table 3-3. Population Covera ge of Modeled Areas...................................................... 3-11 Table 3-4. Estimated Number and Per cent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-19 Table 3-5. Estimated Number and Per cent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-20 Table 3-6. Number and Percent of All Ch ildren (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .. 3-21 Table 3-7. Number and Per cent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .. 3-22 Table 3-8. Estimated Number and Per cent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004..........................................................................3-23 Table 3-9. Number and Per cent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience AtLeast One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004.....................................................................3-24 Table 3-10. Estimated Number and Per cent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Mode rate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004.....................................................................3-27 Table 3-11. Number and Pe rcent of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to E xperience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002, 2003, 2004 ...........................................................................3-28

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 vi Table 3-12. Estimated Number of Oc currences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8- Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-31 Table 3-13. Estimated Number of Oc currences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8- Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-33 Table 3-14. Estimated Percent of O ccurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8- Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-35 Table 3-15. Estimated Percent of O ccurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8- Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-37 Table 3-16. Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-39 Table 3-17. Number of All Children (Age s 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-41 Table 3-18. Percent of All Children (Age s 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-43 Table 3-19. Percent of All Children (Age s 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations.....................................3-45 Table 3-20. Estimated Number of Occurre nces of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternativ e Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engage d in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-53

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 vii Table 3-21. Estimated Percent of Occurre nces of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternativ e Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engage d in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-54 Table 3-22. Number of All Children (Age s 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Dail y Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-55 Table 3-23. Percent of All Children (Age s 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least On e Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Dail y Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-56 Table 3-24. Estimated Number of Occurre nces of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternativ e Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-61 Table 3-25. Estimated Percent of Occurre nces of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternativ e Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 3-62 Table 3-26. Number of Asthmatic Child ren (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ..................................................................................... 3-63 Table 3-27. Percent of Asthmatic Child ren (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ..................................................................................... 3-64 Table 3-28. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimate d Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Among All Children (Age 5- 18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Associated with Exposure to O 3

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 viii Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons........................................ 3-70 Table 3-29. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of All Children (Ages 5- 18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Es timated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons ......................3-71 Table 3-30. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimate d Percent of All Children (Ages 5- 18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Es timated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons ......................3-72 Table 3-31. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exer tion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons ............3-73 Table 3-32. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exer tion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons ............3-74 Table 3-33. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exer tion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons ............3-75 Table 4-1. Locations and Hea lth Endpoints Included in the O 3 

# Risk Assessment Based on Epidemiological Studies....................................................................... 4-9 Table 4-2. Summary of Lo cations, Concentration-Re sponse Functions, Months Included and Counties Included.........................................................................4-14 Table 4-3. Relevant Population Sizes for O 3 

# Risk Assessment Locations ................... 4-23 Table 4-4. Baseline Mortality Rates (per 100,000 Population) for 2002 for O 3 

# Risk Assessment Locations........................................................................................ 4-24 Table 4-5. ICD-9 Codes used in Epidem iological Studies and Corresponding ICD10 Codes............................................................................................................. 4-25 Table 4-6. Baseline Rates for Hospital Admissions Used in the O 3 

# Risk Assessment. 4-26 Table 4-7. Key Uncertainties in the Risk Assessment.................................................. 4-29 Table 4-8. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: April – September, 2004 ......................... 4-50

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 ix Table 4-9. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: April – September, 2002 ......................... 4-52 Table 4-10. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: April – September, 2004 ........................ 4-54 Table 4-11. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: April – September, 2002 ........................ 4-55 Table 4-12. Estimated Health Ri sks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: New York, NY, April – September, 2004 ........................ 4-56 Table 4-13. Estimated Health Ri sks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Above Background: New York, NY, April – September, 2002 ........................ 4-57 Table 4-14. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2003 .......................................................... 4-61 Table 4-15. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2003 .......................................................... 4-62 Table 4-16. Estimated Incidence of Non-A ccidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations...4-76 Table 4-17. Estimated Incidence of Non- Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Sta ndards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ..................................................................................... 4-78 Table 4-18. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-80 Table 4-19. Estimated Incidence of Non-A ccidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations...4-82 Table 4-20. Estimated Incidence of Non- Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Sta ndards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ..................................................................................... 4-84 Table 4-21. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-86 Table 4-22. Estimated Cardiorespirat ory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations..4-88 Table 4-23. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-89 Table 4-24. Estimated Percent of Total In cidence of Cardiore spiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 x 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-90 Table 4-25. Estimated Cardiorespirat ory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations..4-91 Table 4-26. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-92 Table 4-27. Estimated Percent of Total In cidence of Cardiore spiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-93 Table 4-28. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, Apr il - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-94 Table 4-29. Estimated Incidence of H ealth Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................4-95 Table 4-30. Estimated Percent of Total Inci dence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-96 Table 4-31. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, Apr il - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-97 Table 4-32. Estimated Incidence of H ealth Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................4-98 Table 4-33. Estimated Percent of Total Inci dence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................... 4-99 Table 4-34. Estimated Incidence of Non-A ccidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................. 4-104 Table 4-35. Estimated Incidence of Non- Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximu m Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations...................................................4-105

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 xi Table 4-36. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Sta ndards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................. 4-106 Table 4-37. Estimated Cardiorespirat ory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Cu rrent andTwo Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................. 4-107 Table 4-38. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Sta ndards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................. 4-108 Table 4-39. Estimated Percent of Total In cidence of Cardiore spiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Sta ndards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................. 4-109 Table 4-40. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality A ssociated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2004 .............................................................................................. 4-114 Table 4-41. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality A ssociated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2002 .............................................................................................. 4-115 Table 4-42. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004.................................................................................................................. 4-116 Table 4-43. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002.................................................................................................................. 4-117 Table 4-44. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 pp m, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004 .............................................................................................. 4-118 Table 4-45. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 pp m, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002 .............................................................................................. 4-119 Table 4-46. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 xii Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 pp m, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004 .............................................................................................. 4-120 Table 4-47. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 pp m, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002 .............................................................................................. 4-121 Table 4-48. Sensitivity Analysis: Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Down to Policy Relevant Background (PRB) Versus 0 ppb: April - September, 2004 ........................................................... 4-122 Table 4-49. Sensitivity Analysis: Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Down to Policy Relevant Background (PRB) Versus 0 ppb: April - September, 2002 ........................................................... 4-124

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 xiii 

# List of Figures

Figure 3-1. Components of Ozone Health Risk Assessment Based on Controlled Human Exposure Studies..................................................................................... 3-2 Figure 3-2. Bayesian-Estimated (90% L ogistic and 10% Linear) Median ExposureResponse Functions: Change in FEV 1 

# > 10%, 15%, and 20% ............................3-6 Figure 3-3. a, b, c. Probabilistic Ex posure-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

# Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion ............................................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3-4. Probabilistic Exposur e-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

# Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion: Comparison of 90% Logistic/10% Li near (Hockeystick) Split and 80% Logistic/20% Linear (Hockeystick) Split in Assumed Relationship Between Exposure and Response ..................................................................................... 3-13 Figure 3-5. Probabilistic Exposur e-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

# Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion: Comparison of 90% Logistic/10% Li near (Hockeystick) Split and 50% Logistic/50% Linear (Hockeystick) Split in Assumed Relationship Between Exposure and Response ..................................................................................... 3-14 Figure 3-6. Median Exposure-Respons e Functions Using Three Different Combinations of Logistic and Li near (Hockeystick) Models............................3-15 Figure 3-7. Percent Reductions in Aggr egate Numbers (Across All Locations) of Occurrences of Lung Function Resp onse Among All School Age Children when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definitions of Response ................................................................ 3-47 Figure 3-8. Percent Reductions of Occurrences of Decrement in FEV 1 

# >15% Among All School Age Children when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separate ly for Each Location..........................................3-48 Figure 3-9. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numbers (A cross All Locations) of All School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Occurrence of Lung Function Response when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to T hose that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of th e Three Definitions of Response .............. 3-49 Figure 3-10. Percent Reductions in Numbers of All School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

# >15% when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alte rnative Standard, Separately for Each Location .............................................................................................................3-50 Figure 3-11. Estimated Percent Reducti ons From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in All Childre n (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Experiencing at Least One O 3 

# -Related Decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 15%, Separately for Each of Five Locations............................................................... 3-57 Figure 3-12. Estimated Percent Reducti ons From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 xiv Moderate Exertion Experiencing at Least One O 3 

# -Related Decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 10%, Separately for Each of Five Locations .......................................... 3-65 Figure 3-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impactof Alternative Estimates of ExposureResponse Function on Estimated Percent Changes in Numbers of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Mode rate Exertion Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

# >15% when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standa rd to Those that Would Just Meet Each of Several Alternative Daily Ma ximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons............................................................................ 3-78 Figure 3-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impactof Alternative Estimates of ExposureResponse Function on Estimated Percent Changes in Numbers of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Mode rate Exertion Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

# >10% when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standa rd to Those that Would Just Meet Each of Several Alternative Daily Ma ximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons............................................................................ 3-80 Figure 4-1. Major Components of Ozone Health Risk Assessment Based on Epidemiology Studies .......................................................................................... 4-3 Figure 4-2. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background: Single-Pollutant, Single-City Models (A pril – September)...........................................................4-43 Figure 4-3. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi- Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

# , PM 10 

# , SO 2 

# ] ...............................4-44 Figure 4-4. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Mu lti-City Model (right bar) ..........................4-45 Figure 4-5. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left ba r) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) ............................................................................................4-46 Figure 4-6. Estimated Annual Percent of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Diffe rent Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] 4-47 Figure 4-7. Estimated Annual Percent of N on-Accidental Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges .................................................................. 4-48 Figure 4-8. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges .................................................................. 4-49 Figure 4-9. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 xv Hour Standard is Just Met: Single-P ollutant, Single-City Models (April – September) ......................................................................................................... 4-65 Figure 4-10. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8- Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single- Pollutant vs. MultiPollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

# , PM 10 

# , SO 2 

# ] .................................................................... 4-66 Figure 4-11. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8- Hour Standard is Just Met (April – Se ptember): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) ........................................................................4-67 Figure 4-12. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8- Hour Standard is Just Met (April – Se ptember): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) ..................... 4-68 Figure 4-13. Estimated Annual Percent of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Different Lag Models – Ba sed on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] ........................................ 4-69 Figure 4-14. Estimated Annual Percent of Non-Accidental Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Curre nt 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24- Hour O 3 

# Ranges ................................................................................................. 4-70 Figure 4-15. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mo rtality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Curre nt 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges............................................................................................ 4-71 Figure 4-16. Estimated Percent Reduc tions From the Current Standard to Alternative Standards in O 3 

# -Related Non-Accidental Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities).......................4-72 Figure 4-17. Estimated Percent Reduc tions From the Current Standard to Alternative Standards in O 3 

# -Related Cardiorespiratory Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Huang et al., 2004 -- 19 U.S. Cities)...................4-74 Figure 4-18. Estimated Percent Reducti ons From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in O 3 

# -Related Non-Accidental Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities).....................4-110 Figure 4-19. Sensitivity Analysis of Estimated Percent Change in O 3 

# -Related NonAccidental Mortality (Using Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities) From the Current Standard to Alternative 8-hr Standards and a R ecent Year of Air Quality, Using Base Case, Higher, and Lower PRB Estimates....................... 4-126

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 1-1 

# Ozone Health Risk Assessment for Selected Urban Areas

1 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Ag ency (EPA) is presently conducting a review of the national ambient air qu ality standards (NAAQS) for ozone (O 3 

# ). Sections 108 and 109 of the Clean Air Act (Act) govern the establishment and periodic review of the NAAQS. These standards are establishe d for pollutants that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welf are, and whose presence in the ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile or stationary sources. The NAAQS are to be based on air quality criteria, wh ich are to accurately reflect th e latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of id entifiable effects on public health or welfare that may be expected from the presence of the pollutant in ambient air. The EPA Administrator is to promulgate and periodically review, at five-year intervals, “primary” (health-based) and “secondary” (welfa re-based) NAAQS for such pollutants. 1 

# Based on periodic reviews of the air qua lity criteria and standards, the Administrator is to make revisions in the criteria and standards, and promulgate any new standards, as may be appropriate. The Act also requires that an independent scientific review committee advise the Administrator as part of this NAAQS review process, a function performed by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC).
EPA’s overall plan and schedule for this O 3 

# NAAQS review is presented in a Plan for Review of the National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards for Ozone (EPA, 2005a), which is available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_cr_pd.html

. That plan discusses the prepar ation of two key documents in the NAAQS review process: an Air Quality Criteria Document (hereafter cited as CD) and a Staff Paper. The CD provides a critical assessment of the latest available scientific information upon which the NAAQS are to be based, and the Staff Pape r evaluates the policy implications of the information contained in the CD and disc usses standard-setting options for the Administrator to consider. In conjunction wi th preparation of the Staff Paper, staff in EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) conducts various policyrelevant assessments, including in this revi ew a quantitative exposure analysis and a human health risk assessment. Both the exposure analysis and the risk assessment require a quantitative analysis of O 3 

# air quality. The methods a nd results of this analysis are described in Chapters 2 and 4 of th e Staff Paper (EPA, 2007a) (hereafter “Staff Paper”) and in Fitz-Simons et al. (20 05) and Rizzo (2005, 2006). The methods and results of the modeling of personal exposures are discussed in Chapter 4 of the Staff Paper and in an accompanying technical support document (EPA, 2007b). The methods and results of the human health risk asse ssment are described in this document.

1 

## Section 109(b)(1) [42 U.S.C. 7409] of the Act defines a primary standard as one “the attainment and maintenance of which in the judgment of the Administrator, based on such criteria and allowing an adequate margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public health.”

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 1-2 As part of the last O 3 

# NAAQS review, EPA conducted exposure analyses for the general population; children, who spend more time outdoors; and outdoor workers. Exposure estimates were generated for 9 urban areas for existing (referred to as “as is”) air quality and for just meeting the existing 1-hour standard and several alternative 8-hour standards. Several reports (Johnson et al., 1996a,b,c; Johnson, 1997) that describe these analyses can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_pr_td.html . EPA also conducted a health risk assessment that produced risk estimates for the number and percent of children experiencing lung function and respiratory symptoms associated with the exposures estimated for these same 9 urban areas. This portion of the risk assessment was based on exposure-response relationships developed from analysis of data from several controlled human exposure studies. The risk assessment for the last review also included risk estimates for excess respiratory-related hospital admissions related to O 3 

# concentrations for New York City based on a concentration-response relationship reported in an epidemiology study. Risk estimates for lung function decrements, respiratory symptoms, and hospital admissions were developed for “as is” air quality and for just meeting the existing 1-hour standard and several alternative 8-hour standards. Reports describing the health risk assessment (Whitfield et al., 1996; Whitfield, 1997) can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_pr_td.html

. The health risk assessment described in this report builds upon the methodology and lessons learned from the exposure and risk work conducted for the last review. This report is also based on the information and evaluation contained in the final O 3 

# CD (EPA, 2006a) (hereafter O 3 

# CD). The general approach used in the current risk assessment was described in the draft Health Assessment Plan (EPA, 2005b), that was released to the CASAC and general public in April 2005 for review and comment and was the subject of a consultation with the CASAC O 3 

# Panel on May 5, 2005. The approach used in the current risk assessment reflects consideration of the comments offered by CASAC members and the public on the draft Health Assessment Plan; comments offered on the first drafts of the Staff Paper and Risk Assessment TSD at and subsequent to a consultation with CASAC on December 8, 2005; CASAC comments provided to the EPA in letters dated February 16, 2006 (Henderson, 2006a) and June 5, 2006 (Henderson, 2006b); and comments offered on the second draft Staff Paper and draft Risk Assessment TSD at and subsequent to a consultation with CASAC on August 24 and 25, 2006, including CASAC comments provided to EPA in a letter dated October 24, 2006 (Henderson, 2006c).

The O 3 

# health risk assessment described in this document estimates the health effects associated with short-term exposures to O 3 

# under recent (“as is”) air quality levels and upon just meeting the current and several alternative O 3 

# primary NAAQS in selected sample urban areas. These assessments cover a variety of health effects for which there is adequate information to develop quantitative risk estimates. However, there are several health endpoints for which there currently is insufficient information to develop quantitative risk estimates. These additional health endpoints are discussed qualitatively in the Staff Paper. The risk assessment is intended as a tool that, together with other information on these health endpoints and other health effects evaluated in the O 3 

# CD and

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 1-3 Staff Paper, can aid the Administrator in judging whether the current primary standard protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, or whether revisions to the standard are appropriate.
The basic structure of the risk assessment reflects the two different types of studies on which the health risk assessment for O 3 

# is based: controlled human exposure studies, and epidemiological studies. This basic structure, as well as some preliminary considerations, is described in Section 2. Section 3 describes the methods and results of that portion of the risk assessment based on controlled human exposure studies. Section 4 describes the methods and results of that portion of the risk assessment based on epidemiological studies.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 2-1 2 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

The health risk assessment described in this report estimated various health effects associated with O 3 

# exposures for recent (“as is”) O 3 

# levels, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data, as well as the reduced risks for one O 3 

# season associated with just meeting the curren t 8-hour daily maximum O 3 

# NAAQS and several alternative 8- hour daily maximum standards. Risk estim ates were developed for 12 urban areas located throughout the U.S. In this secti on we address preliminary considerations. Section 2.1 briefly discusses the broad empi rical basis for a relationship between O 3 

# exposures and adverse health effects. Section 2.2 describes the basic structure of the risk assessment. Finally, Section 2.3 addresses ai r quality considerations that affect both major portions of the risk asse ssment described in Section 2.2.

2.1 The Broad Empirical Basis fo r a Relationship Between O 3 

# and Adverse Health Effects

The health endpoints examined in the risk assessment include: lung function decrements, respiratory-related hospital admissi ons, and mortality. In addition, estimates of respiratory symptoms in asthmatic childre n were developed for one urban area. The empirical basis for a relationship between O 3 

# exposures and adverse human health effects extends well beyond these specific health eff ects, however, and is by now considered quite solid.

In its October 24, 2006 letter to the EP A administrator (Henderson, 2006c), the CASAC affirmed this solid empirical basi s, quoting and concurring with EPA’s own assessment, as stated in the second draft Staff Paper (EPA, 2006b): “... While being mindful of important re maining uncertainties, staff concludes that the newly available information ge nerally reinforces our judgments about causal relationships between O 3 

# exposure and respiratory effects observed in the last review and broade ns the evidence of O 3 

# -related associations to include additional respiratory-related endpoints, newly identified cardiovascular-related health endpoints, and mortality. Newly av ailable evidence also has identified increased susceptibility in people with asthma. While recognizing that important uncertainties and research questions rema in, we also conclude that progress has been made since the last review in advancing our understa nding of potential mechanisms by which ambient O 3 

# , alone and in combination with other pollutants, is causally linked to a range of respiratory- and cardiovascular-related health endpoints.” (Pages 6-6 and 6-7)
The CASAC pointed to “several new si ngle-city studies and large multi-city studies designed specifically to examine the ef fects of ozone and other pollutants on both morbidity and mortality” that have “provided more evidence for adverse health effects at concentrations lower than the current st andard.” (Henderson, 2006c, p. 3). The CASAC also pointed to the results from controlled human exposure studies, noting that “these

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 2-2 findings were observed in h ealthy volunteers” and that, although similar studies in sensitive groups such as asthmatics have not yet been conducted, “people with asthma, and particularly children, have been found to be more sensitive and to experience larger decrements in lung function in response to ozone exposures than would healthy volunteers” (Henderson, 2006c, p. 4).

The CASAC also noted that, in addition to the lung function decrements seen in controlled human exposure studies, “adverse health effects due to low-concentration exposure to ambient ozone (that is, be low the current primary 8-hour NAAQS) ... include: an increase in school absenteeism; increases in respiratory hospital emergency department visits among asthmatics and pati ents with other respiratory diseases; an increase in hospitalizations for respiratory illnesses; an increase in symptoms associated with adverse health effects, including ch est tightness and medication usage; and an increase in mortality (non-accidental, cardi orespiratory deaths) reported at exposure levels well below the current standard. The CASAC considers each of these findings to be an important indicator of adverse health effects ” (Henderson, 2006c, p. 4).

2.2 Basic Structure of the Risk Assessment

At this time, two general types of human studies are particul arly relevant for deriving quantitative re lationships between O 3 

# levels and human health effects: controlled human exposure studies and epidemiological st udies. Controlled human exposure studies involve volunteer subjects who are exposed while engaged in different exercise regimens to specified levels of O 3 

# under controlled condit ions for specified amounts of time. The responses measured in such studies have included measures of lung function, such as forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 

# ), respiratory symptoms, airway hyperresponsiveness, and inflammation. As not ed above, prior EPA risk assessments for O 3 

# have included risk estimates for lung func tion decrements and respiratory symptoms based on analysis of individual data from c ontrolled human exposure studies. For the current health risk assessment, we used exposure-response relationships based on analysis of individual data th at describe the relationship be tween a measure of personal exposure to O 3 

# and the measure(s) of lung function recorded in several studies. The measure of personal exposure to ambient O 3 

# is typically some function of hourly exposures – e.g., 1-hour maximum or 8-hour maximum. Therefore, a risk assessment based on exposure-response relationships deri ved from controlled human exposure study data requires estimates of personal exposure to O 3 

# , typically on a 1-hour or multi-hour basis. Because data on personal hourly O 3 

# exposures are not available, estimates of personal exposures to varying ambient con centrations were derived through exposure modeling, as described in the exposure an alysis technical s upport document (EPA, 2007b).
In contrast to the exposure-response rela tionships derived from controlled human exposure studies, epidemiological studies provide estimated concen tration-response (CR) relationships based on data collected in real world settings. Ambient O 3 

# concentration is typically measured as the average of monitor-specific measurements. Population

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 2-3 health responses for O 3 

# have included lung function decrements, respiratory symptoms inmoderate to severe asthmatic children, asthma emergency department visits, respiratoryrelated hospital admissions and premature mortality. As described more fully below, a risk assessment based on epidemiological studies requires baseline incidence rates and population data for the risk assessment locations.
The characteristics that are relevant to carrying out a risk assessment based on controlled human exposure studies versus one based on epidemiology studies can be summarized as follows:

 A risk assessment based on controlled human exposure studies uses exposureresponse functions, and therefore requires as input (modeled) personal exposures to O 3 

# . A risk assessment based on epidemiology studies uses C-R functions, and therefore requires as input (monitored) ambient O 3 

# concentrations.

 Epidemiological studies are carried out in specific real world locations (e.g., specific urban areas). A risk assessment focused on locations in which the epidemiologic studies providing the C-R functions were carried out will minimize uncertainties. Controlled human exposure studies, carried out in laboratory settings, are generally not specific to any particular real world location. A controlled human exposure studies-based risk assessment can therefore appropriately be carried out for any location for which there are adequate air quality data on which to base the modeling of personal exposures.

 The adequate modeling of hourly personal exposures associated with ambient concentrations requires more complete ambient monitoring data than are necessary to estimate average ambient concentrations used to calculate risks based on C-R relationships. Therefore, there may be some locations in which an epidemiological studies-based risk assessment could appropriately be carried out but a controlled human exposure studies-based risk assessment would introduce significant additional uncertainty.

 To derive estimates of risk from C-R relationships estimated in epidemiological studies, it is usually necessary to have estimates of the baseline incidences of the health effects involved. Such baseline incidence estimates are not needed in a controlled human exposure studies-based risk assessment.
The methods and results for the two parts of the risk assessment – the part based on controlled human exposure studies and the part based on epidemiological studies – are discussed in Sections 3 and 4 below. Both parts of the risk assessment were implemented within a new probabilistic version of TRIM.Risk, the component of EPA’s Total Risk Integrated Methodology (TRIM) model that estimates human health risks.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 2-4 2.3 Air Quality Considerations

Both the portion of the risk assessment based on controlled human exposure studies and the portion based on epidemiological studies include risk estimates for a recent year of air quality (“as is” air quality) and for air quality adjusted so that it simulates just meeting the current or alternative 8-hr O 3 

# standards based on a recent three-year period (2002-2004). This period was selected to represent the most recent air quality for which complete data were available when the risk assessment was conducted.
In order to estimate health risks associated with just meeting the current and alternative 8-hr O 3 

# standards, it is necessary to estimate the distribution of hourly O 3 

# concentrations that would occur under any given standard. Since compliance with the current O 3 

# standard is based on a 3-year average, air quality data from 2002 to 2004 were used to determine the amount of reduction in O 3 

# concentrations required to meet the current standard. Estimated design values were used to determine the adjustment necessary to just meet the current 8-hr daily maximum standard. The amount of control was then applied to each year of data (2002, 2003, and 2004) to estimate risks for a single O 3 

# season or single warm O 3 

# season, depending on the health effect, in each of these individual years.
As described in section 4.5.6 of the Staff Paper and in more detail in Rizzo (2005, 2006), after considering several approaches, including proportional rollback and Weibull adjustment procedures, EPA concluded that the Quadratic air quality adjustment procedure generally best represented the pattern of reductions across the O 3 

# air quality distribution observed over the last decade. The Quadratic air quality adjustment procedure was applied in each of the 12 urban areas to the filled in 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# monitoring data, based on the 3-year period (2002-2004) O 3 

# design values, to generate new time series of hourly O 3 

# concentrations for 2002, 2003, and 2004 that simulate air quality levels that just meet the current 8-hr O 3 

# standard and each of the alternative 8-hr O 3 

# standards considered in the risk assessment over this three year period.
Because compliance with the current standard is based on the 3-year average of the 4th daily maximum 8-hr values, the air quality distribution in each of the 3 years can and generally does vary. As a result, the risk estimates associated with air quality just meeting the current standard also will vary depending on the year chosen for the analysis. The risk assessment includes risk estimates involving adjustment of 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data to illustrate the magnitude of this year-to-year variability in the estimates. The year 2002 generally had meteorology that was very conducive to producing O 3 

# over the eastern half of the U.S., and this resulted in the highest O 3 

# levels over the 2002-2004 time period in the vast majority of the 12 urban study areas. In contrast, 2004 was a year associated with an unusually cool and rainy summer in the eastern half of the U.S. and this contributed to the fact that the lowest O 3 

# levels over this same three-year period were observed in this year in most of the urban areas included in the risk assessment. The lower O 3 

# levels observed in 2004 were also due, in part, to reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x 

# ) associated with implementation of additional regional controls on large power plants in the eastern half of the U.S. The risk

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 2-5 results for 2002 and 2004 thus provide generally lower-end and upper-end estimates of the annual risks that can occur over a three-year period when alternative standards are just met in most of the urban areas examined.
Daily maximum 1-hr and 8-hr O 3 

# levels in 2003 generally fell somewhere between 2002 and 2004 levels in most of the 12 urban areas. Differences in meteorology were less evident in Texas and California, and these areas also were not impacted by the recent additional regional controls imposed on large power plants. It is therefore not surprising that the daily maximum 8-hr levels observed in Houston in 2003 and 2004 were somewhat higher than those observed in 2002 and that 8-hr levels were higher in Los Angeles in 2003.
The risk estimates developed for both the recent air quality scenario and scenarios in which O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current or alternative 8-hr standards represent risks associated with O 3 

# levels in excess of estimated background concentrations. The results of the global tropospheric O 3 

# model GEOS-CHEM have been used to estimate average background O 3 

# levels for different geographic regions across the U.S. These GEOS-CHEM simulations include a background simulation in which North American anthropogenic emissions of nitrogen oxides, non-methane volatile organic compounds, and carbon monoxide are set to zero, as described in Fiore et al. (2003). EPA estimatedmonthly background concentrations for each of the 12 urban areas based on the GEOSCHEM simulations, including daily diurnal profiles that were fixed for each day of each month during the O 3 

# season (see Appendix 2-A of the Staff Paper for plots of these estimated background values).

# 3 ASSESSMENT OF RISK BASED ON CONTROLLED HUMAN EXPOSURE STUDIES

3.1 Methods

The major components of the part of th e health risk assessment based on data from controlled human exposure studies are illu strated in Figure 3-1. The air quality and exposure analysis components that are integral to this part of the risk assessment are discussed in Chapters 2 and 4, respectively, of the Staff Paper. As described in the O 3 

# CD, there are numerous controlled human exposure studies reporting lung function decrements (as measured by changes in FEV 1 

# ), other measures of lung function, airway responsiveness, respiratory symptoms, and various markers of inflammation. Most of these studies have involved voluntary exposures with h ealthy adults, although a few studies have been conducted with mild a nd moderate asthmatics and one study reported lung function decrements for children 8-11 y ears old (McDonnell et al., 1985a) at a single exposure level.
3.1.1 Selection of health endpoints

In the last review, th e health risk assessment estimated both lung function decrements (> 10, > 15, and > 20% changes in FEV 1 

# ) and respiratory symptoms in children 6-18 years old associated with 1-hour exposur es at moderate and heavy exertion and 8- hour exposures at moderate exertion. At that time EPA staff and the CASAC O 3 

# Panel judged that it was reasonable to estimate the exposure-response relationships for children 6-18 years old based on data from adult subject s (18-35 years old). As discussed in the 1996 O 3 

# Staff Paper (EPA, 1996a) and 1996 O 3 

# CD (EPA, 1996b), findings from other chamber studies (McDonnell et al., 1985a) for children 8-11 years old for a single exposure level and summer camp field studies involving children exposed to ambient O 3 

# in at least six different locations in th e United States and Canada found lung function changes in healthy children similar to thos e observed in healthy adults exposed to O 3 

# under controlled chamber condi tions. We are using the same approach in this assessment.
In the prior risk assessment, EPA esti mated risk for lung function decrements associated with 1-hour heavy exertion, 1-hour moderate exertion, and 8-hour moderate exertion exposures. Since the 8-hour mode rate exertion exposur e scenario clearly resulted in the greatest hea lth risks in terms of lung function decrements, EPA staff has chosen to include only the 8-hour moderate exertion exposures in the current risk assessment for this health endpoint. As discu ssed in Chapter 4 of the Staff Paper, levels of physical activity were categor ized by a daily Physical Activity Index (PAI). Children were characterized as active if their median daily PAI over the period modeled was 1.75 or higher, a level characterize d by exercise physiologists as being “moderately active” or “active.”

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-1Figure 3-1. Components of Ozone Health Risk Assessment Based on Controlled Human Exposure StudiesAmbientMonitoring forSelected UrbanAreasAir QualityAdjustmentProceduresCurrent andAlternativeProposedStandardsRisk Estimates:•Recent AirQuality•CurrentStandard•AlternativeStandardsHealthRiskModelControlled HumanExposure StudiesProbabilisticExposure -ResponseRelationshipsExposure-ResponseAir QualityModeledBackgroundConcentrationsRecent(“As Is”)AmbientO3LevelsExposureModelExposure EstimatesAssociated with:•BackgroundConcentrations•Recent Air Quality•Current Standard•AlternativeStandardsExposureAmbientMonitoring forSelected UrbanAreasAir QualityAdjustmentProceduresCurrent andAlternativeProposedStandardsRisk Estimates:•Recent AirQuality•CurrentStandard•AlternativeStandardsHealthRiskModelControlled HumanExposure StudiesProbabilisticExposure -ResponseRelationshipsE posure-ResponseAir QualityModeledBackgroundConcentrationsRecent(“As Is”)AmbientO3LevelsExposureModelExposure EstimatesAssociated with:•BackgroundConcentrations•Recent Air Quality•Current Standard•AlternativeStandardsExposurexAbt Associates Inc.December 20063-2

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-3 Although respiratory symptoms in healthy ch ildren were estimated in the last review, EPA staff has decided not to es timate respiratory symptoms in healthy child ren given the lack of symptoms found in field studies examining responses in healthy children published since the prior review. The O 3 

# CD concludes that “collectively, thes e studies indicate that there is no consistent evidence of an association between O 3 

# and respiratory symptoms among healthy children” (p. 7-55). While a number of controll ed human exposure studies have been published since the last review reporting various other acute effects, in cluding airway responsiveness and increases in inflammatory indicators, none of these studies were conducted at multiple concentration levels within the range of greatest interest (i.e., below 0.12 ppm). Thus, EPA staff has decided to limit this portion of the risk assessment to lung function decrements in children and to again base the exposure-response rela tionships on data obtained for 18-35 year old subjects.
3.1.2 Development of exposure-response functions

We used a Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach to estimate probabilistic exposure-response relationships for lung function decrements associated with 8-hour moderate exertion exposures, using the WinBUGS softwa re (Spiegelhalter et al. (1996)). (For an explanation of these methods, see Gelman et al. (1995) or Gilks et al. (1996). The combined data set from the Folinsbee et al. (1988), Hors tman et al. (1990), and McDonnell et al. (1991) studies provide three data point s – lung function decrements asso ciated with each of three O 3 

# concentrations (0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 ppm) – for each of the three measures of lung function decrement listed above (> 10, > 15, and > 20% changes in FEV 1 

# ). In addition, we now have three studies by Adams (Adams 2002, 2003, a nd 2006) that provide data for O 3 

# concentrations of 0.04 and 0.06 ppm as well as additional data for 0.08 and 0.12 ppm. In total, then, we have data for five O 3 

# concentrations – 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 pp m. All of these studies were conducted for 6.6 hours under moderate exertion.
Before being used to estimate exposure-re sponse relationships fo r 8-hour exposures, the data from these controlled hum an exposure studies were corrected for the effect of exercise in clean air to remove any systematic bias that mi ght be present in the da ta attributable to an exercise effect. Generally, this correction for exer cise in clean air is small relative to the total effects measures in the O 3 

# -exposed cases. The resulting st udy-specific resu lts, based on the corrected data, are shown in Table 3-1.
Our Bayesian estimation approach incorporat ed both model (epistem ic) uncertainty and (aleatory) uncertainty about the va lues of the parameters in the models considered. In particular, for each of the three measures of lung functi on decrement we assumed a 90 percent probability that the exposure-response function has th e following 3-parameter logistic form: 2
, 3

2 

## As noted in Whitfield et al., 1996, the response data point in the combined dataset from the Folinsbee, Horstman, and McDonnell studies associated with 0. 12 ppm for the response measure FEV1 ≥ 15% appeared to be inconsistent with the other data points (see Whitf ield et al., 1996, Table 10, footnote c) . Because of this, we estimated the probability of a response of FEV1 ≥ 15% at an O 3 

## concentration of 0.12 ppm by interpolating between the FEV1 ≥ 10% and FEV1 ≥ 20% response rates at that O 3 

## concentration. 3 

## The 3-parameter logistic function is a special case of the 4-parameter logistic, in which the function is forced to go through the origin, so that the probability of response to 0.00 ppm is 0.Abt Associates Inc.December 20063-4Table 3-1. Study-Specific Ozone Exposure-Response Data for Lung Function DecrementsChange in FEV1>10%Change in FEV1>15%Change in FEV1>20%Study and O3LevelProtocolNumberExposedNumberRespondingNumberExposedNumberRespondingNumberExposedNumberResponding0.04 ppm O3Adams(2006)Triangular300300300Adams (2002)Square-wave,face mask3023003000.06 ppm O3Square-wave302300300Adams (2006)Triangular3023023000.08 ppm O3Square-wave307302301Adams (2006)Triangular309303301Square-wave,chamber306302301Square-wave,face mask309303301Variable levels (0.08 ppmavg), chamber306301301Adams (2003)Variable levels (0.08 ppmavg), face mask305303300Adams (2002)Square-wave,face mask306305302F-H-M*Square-wave601860116050.1 ppm O3F-H-MSquare-wave32133293250.12 ppm O3Square-wave,chamber301730123010Adams (2002)Square-wave,facemask30213013307F-H-MSquare-wave301530**15**306*Data from Folinsbee et al. (1988), Horstman et al. (1990), and McDonnell etal. (1991) are combined.**In general, the percentages of responders followed the same pattern at each of the three ozone concentrations in the Folinsbee,Horstman, and McDonnell studies –the percentage with FEV1decrements≥15% at a given ozone concentration was about midway between the percentages with FEV1decrements≥10% and≥20% atthat ozone concentration. The sole exception was the percentage with FEV1decrements≥15% at an ozone concentration of 0.12 ppm, which was the same as thepercentage with FEV1decrements≥10% at 0.12 ppm (50%). This data point was therefore sufficiently inconsistent with the other data that it was considered anoutlier and was not included in the analysis.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-5 )1)(1( )1(* ),,;( γβ γ β

γ 

# α γβα
+ 

# ++ −
= x x



# ee

ee xy , (3-1)

where x denotes the O 3 

# concentration (in ppm) to which the individual is exposed, y denotes the corresponding response (decrement in FEV 1 

# > 10%, > 15% or > 20%), and α , β , and γ are the three parameters whose values are estimated.
We assumed a 10 percent probability that the exposure-response function has the following linear (hockeystick) form:

⎩ ⎨ ⎧

<+ >+ +

= 0 ,0 0
, ),;( xfor xforx xy βα βαβα βα . (3-2)

We assumed that the number of responses, S , out of N subjects exposed to a given concentration, x , has a binomial distribution with respons e probability given by model (3-1) with 90 percent probability and response probability give n by model (3-2) with 10 percent probability. The choice of a 90 percent logistic /10 percent linear split as the base case for the current risk assessment was made by EPA staff (EPA, 2007a) base d on the following cons iderations: 1) the prior 1997 risk assessment had used a linear form consistent with the advice from the CASAC O 3 

# Panel at the time that a linear model reasonably fit the available data at 0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 ppm; 2) with the addition of data at 0.06 and 0.04 ppm, a logistic model provides a very good fit to the data; and 3) as the current CASAC O 3 

# Panel has noted, there is only very limited data at the two lowest exposure levels and, therefore, a linea r model cannot entirely be ruled out. Section 3.3.2 presents the results of sensitivity analyses that explore the impact of different assumptions about the functional form of the exposure-response function.
In some of the controlled human exposure st udies, subjects were exposed to a given O 3 

# concentration more than once – for example, using a square-wave exposure pattern in one protocol and a triangular exposur e pattern in another protocol. However, because there were insufficient data to estimate subject-specifi c response probabilities, we assumed a single response probability (for a given definition of response) for all individuals and treated the repeated exposures for a single subj ect as independent exposures in the binomial distribution.
For each of the two functional forms (logi stic and linear), we derived a Bayesian posterior distribution using th is binomial likelihood functi on in combination with prior distributions for each of the unknown parameters. We assumed lognormal priors with maximum likelihood estimates of the means and variances fo r the parameters of the logistic function, and normal priors, similarly with maximum likelihood estimates for the means and variances, for the parameters of the linear functi on. For each of the two functional forms considered, we used 1000 iterations as the “burn-in” period followe d by 9,000 iterations for the estimation. Each iteration corresponds to a set of values for the pa rameters of the (logis tic or linear) exposureresponse function. We then combined the 9,000 sets of values from the logistic model runs with the last 1,000 sets of values from the linear mode l runs to get a single combined distribution of 10,000 sets of values reflecting the 90 percen t/10 percent assumptions stated above.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-6 For any O 3 

# concentration, x , we could then derive the n th 

# percentile response value, for any n, by evaluating the exposure-response function at x using each of the10,000 sets of parameter values (9,000 of which were for a lo gistic model and 1,000 of which were for a linear model). The resulting median (50 th 

# percentile) exposure-response functions for changes in FEV 1 

# > 10%, > 15% and > 20% are shown together in Figure 3-2. The 2.5 th 

# percentile, median, and 97.5 th 

# percentile curves, along with the response da ta to which they were fit, are shown separately for each of the three response definitions in Figures 3-3a, b, and c, respectively.
3.1.3 Approach to calculating risk estimates

We have generated several risk measures fo r this portion of the ri sk assessment. In addition to the estimates of the number of school age children and active children experiencing 1 or more occurrences of a lung function decrement > 10%, > 15% and > 20% in an O 3 

# season, risk estimates have been developed for the tota l number of occurrences of these lung function decrements in school age children and active school age children. The mean number of occurrences per child has been calculated to provi de an indicator of the average number of times that a responder would experience the specified effect during an O 3 

# season.
A headcount risk estimate for a given lung function decrement (e.g., > 20% change in FEV 1 

# ) is an estimate of the expected number of people who will experience that lung function decrement. To obtain risk estimates associated with ozone concentrations in excess of policy relevant background (PRB) concentrations, we ha ve (1) estimated expected risk, given the personal exposures associated with “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations, (2) estimated expected risk, given the personal exposures associ ated with estimated background ambient O 3 

# concentrations, and (3) subtracted the latter fr om the former. The headcount risk is then calculated by multiplying the resulting expected risk by the number of people in the relevant population. Because response rates are calculated for 21 fractiles, estimated headcount risks are similarly fractile-specific.

Figure 3-2. Bayesian-Estimated (90% Logistic and 10% Linear) Median Exposure-Response Functions: Change in FEV 1 

## > 10%, 15%, and 20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

### Delta FEV1>=10%
Delta FEV1>=15%
Delta FEV1>=20%

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-7 Figure 3-3. a, b, c. Probabilistic Exposure-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and
> 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion* a) FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate Original Response Data 2.5th percentile curve
median curve 97.5th percentile curve



## b) FEV 1 

## Decrement > 15%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate Original Response Data 2.5th percentile curve
median curve 97.5th percentile curve



## c) FEV 1 

## Decrement > 20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate Original Response Data 2.5th percentile curve
median curve 97.5th percentile curve



## * Derived from Folinsbee et al., 1988; Horstman et al. 1990; McDonnell et al., 1991; Adams 2002, 2003, 2006). Each curve is 90% logistic and 10% linear (see text above).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-8 ) The risk (i.e., expected fractional response rate) for the k th 

# fractile, R k 

# is:

(Equation 3-1) |( )|(

1 1 b ik N

i b i jk N

j j k 

# eRRxP eRRxPR b 

# ∑ ∑

=

= 

# − =

where:

e j 

# = (the midpoint of) the jth category of personal exposure to ozone, given “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations;

b i 

# e = (the midpoint of) the ith category of pe rsonal exposure to ozone, given background ambient O 3 

# concentrations;



# P

j 

# = the fraction of the population having personal exposures to O 3 

# concentration of 

# e j 

# ppm, given “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations;

b i 

# P = the fraction of the population having personal exposures to O 3 

# concentration of ppm, given background ambient O b i 

# e 3 

# concentrations;

jk 

# eRR | = k-fractile response rate at O 3 

# concentration e j 

# ;

= k-fractile response rate at O b ik 

# eRR | 3 

# concentration ; and b i 

# e

N

= number of intervals (categories) of O 3 

# personal exposure concentration, given “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations; and

b 

# N = number of intervals of O 3 

# personal exposure concentration, given background ambient O 3 

# concentrations.
For example, if the median expected response rate given “as is” ambient concentrations is 0.065 (i.e., the median expected fraction of th e population responding is 6.5%) and the median expected response rate given background ambien t concentrations is 0.001 (i.e., the median expected fraction of the population responding is 0. 1%), then the median expected response rate associated with “as is” ambien t concentrations above PRB c oncentrations is 0.065 – 0.001 = 0.064. If there are 300,000 people in the relevant population, then the headcount risk is 0.064 x 300,000 = 19,200.

An artifact of the method used is that the population numbers associated with PRB concentrations were not identical to those associated with “as is” concentrations (or concentrations rolled back to simulate just mee ting current or alternative standards) in the same location. Before calculating risk estimates asso ciated with ozone concentrations in excess of PRB concentrations, we therefore first normalized the number of responders (or the number of occurrences of response) given personal e xposures associated with “as is” ambient O 3

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-9 concentrations (or concentrations rolled back to s i mulate just meeting a standard) by multiplying by the ratio of the population asso ciated with PRB concentrations to the population associated with “as is” concentrations (or c oncentrations rolled back to simulate just meeting current or alternative standards in the same location). Fo r example, the number of person-days for all children in St. Louis associated with PRB concentrations was 39,500,000; the number of persondays for all children in St. L ouis associated with “as is” concentrations was 42,310,000. The ratio of the former to the latter is 0.9336. The number of person-days with a decrease in FEV 1 

# > 10% given personal exposures asso ciated with “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations was 391,011. After normalizing to the bac kground population of person-days , this becomes 365,042. The number of person-days with a decrease in FEV 1 

# > 10% given personal exposur es associated with PRB O 3 

# concentrations was 50,183. The number of occurrences of a decrease in FEV 1 

# > 10% associated with “as is” ambient O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations was therefore calculated to be 365,042 - 50,183 = 314,859, or about 315,000.

3.1.4 Selection of urban areas



# EPA staff chose to develop lung function decrement risk estim a tes for school age children and active school age ch ildren living in 12 urban areas in the U.S. Since the exposureresponse functions for lung function decrements based on the controlled human exposure studies were based on controlled laborator y conditions, the location of thes e studies played no role in selecting urban locations for the risk assessment. Instead, several criter ia and considerations guided the selection of urban areas for the risk assessment, including the following:

• 

# The overall set of urban locations should re present a range of geographic areas, urban population demographics, and climatology, and be focused on areas that do not meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# NAAQS.

• 

# The largest areas with major O 3 

# nonattainment problems should be included.

• 

# There must be sufficient air quality da ta for the three-year period (2002 - 2004).

Several additional criteria, which apply to the epidem iology-based portion of the risk

assessm ent, are discussed below in Section 4.1.4. Because the same 12 urban areas were used in both the controlled human studies- and the epidem iological studies-based portions of the risk assessment, these additional criteria were used to further narrow the choice of urban areas for which lung function decrement risk estimates were developed.
For the purposes of estimating population exposure and the risk of lung function decrem ents associated w ith these population exposure estimates, the 12 urban areas were defined based on consolidated statistical areas (CSAs). In contrast, for the risk estimates for premature mortality and excess hospital admissions ba sed on C-R relationships estimated in epidemiological studies, the urban areas were de fined to be generally consistent with the geographic boundaries used in thos e studies. While risk estimates in the epidemiology-based portion of the O 3 

# risk assessment are based on the months of April through September, risk estimates in the controlled human studies-based portion are based on the actual location-specific O 3 

# seasons. The CSAs and their O 3 

# seasons are shown in Table 3-2. Throughout the rest of this report, the urban area in bold is used as a short-hand name repr esenting the entire CSA for the

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-10 lung function part of the risk as sessm ent. The populations of a ll, active, and asthmatic school age children in these areas are shown in Table 3-3.
3.1.5 Addressing variability and uncertainty



# Any estimation of risk and reduced risks a sso ciated with jus t meeting the current O 3 

# standards should address both the variability and uncertainty that generally underlie such an analysis. Uncertainty refers to the lack of knowledge regarding the actual values of model input variables (parameter un certainty) and of physical systems or relationships (model uncertainty – e.g., the shapes of exposure-response and concen tration-response functions). The goal of the analyst is to reduce uncertainty to the maximum extent possible. Uncertainty can be reduced by improved measurement and improved model formulati on. In a health risk assessment, however, significant uncertainty often remains.

Table 3-2. Urban Areas Used in the Co ntrolled Human Studies-Portion of the O 3 

## Risk Assessment and Their O 3 

## Seasons 

# Urban Area (CSA) O 3 

# Season
Atlanta 

# -Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL March 1 to Oct. 31
Boston 

# -Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH April 1 to Sept. 30 Chicago 

# -Naperville-Michigan City, IL -IN-WI April 1 to Sept. 30
Cleveland 

# -Akron-Elyria, OH April 1 to Oct. 31
Detroit 

# -Warren-Flint, MI April 1 to Sept. 30
Houston 

# -Baytown-Huntsville, TX Jan. 1 to Dec. 30 Los Angeles 

# -Long Beach-Riverside, CA Jan. 1 to Dec. 30
New York 

# -Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA April 1 to Sept. 30 Philadelphia 

# -Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD April 1 to Oct. 31
Sacramento 

# --Arden-Arcade--Truckee, CA-NV Jan. 1 to Dec. 30
St. Louis 

# -St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL April 1 to Oct. 31 Washington 

# -Baltimore-N. Virginia, DC 

# -MD-VA-WV April 1 to Oct. 31

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-11 Table 3-3. Population Coverage of Modeled Areas 

# Urban Area (CSA) Modeled population (thousands) All school age children (thousands) Active school age

children (thousands) Asthmatic school age

children (thousands)


# Atlanta 4,548 942 519 100
Boston 5,714 1,098 529 200 Chicago 9,311 1,946 933 300
Cleveland 2,945 582 295 100
Detroit 5,357 1,110 553 200
Houston 4,815 1,076 598 100 Los Angeles 16,349 3,594 1,951 500
New York 21,357 4,084 2,009 600 Philadelphia 5,832 1,179 609 200
Sacramento 1,930 418 226 100
St. Louis 2,754 572 309 100 Washington, DC 7,572 1,473 759 200

The degree of uncertainty can be characterized , s o metimes quantitatively. For example, the statistical un certainty surrounding the estimated O 3 

# coefficients in the exposure-response functions is reflected in conf idence or credible intervals provided for the risk estimates.

As described in Section 3.1.3 above, we used a Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach to estim ate exp osure-response functio ns as well as to characterize uncertainty attributable to sampling error based on sample size considerations. Using this approach, we could derive the n th 

# percentile response value, for any n , for any O 3 

# concentration, x , as described above (see Section 3.1.3). Because our exposur e estimates were generated at the midpoints of 0.01 ppm intervals (i.e., for 0.005 ppm, 0.015 ppm, etc.), we derived 2.5 th 

# percentile, 50 th 

# percentile (median), and 97.5 th 

# percentile response estimates for O 3 

# concentrations at these midpoint values. The 2.5 th 

# percentile and 97.5 th 

# percentile response estimat es comprise the lower and upper bounds of the credible interval around each point estimate (median estimate) of response. The median curve, and the upper and lower bounds of the credib le intervals are shown above, separately for each of the three response definitions, in Figures 3-3a, b, and c, respectively.
As noted above, the exposure-response functio ns shown in Figures 3-3a, b, and c above are based on the assum ption that the relationshi p between exposure and response has a logistic for m with 90 percent probability and a linear (hockeystick) form w ith 10 percent probability. If we had assumed different probabilities for the two alternative functional forms, the resulting

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-12 exposure-response curves, and the response probabil ities associated with exposure to any given O 3 

# concentration, would have been different. Alternative median exposure-response functions, with 95% credible intervals, ba sed on an 80 percent logistic/ 20 percent linear split and a 50 percent logistic/50 percent linear split are show n in Figures 3-4 and 3-5, respectively. The median exposure-response functions for all three alternative forms are shown for decrements in FEV 1 

# > 10% and > 15% in Figures 3-6a and b, respectively.
We carried out sensitivity anal yses to explore the im pact of alternative input values for two sources of uncertainty that we did not characterize quantitatively. The first set of sensitivity analyses explore the impact of alternative assump tions about PRB levels in each of three of the locations included in the risk as sessment – Atlanta, Los Angeles, and New York. The second set of sensitivity analyses explores the impact of different assumptions about the functional form of the exposure-response function. The results from both sets of sensitivity analyses are presented in Section 3.3 below.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-13 Figure 3-4. Probabilistic Exposure-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion: Comparison of 90% Logistic/10% Linear (Hockeystick) Split and 80% Logistic/20% Linear (Hockeystick) Split in Assumed Relationship Between Exposure and Response*

FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%: 80% Logistic/20% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 15%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 15%: 80% Logistic/20% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 20%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 20%: 80% Logistic/20% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## * Derived from Folinsbee et al., 1988; Horstman et al. 1990; McDonnell et al., 1991; Adams 2002, 2003, 2006.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-14 Figure 3-5. Probabilistic Exposure-Response Relationships for FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% for 8-Hour Exposures Under Moderate Exertion: Comparison of 90% Logistic/10% Linear (Hockeystick) Split and 50% Logistic/50% Linear (Hockeystick) Split in Assumed Relationship Between Exposure and Response*

FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 10%: 50% Logistic/50% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 15%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 15%: 50% Logistic/50% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 20%: 90% Logistic/10% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate 

## FEV 1 

## Decrement > 20%: 50% Logistic/50% Linear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Ozone Concentration (ppm)Response Rate



## * Derived from Folinsbee et al., 1988; Horstman et al. 1990; McDonnell et al., 1991; Adams 2002, 2003, 2006).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-15 Figure 3-6. Median Exposure-Response Functions Using Three Different Combinations of Logistic and Linear (Hockeystick) Models

Figure 3-6a. FEV 1 

## Decrements > 10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Ozone Exposure (ppm)Response Rate

90% logistic - 10% linear 80% logistic - 20% linear 50% logistic - 50% linear



## Figure 3-6b. FEV 1 

## Decrements > 15%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Ozone Exposure (ppm)Response Rate

90% logistic - 10% linear 80% logistic - 20% linear 50% logistic - 50% linear

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-16 In addition to uncertainties arising from sa m pling variability, other uncertainties associated with the use of the exposure-respons e relationships for lung function responses are briefly summarized below. Additional uncertaintie s with respect to the exposure inputs to the risk assessment are described in Chapter 4 of the Staff Paper and in the Exposure Assessment TSD (EPA 2006c). The main additional uncertain ties with respect to th e approach used to estimate exposure-response relationships include:

• 

# Length of exposure

. The 8-hour moderate exertion risk estimates are based on a combined data set from six controlled human exposure st udies conducted using 6.6-hr exposures. The use of these data to estimate responses associ ated with an 8-hour exposure seem reasonable, however, because lung function resp onse appears to level off after exposure for 6 hours. It is unlikely that the exposure-response relationships would have been appr eciably different had the studies been conducted over an 8-hour period.

• 

# Extrapolation of exposure-response relationships . It was necessary to estimate responses at O 3 

# levels below the lowest exposure levels used in the controlled human studies (i.e., 0.04 ppm). In both the prior review and the current assessment, the response has been extrapolated down to background levels.

• 

# Reproducibility of O 3- 

# induced responses

. The risk assessment assumed that the O 3 

# -induced responses for individuals are reproducible. Th is assumption is supported by the evaluation in the O 3 

# CD (see section AX6.4), which cites studies by McDonnell et al. (1985b) and Hazucha et al. (2003) as showing significant reproducibility of response.

• 

# Age and lung function response . As in the prior review, exposure-response relationships based on controlled human expos ure studies involving 18-35 year old subjects were used in the risk assessment to estimate responses for sch ool age children (ages 5-18). This approach is supported by the findings of McDonnell et al. (1985a) who reported that children 8-11 years old experienced FEV 1 

# responses similar to those observed in adults 18-35 years old when both groups were exposed to concentra tions of 0.12 ppm at an EVR of 35 L/min/m 2



# . In addition, a number of summer camp studies of school age children exposed in outdoor environments in the Northeast also showed O 3 

# -induced lung function changes similar in magnitude to, and in some cases somewhat la rger than, those observe d in controlled human exposure studies.

• 

# Exposure history . The risk assessment assumed that the O 3 

# -induced response on any given day is independent of previous O 3 

# exposures. As discussed in Chapter 3 of the Staff Paper and in the O 3 

# CD, O 3 

# -induced responses can be enhanced or attenuated as a result of recent prior exposures. The possibl e impact of exposure history on the risk estimates is an additional source of uncerta inty that is not quantified in this assessment. In addition, the Adams studies were conducted in southern Ca lifornia, where ozone levels are generally higher than those in Chapel Hill, NC, where the Folinsbee, Horstman, and McDonnell studies were conducted. However, the Adams studies were conducted when ozone levels were below the level of the current standard.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-17 • 

# Exposure-response relationship for all, active, and asthmatic school age children . The risk assessment used the same exposure-response rela tionship, developed from data on “healthy” subjects, for all, active, and asthmatic sc hool age children. Based on evidence from epidemiological studies, it is likely that mode rate to severe asthmatic children would experience greater lung function decrements th an other children wit hout these conditions. This would tend to lead to the lung function decrements presented in this assessment for asthmatic children being underestimated. One consideration working in the opposite direction is that the act ivity patterns used in th e exposure analysis to estimate exposures for asthmatic children were not specific to asthmatic individuals. To the extent that asthmatic children, especially those with moderate to severe asthma, are less active or spend less time outdoors than other children of th e same age, the estimates of their 8-hr exposures to O 3 

# under moderate exertion may be overstated. This factor would tend to lead to overestimates of risks for lung function decrements in the asthmatic school age population.

• 

# Interaction between O 3 

# and other pollutants. Because the controlled human exposure studies used in the risk assessment involved only O 3 

# exposures, it was assumed that estimates of O 3 

# - induced health responses would not be affect ed by the presence of other pollutants (e.g., SO 2, 

# PM 2..5 

# , etc). Some evidence exists that other po llutants may enhance the respiratory effects associated with exposure to O 3 

# , but the evidence is not consistent across studies.
Variability refers to the heterogeneity in a populati on or param eter. Even if there is no uncertainty surrounding inputs to the analysis, there may still be variability. For example, there may be variability among exposure-response func tions describing the relationship between O 3 

# and lung function across urban areas . Similarly, there may be variability among C-R functions describing the relationship between O 3 

# and mortality across urban ar eas. This variability does not imply uncertainty about the exposure-response or C-R function in any of the urban areas, but only that these functions are diff erent in the different locations, reflecting differences in the populations and/or other f actors that may affect th e relationship between O 3 

# and the associated health endpoint. In general, it is possible to have uncertainty but no variability (if, for instance, there is a single parameter whose value is uncertain ) or variability but littl e or no uncertainty (for example, people’s heights vary considerably but can be accurately m easured with little uncertainty).
The current controlled human exposure stud ies portion of the risk assessm e nt incorporates some of the variability in key inputs to the analysis by using location-specific inputs for the exposure analysis (e.g., location-specific population data, air exchange rates, air quality and temperature data). Although sp atial variability in these key inputs across all U.S. locations has not been fully characterized, variability across the selected locations is imbedded in the analysis by using, to the extent possible, inputs specific to each urban area. Temporal variability is more difficult to address, because the risk a ssessment focuses on some unspecified time in the future. To minimize the degree to which values of inputs to the analysis may be different from the values of those inputs at that unspecified time, we have used relatively recent inputs – in particular, year 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality da ta for the urban locations, and the most recent available population data (from the 2000 Census). However, future changes in inputs have not been predicted (e.g., futu re population levels).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-18 3.2 Results



# Section 3.2.1 presents the results of the a ssessm ent of lung function decrem ent associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations (representing le vels measured in 2004, 2003, and 2002 for all of the assessment locations) over PRB levels, based on controlled human exposure studies. The corresponding results when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current and alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards ar e presented in Section 3.2.2. Section 3.2.2.1 focuses on the current standard and a set of seven alternat ive standards, based on adjusting 2004 and 2002 air quality data. Section 3.2.2.2 focuses on the current standard and a (different) set of five alternative standards, based on adjusting 2002, 2 003, and 2004 air quality data for a subset of five locations. Results for “as is” O 3 

# concentrations for each of the three years are also included in the tables of results in Sec tion 3.2.2.2. While all three lung function response measures were developed and included in the risk assessm ent, based on CASAC advice and EPA staff recommendations, the focus of the results discussed in this section is primarily on decrements in FEV 1 

# > 15% for all and active school age ch ildren and on decrements in FEV 1 

# > 10% for asthmatic school age children as an indi cator of adverse lung function effects.

All estimated numbers (of children and of o ccurrences) were rounded to the nearest 1000, and all p e rcentages were rounded to one deci mal place. These rounding conventions are not intended to imply confidence in that level of precision, but rather to avoid the confusion that can result when a greater amount of rounding is used.
3.2.1 Assessment of lung function decrement associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of po licy relevant background levels
3.2.1.1 Results for all school age children



# The estimated number and percent of occurrenc es of lung function decrem ent associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB con centrations among all school age children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exer cise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season in 2004 is given in Table 3-4; the co rresponding table for 2002 is Table 3-5. The numbers and percents of these children estimated to experience at least one lung function decrement associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations is given in Tables 3-6 and 3-7, for 2004 and 2002, respectively. The corresponding results for active children are given in Appendix C. Re sults for all three meas ures of lung function decrement being considered in this analysis – decrements in FEV 1 

# > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% -- are shown in each table.
The estimated number and percent of occurrences of lung function decrement, defined as decrem ents in FEV 1 

# of > 15%, associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations among all school ag e children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season is given in Table 3-8 for 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations. The number and percent of thes e children estimated to experience at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# > 15% associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations is given, for 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, in Table 3-9.

## Table 3-4. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 800 1% 191 0.2% 27 0% (281 - 1430) (0.3% - 1.7%) (29 - 456) (0% - 0.6%) (4 - 117) (0% - 0.1%) 547 0.8% 125 0.2% 16 0% (165 - 1002) (0.2% - 1.4%) (16 - 315) (0% - 0.5%) (2 - 77) (0% - 0.1%) 795 0.6% 167 0.1% 17 0% (188 - 1485) (0.2% - 1.2%) (6 - 460) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 106) (0% - 0.1%) 312 0.7% 69 0.2% 8 0% (89 - 575) (0.2% - 1.3%) (6 - 179) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 43) (0% - 0.1%) 512 0.7% 111 0.2% 12 0% (136 - 953) (0.2% - 1.4%) (8 - 296) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 69) (0% - 0.1%) 827 0.6% 230 0.2% 45 0% (387 - 1361) (0.3% - 1%) (63 - 465) (0% - 0.3%) (12 - 140) (0% - 0.1%) 5432 1.1% 1470 0.3% 273 0.1% (2471 - 9181) (0.5% - 1.9%) (393 - 3073) (0.1% - 0.6%) (62 - 892) (0% - 0.2%) 2418 0.9% 563 0.2% 76 0% (795 - 4360) (0.3% - 1.6%) (77 - 1383) (0% - 0.5%) (8 - 347) (0% - 0.1%) 901 1% 218 0.3% 31 0% (338 - 1588) (0.4% - 1.8%) (35 - 509) (0% - 0.6%) (3 - 132) (0% - 0.2%) 366 0.7% 86 0.2% 11 0% (135 - 647) (0.3% - 1.3%) (11 - 206) (0% - 0.4%) (1 - 52) (0% - 0.1%) 317 0.7% 69 0.2% 8 0% (92 - 579) (0.2% - 1.3%) (4 - 181) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 43) (0% - 0.1%) 1091 1% 268 0.2% 41 0% (404 - 1928) (0.4% - 1.7%) (50 - 622) (0% - 0.6%) (7 - 165) (0% - 0.1%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-19 December 2006

## Table 3-5. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 1043 1.3% 290 0.4% 57 0.1% (489 - 1754) (0.6% - 2.1%) (88 - 593) (0.1% - 0.7%) (14 - 176) (0% - 0.2%) 1046 1.5% 311 0.4% 74 0.1% (502 - 1737) (0.7% - 2.5%) (115 - 611) (0.2% - 0.9%) (27 - 197) (0% - 0.3%) 1777 1.4% 511 0.4% 106 0.1% (862 - 2954) (0.7% - 2.4%) (171 - 1015) (0.1% - 0.8%) (29 - 310) (0% - 0.3%) 814 1.9% 259 0.6% 65 0.2% (441 - 1304) (1% - 3%) (110 - 473) (0.3% - 1.1%) (24 - 161) (0.1% - 0.4%) 1135 1.6% 333 0.5% 71 0.1% (569 - 1875) (0.8% - 2.7%) (119 - 649) (0.2% - 0.9%) (20 - 201) (0% - 0.3%) 742 0.5% 209 0.2% 42 0% (349 - 1215) (0.3% - 0.9%) (62 - 419) (0% - 0.3%) (12 - 128) (0% - 0.1%) 4625 1% 1265 0.3% 249 0.1% (2054 - 7815) (0.4% - 1.6%) (355 - 2642) (0.1% - 0.6%) (69 - 781) (0% - 0.2%) 4995 1.9% 1522 0.6% 361 0.1% (2588 - 8140) (1% - 3.1%) (585 - 2885) (0.2% - 1.1%) (123 - 945) (0% - 0.4%) 1788 2.1% 570 0.7% 146 0.2% (984 - 2848) (1.1% - 3.3%) (239 - 1037) (0.3% - 1.2%) (54 - 358) (0.1% - 0.4%) 538 1.1% 145 0.3% 27 0.1% (245 - 912) (0.5% - 1.8%) (39 - 305) (0.1% - 0.6%) (6 - 88) (0% - 0.2%) 623 1.5% 183 0.4% 40 0.1% (311 - 1023) (0.7% - 2.4%) (65 - 356) (0.2% - 0.8%) (12 - 112) (0% - 0.3%) 1882 1.7% 565 0.5% 132 0.1% (959 - 3085) (0.9% - 2.8%) (209 - 1086) (0.2% - 1%) (45 - 352) (0% - 0.3%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-20 December 2006

## Table 3-6. Number and Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 89 9.4% 34 3.6% 10 1% (66 - 128) (7.1% - 13.6%) (19 - 51) (2% - 5.4%) (3 - 20) (0.4% - 2.1%) 76 6.9% 26 2.4% 6 0.6% (53 - 114) (4.9% - 10.4%) (12 - 42) (1.1% - 3.8%) (2 - 15) (0.1% - 1.4%) 93 4.8% 27 1.4% 4 0.2% (59 - 150) (3% - 7.7%) (6 - 49) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0 - 15) (0% - 0.8%) 37 6.2% 12 2% 2 0.4% (25 - 57) (4.2% - 9.6%) (5 - 20) (0.8% - 3.3%) (0 - 7) (0.1% - 1.1%) 65 5.8% 20 1.8% 4 0.3% (43 - 102) (3.9% - 9.2%) (7 - 35) (0.6% - 3.1%) (0 - 11) (0% - 1%) 129 11.9% 57 5.2% 20 1.9% (102 - 173) (9.4% - 15.9%) (37 - 79) (3.4% - 7.3%) (10 - 37) (0.9% - 3.4%) 483 13.2% 220 6% 81 2.2% (402 - 631) (11% - 17.2%) (149 - 298) (4.1% - 8.1%) (39 - 143) (1.1% - 3.9%) 316 7.6% 112 2.7% 28 0.7% (227 - 469) (5.5% - 11.3%) (55 - 176) (1.3% - 4.2%) (8 - 64) (0.2% - 1.6%) 105 8.8% 38 3.2% 10 0.8% (77 - 153) (6.5% - 12.9%) (21 - 59) (1.8% - 4.9%) (3 - 22) (0.2% - 1.8%) 31 7.5% 11 2.7% 3 0.7% (25 - 45) (6% - 11%) (6 - 17) (1.4% - 4.1%) (1 - 6) (0.1% - 1.5%) 34 5.8% 10 1.8% 2 0.3% (23 - 54) (3.9% - 9.3%) (3 - 18) (0.6% - 3.1%) (0 - 6) (0% - 1%) 144 9.7% 57 3.8% 17 1.1% (109 - 204) (7.3% - 13.8%) (33 - 84) (2.2% - 5.6%) (6 - 34) (0.4% - 2.3%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-21 December 2006

## Table 3-7. Number and Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 132 14% 59 6.3% 21 2.3% (105 - 173) (11.2% - 18.3%) (40 - 81) (4.2% - 8.6%) (10 - 38) (1.1% - 4.1%) 172 15.7% 84 7.6% 35 3.2% (140 - 219) (12.7% - 19.9%) (58 - 112) (5.3% - 10.3%) (20 - 59) (1.8% - 5.4%) 275 14.1% 123 6.3% 44 2.3% (220 - 359) (11.3% - 18.4%) (83 - 169) (4.2% - 8.7%) (21 - 79) (1.1% - 4%) 112 18.9% 56 9.4% 24 4% (93 - 138) (15.6% - 23.2%) (40 - 74) (6.7% - 12.4%) (13 - 40) (2.2% - 6.7%) 167 15.1% 76 6.8% 27 2.5% (135 - 215) (12.1% - 19.4%) (51 - 103) (4.6% - 9.3%) (13 - 48) (1.2% - 4.4%) 131 12% 58 5.3% 21 1.9% (104 - 175) (9.5% - 16%) (38 - 80) (3.5% - 7.4%) (10 - 38) (0.9% - 3.5%) 472 12.9% 220 6% 86 2.3% (394 - 612) (10.7% - 16.7%) (150 - 297) (4.1% - 8.1%) (44 - 149) (1.2% - 4.1%) 712 17.2% 346 8.3% 144 3.5% (582 - 895) (14% - 21.6%) (244 - 462) (5.9% - 11.2%) (79 - 242) (1.9% - 5.8%) 231 19.5% 118 9.9% 53 4.4% (192 - 283) (16.2% - 23.9%) (85 - 155) (7.2% - 13.1%) (31 - 87) (2.6% - 7.3%) 53 12.8% 24 5.8% 9 2.1% (44 - 69) (10.7% - 16.6%) (16 - 32) (3.9% - 7.9%) (4 - 15) (1% - 3.8%) 89 15.3% 41 7.1% 16 2.7% (72 - 113) (12.4% - 19.5%) (28 - 56) (4.8% - 9.6%) (8 - 27) (1.4% - 4.7%) 255 17.2% 125 8.4% 52 3.5% (209 - 321) (14.1% - 21.6%) (88 - 167) (5.9% - 11.2%) (29 - 88) (2% - 5.9%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-22 December 2006

## Table 3-8. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

## >=15%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004 *

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 290 0.4% 186 0.2% 191 0.2% (88 - 593) (0.1% - 0.7%) (32 - 431) (0% - 0.5%) (29 - 456) (0% - 0.6%) 311 0.4% 149 0.2% 125 0.2% (115 - 611) (0.2% - 0.9%) (24 - 364) (0% - 0.5%) (16 - 315) (0% - 0.5%) 511 0.4% 265 0.2% 167 0.1% (171 - 1015) (0.1% - 0.8%) (36 - 640) (0% - 0.5%) (6 - 460) (0% - 0.4%) 259 0.6% 116 0.3% 69 0.2% (110 - 473) (0.3% - 1.1%) (27 - 262) (0.1% - 0.6%) (6 - 179) (0% - 0.4%) 333 0.5% 226 0.3% 111 0.2% (119 - 649) (0.2% - 0.9%) (65 - 481) (0.1% - 0.7%) (8 - 296) (0% - 0.4%) 209 0.2% 291 0.2% 230 0.2% (62 - 419) (0% - 0.3%) (96 - 567) (0.1% - 0.4%) (63 - 465) (0% - 0.3%) 1265 0.3% 1700 0.4% 1470 0.3% (355 - 2642) (0.1% - 0.6%) (610 - 3277) (0.1% - 0.7%) (393 - 3073) (0.1% - 0.6%) 1522 0.6% 834 0.3% 563 0.2% (585 - 2885) (0.2% - 1.1%) (237 - 1769) (0.1% - 0.7%) (77 - 1383) (0% - 0.5%) 570 0.7% 281 0.3% 218 0.3% (239 - 1037) (0.3% - 1.2%) (77 - 594) (0.1% - 0.7%) (35 - 509) (0% - 0.6%) 145 0.3% 121 0.2% 86 0.2% (39 - 305) (0.1% - 0.6%) (26 - 265) (0.1% - 0.5%) (11 - 206) (0% - 0.4%) 183 0.4% 120 0.3% 69 0.2% (65 - 356) (0.2% - 0.8%) (26 - 266) (0.1% - 0.6%) (4 - 181) (0% - 0.4%) 565 0.5% 253 0.2% 268 0.2% (209 - 1086) (0.2% - 1%) (60 - 568) (0.1% - 0.5%) (50 - 622) (0% - 0.6%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 2002 Data 2003 Data 2004 Data



### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-23 December 2006

## Table 3-9. Number and Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

## >=15%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004 *

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 59 6.3% 34 3.6% 34 3.6% (40 - 81) (4.2% - 8.6%) (20 - 51) (2.1% - 5.4%) (19 - 51) (2% - 5.4%) 84 7.6% 33 3% 26 2.4% (58 - 112) (5.3% - 10.3%) (17 - 51) (1.6% - 4.6%) (12 - 42) (1.1% - 3.8%) 123 6.3% 52 2.6% 27 1.4% (83 - 169) (4.2% - 8.7%) (25 - 81) (1.3% - 4.2%) (6 - 49) (0.3% - 2.5%) 56 9.4% 28 4.7% 12 2% (40 - 74) (6.7% - 12.4%) (18 - 40) (3% - 6.7%) (5 - 20) (0.8% - 3.3%) 76 6.8% 62 5.5% 20 1.8% (51 - 103) (4.6% - 9.3%) (40 - 86) (3.6% - 7.7%) (7 - 35) (0.6% - 3.1%) 58 5.3% 72 6.6% 57 5.2% (38 - 80) (3.5% - 7.4%) (49 - 98) (4.5% - 9%) (37 - 79) (3.4% - 7.3%) 220 6% 309 8.4% 220 6% (150 - 297) (4.1% - 8.1%) (221 - 406) (6% - 11.1%) (149 - 298) (4.1% - 8.1%) 346 8.3% 223 5.4% 112 2.7% (244 - 462) (5.9% - 11.2%) (145 - 312) (3.5% - 7.5%) (55 - 176) (1.3% - 4.2%) 118 9.9% 68 5.7% 38 3.2% (85 - 155) (7.2% - 13.1%) (45 - 94) (3.8% - 8%) (21 - 59) (1.8% - 4.9%) 24 5.8% 19 4.5% 11 2.7% (16 - 32) (3.9% - 7.9%) (12 - 26) (2.9% - 6.3%) (6 - 17) (1.4% - 4.1%) 41 7.1% 26 4.4% 10 1.8% (28 - 56) (4.8% - 9.6%) (16 - 37) (2.7% - 6.3%) (3 - 18) (0.6% - 3.1%) 125 8.4% 69 4.7% 57 3.8% (88 - 167) (5.9% - 11.2%) (44 - 99) (2.9% - 6.6%) (33 - 84) (2.2% - 5.6%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento 2002 Data 2003 Data 2004 Data



### Detroit Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-24 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-25 The estimated occurrence of lung function decrem ent a mong all school age children exercising moderately while exposed to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations (Tables 3-4 and 3-5) varied across the locations in each y ear for each of the three l ung function response measures (decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, ≥ 

# 15%, and ≥ 

# 20%). For all three lung function response measures, there was a greater occurrence of lung function decrement in 2002 than in 2004 in all locations except Los Angeles and Houston. In 2004, Los A ngeles had the greatest percentage of childdays with occurrences of lung function response fo r all three response definitions (decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, ≥ 

# 15%, and ≥ 

# 20%). Not surprisingly, absolute numbers of occurrences of lung function decrement were also largest in Los Angeles. They were smallest in Cleveland and St. Louis for all three definitions of lung function response (at about 312,000 and 317,000, respectively, for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%; about 69,000 for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%; and about 8,000 for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20%). In 2002, New York had the greatest absolute numbers of occurrences of lung function response for all three definitions of response (at about 5.0 million for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, 1.5 million for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%, and about 361,000 for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20%). For all three lung function response measures Sacramento had the smallest numbers of occurrence (at about 538,000; 145,000; and 27,000 occurrences for the three lung function res ponse definitions, respectively). However, Philadelphia had the greatest percentages of child-days with occurr ences of lung function response defined as decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10% and ≥ 

# 15%, at 2.1% and 0.7%, respectively. The percentages of child-days with o ccurrences of decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20% rounded to 0.1% in most locations.
The patterns were similar for occurrences of lung function decrement among active school age children (Tables C-1 and C-2). On ce again, for all three lung function response

m easures, there was a greater occurrence of lung function decrement in 2002 than in 2004 in all locations except Los Angeles and Houston. In 2004, the percentage of child-days (for active children) on which decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10% were estimated to occur ranged from 0.6% in Houston to 1.3% in Los Angeles. The corr esponding percentages for decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% rounded to 0.2% in most locations (except Ch icago, where it was 0.1%, and Los Angeles and Philadelphia, where it was 0.3%). For decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20%, the percentages rounded to 0.0% in all locations except Los Angeles, wher e it rounded to 0.1%. The absolute numbers of occurrences were greatest in Los Angeles for a ll three lung function response measures. In 2002, the percentage of child-day s (for active children) on which decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10% were estimated to occur ranged from 0.6% in Houst on to 2.1% in Philadelphia; the corresponding percentages for decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% ranged from 0.2% in Houston to 0.7% in Philadelphia; and for decrements of FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20%, the percentages rounded to 0.1% in most locations.

When we considered the number of childre n experiencing at least one lung function response during the O 3 

# season (Tables 3-6 and C-3 for 2004, and Tables 3-7 and C-4 for 2002), the patterns were similar to those observed when occurrence of lung function responses was estimated. In 2004, among all school age childr en and among active sch ool age children, the percentages experiencing at le ast one lung function response were largest in Los Angeles and smallest in Chicago – for each of the three lung function response measures. For example, 6.0% of all school age children and 6.4% of active sch ool age children in Los Angeles experienced at

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-26 least one decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% during the O 3 

# season. The corresponding percentages for Chicago were 1.4% and 1.4% for all school age and activ e school age children, respectively. In 2002, among all school age children and among active school age childre n, the percentages experiencing at least one lung function response were largest in Philadelphia and smallest in Houston – for each of the three lung function re sponse measures. For example, 9.9% of all school age children and 10.3% of active school age children in Phila delphia experienced at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% during the ozone season. The corresponding percentages for Houston for all school age and active school age children were 5.3% and 5.3%, respectively.
The patterns of numbers of occurrences of l ung function response defined as decrem ents in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% across all three years (2002, 2003, and 2004) shown in Table 3-8 are similar in most locations. In all locations except Houston and Los Angeles, the numb er of occurrences is greatest in 2002, and the number of occurrences in 2003 either falls between those of 2004 and 2002 or is slightly lower than in 2004. In Hous ton and Los Angeles the numbers of occurrences are lowest in 2002 and highest in 2003. The patte rns for the numbers of children with at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%, shown in Table 3-9, are simila r. In all locations except Houston and Los Angeles, the number of children with at least one occurrence decreases from 2002 to 2003 to 2004 (in Atlanta, the number is the same in 2003 and 2004). In Houston and Los Angeles the numbers of occurren ces are highest in 2003 and the same or almost the same in 2002 and 2004.

3.2.1.2 Results for asthmatic school age children



# The estimated number and percent of occurrenc es of lung function response, defined as a change in F E V 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB concentrations among asthmatic sc hool age children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season, is given in Table 3-10, for 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations. The number and percent of these children estimated to experience at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# of > 10% associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations is given, for 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, in Table 3-11.

The numbers of occurrences of lung function response, defined as decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, among asthmatic children follow the same patterns across the three years (2002, 2003, and 2004) as for all children (see Table 3-8). In all locations except Houston and Los Angeles, the number of occurrences is great est in 2002, and the number of o ccurrences in 2003 either falls between those of 2004 and 2002 or is slightly lowe r than in 2004. In Houston and Los Angeles the numbers of occurrences are lowest in 2002 a nd highest in 2003. Sim ilarly, the numbers of asthmatic children with at le ast one lung function response, defined as a change in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%, follow the same patterns across the three years as for all children, for changes in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% (see Table 3-9). In all locations except Hous ton and Los Angeles, the number of asthmatic children with at least one occurrence decreases from 2002 to 2003 to 2004 (in Atlanta, the number is the same in 2003 and 2004). In Housto n and Los Angeles the numbers of occurrences are highest in 2003 and the same or almost the same in 2002 and 2004.

## Table 3-10. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004 *

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 145 1.3% 106 1% 109 1% (68 - 244) (0.6% - 2.2%) (40 - 187) (0.4% - 1.7%) (38 - 196) (0.3% - 1.8%) 186 1.5% 111 0.9% 96 0.8% (90 - 308) (0.7% - 2.5%) (37 - 201) (0.3% - 1.7%) (29 - 176) (0.2% - 1.5%) 257 1.5% 163 0.9% 114 0.7% (125 - 427) (0.7% - 2.4%) (56 - 291) (0.3% - 1.6%) (27 - 214) (0.2% - 1.2%) 115 1.9% 64 1.1% 44 0.7% (62 - 184) (1% - 3.1%) (24 - 112) (0.4% - 1.9%) (13 - 82) (0.2% - 1.4%) 159 1.6% 118 1.2% 73 0.8% (79 - 262) (0.8% - 2.7%) (50 - 202) (0.5% - 2.1%) (20 - 135) (0.2% - 1.4%) 96 0.5% 131 0.7% 110 0.6% (45 - 158) (0.3% - 0.9%) (64 - 213) (0.4% - 1.2%) (51 - 181) (0.3% - 1%) 561 1% 690 1.2% 660 1.2% (255 - 942) (0.5% - 1.7%) (352 - 1119) (0.6% - 2%) (308 - 1108) (0.6% - 2%) 834 1.9% 506 1.2% 399 0.9% (435 - 1356) (1% - 3.1%) (215 - 868) (0.5% - 2%) (131 - 720) (0.3% - 1.7%) 325 2.1% 188 1.2% 165 1.1% (180 - 516) (1.2% - 3.4%) (82 - 320) (0.5% - 2.1%) (63 - 289) (0.4% - 1.9%) 69 1.1% 60 1% 45 0.7% (32 - 116) (0.5% - 1.9%) (26 - 103) (0.4% - 1.6%) (16 - 80) (0.3% - 1.3%) 86 1.5% 64 1.1% 44 0.8% (43 - 141) (0.7% - 2.4%) (26 - 112) (0.5% - 1.9%) (13 - 80) (0.2% - 1.4%) 261 1.7% 137 0.9% 153 1% (133 - 428) (0.9% - 2.8%) (52 - 240) (0.3% - 1.6%) (57 - 270) (0.4% - 1.8%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 2002 Data 2003 Data 2004 Data



### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-27 December 2006

## Table 3-11. Number and Percent of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002, 2003, and 2004 *

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 18 15.2% 12 10.1% 12 9.9% (14 - 23) (12.2% - 19.8%) (9 - 17) (7.6% - 14.5%) (9 - 17) (7.4% - 14.2%) 30 16.4% 15 8.4% 13 7.2% (24 - 38) (13.3% - 20.7%) (11 - 22) (6.1% - 12.2%) (9 - 20) (5.1% - 10.8%) 40 14.5% 21 7.6% 14 4.9% (32 - 53) (11.6% - 18.9%) (15 - 32) (5.5% - 11.5%) (9 - 22) (3.1% - 7.8%) 17 18.7% 9 10.6% 5 6.2% (14 - 20) (15.4% - 23.1%) (7 - 13) (8.1% - 14.5%) (4 - 8) (4.2% - 9.6%) 24 14.9% 20 12.3% 10 5.9% (19 - 31) (11.9% - 19.2%) (16 - 27) (9.6% - 16.4%) (6 - 15) (4% - 9.3%) 17 12.5% 20 15.1% 17 12.6% (13 - 23) (9.9% - 16.7%) (17 - 26) (12.3% - 19.5%) (14 - 23) (10% - 16.8%) 61 13.3% 77 16.8% 62 13.6% (51 - 79) (11.1% - 17.2%) (65 - 95) (14.3% - 20.9%) (52 - 81) (11.4% - 17.7%) 118 18.3% 81 12.7% 51 8% (97 - 147) (15.1% - 22.9%) (64 - 109) (10% - 17%) (37 - 76) (5.8% - 11.8%) 40 20.8% 27 13.8% 18 9.5% (33 - 49) (17.3% - 25.3%) (21 - 35) (11% - 18.2%) (14 - 27) (7.1% - 13.8%) 7 13% 6 11% 4 7.5% (6 - 9) (10.9% - 16.9%) (5 - 8) (9.2% - 14.9%) (3 - 6) (5.9% - 11%) 12 15% 9 10.6% 5 5.9% (10 - 16) (12.1% - 19.3%) (7 - 12) (8.1% - 14.8%) (3 - 8) (3.9% - 9.4%) 34 18.2% 21 11.2% 19 10.5% (28 - 42) (15% - 22.7%) (16 - 28) (8.6% - 15.2%) (15 - 27) (7.9% - 14.7%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento 2002 Data 2003 Data 2004 Data



### Detroit Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-28 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-29 3.2.2 Assessment of lung function decrem ent associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the curren t and alternative daily maximum 8-hour standards



# In this section, we present results for two sets of 8-hr average O 3 

# standards. An 8-hr average standard, denoted m/n, is characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the curre nt standard is 0. 084/4 – 0.084 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum 8- hr average. The 3 rd 

# , 4 th 

# , and 5 th 

# daily maximum standards, denoted m/n, for n = 3, 4, and 5, require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

3.2.2.1 Results for all locations fo r the current standard and the original set of seven alternative standards, based on 2002 and 2004 air quality data



# The estimated number of occurrences of lung fu nction response associat ed with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative daily maximum 8-hour standards among all school age children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season, is given in Table 3-12, for estimates based on 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, and Table 3-13, for estimates based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations. The corresponding estimated percents of occurrences are given in Tabl es 3-14 and 3-15, for estimates based on 2004 and 2002 O 3 

# concentrations, respectively. The numbers of these children estimated to experience at least one lung func tion response associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and al ternative standards are given in Tables 3-16 and 3- 17, for estimates based on 2004 and 2002 O 3 

# concentrations, respec tively. The corresponding estimated percents of children are given in Ta bles 3-18 and 3-19. The corresponding results for active school age children are given in Tables C- 5 through C-12 in Appendix C. Results for all three measures of lung function re sponse being considered in this analysis – decrements in FEV 1 

# of > 10%, > 15%, and > 20% -- are shown in each table.
The percent reductions in numbers of occurrenc es and in numbers of school age children experiencing at least one occurrence of lung function response when O 3 

# concentrations are reduced from those just meeting the current standard to those that would just meet each alternative standard are summarized for all school age children in Figures 3-7 through 3-10 below. Percent reductions are calculated as the number (e.g., of occu rrences) at the current standard minus the number at the alternative standard divided by the number at the current standard, so that a decrease in number results in a positive percent. Each figure also shows the percent reduction when O 3 

# concentrations are changed from those just meeting the current standard to “as is” concentrations in the relevant year of air quality (e.g., when O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current and alternativ e standards were based on adjusting 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations were used). Because these “as is” O 3 

# concentrations are higher than the O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard, these percent reductions are negative. Figure 3-7 shows the percen t reductions in the aggregate numbers (across all locations) of occurrences of lung function response, for each of the three definitions of response, based on 2004 data (Fig ure 3-7a) and 2002 data (Figure 3-7b). Figure 3-

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-30 8 shows the percent redu ctions of occurrences of decrem ent in FEV 1 

# > 15%, separately for each location, based on 2004 data (Figure 3-8a) and 20 02 data (Figure 3-8b). Figure 3-9 shows the percent reductions in the aggregate numbers (acr oss all locations) of all children experiencing at least one occurrence of lung function response, fo r each of the three definitions of response, based on 2004 data (Figure 3-9a) and 2002 data (Figure 3-9b). Finally, Figure 3-10 shows the percent reductions of numbers of all children experiencing at l east one occurrence of decrement in FEV 1 

# > 15%, separately for each location, based on 2004 data (Figure 3-10a) and 2002 data (Figure 3-10b). The corresponding figures for active school age children (ages 5-18) are given in Appendix C.

## Table 3-12. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 598 587 532 472 444 439 390 318 (166 - 1102) (160 - 1084) (131 - 994) (102 - 892) (89 - 844) (87 - 836) (66 - 752) (40 - 626) 408 368 363 347 302 279 266 216 (94 - 773) (75 - 704) (72 - 696) (65 - 670) (46 - 591) (38 - 550) (33 - 527) (17 - 437) 555 517 487 437 395 370 337 261 (86 - 1071) (72 - 1004) (62 - 952) (46 - 862) (34 - 787) (28 - 741) (20 - 680) (7 - 537) 212 195 189 162 155 145 136 109 (41 - 407) (33 - 377) (31 - 365) (21 - 318) (19 - 306) (15 - 288) (13 - 271) (6 - 221) 386 353 343 331 285 263 249 200 (77 - 739) (62 - 681) (58 - 665) (53 - 644) (36 - 563) (29 - 523) (25 - 498) (12 - 408) 457 411 393 319 305 273 245 137 (170 - 775) (145 - 698) (136 - 669) (100 - 541) (93 - 518) (80 - 462) (70 - 412) (38 - 209) 1802 1721 1566 1156 1106 1012 793 375 (381 - 3361) (349 - 3220) (292 - 2947) (173 - 2198) (161 - 2106) (140 - 1929) (94 - 1514) (31 - 694) 1452 1374 1293 1054 1081 1035 953 747 (280 - 2771) (244 - 2639) (210 - 2498) (118 - 2081) (128 - 2129) (112 - 2046) (87 - 1901) (38 - 1523) 602 556 535 456 443 415 387 314 (162 - 1107) (138 - 1031) (127 - 995) (89 - 861) (83 - 839) (71 - 790) (59 - 743) (33 - 613) 198 186 171 143 135 128 112 79 (48 - 367) (43 - 345) (37 - 320) (26 - 270) (23 - 256) (21 - 243) (16 - 216) (8 - 155) 257 237 225 191 182 169 156 121 (63 - 478) (53 - 443) (48 - 423) (33 - 363) (30 - 348) (25 - 325) (21 - 302) (10 - 240) 750 671 665 587 551 501 484 390 (205 - 1386) (163 - 1256) (160 - 1246) (122 - 1114) (106 - 1052) (84 - 966) (77 - 936) (43 - 771)

131 128 113 98 91 90 78 62 (10 - 344) (9 - 338) (6 - 308) (3 - 275) (2 - 260) (2 - 257) (1 - 230) (0 - 191) 86 76 74 70 59 54 51 40 (5 - 238) (3 - 216) (2 - 213) (2 - 205) (1 - 180) (0 - 167) (0 - 160) (0 - 131) 110 102 95 84 75 70 63 48 (1 - 328) (0 - 307) (0 - 291) (0 - 262) (0 - 239) (0 - 224) (0 - 205) (0 - 161) 43 39 37 31 30 28 26 20 (1 - 125) (0 - 115) (0 - 112) (0 - 97) (0 - 93) (0 - 87) (0 - 82) (0 - 66) 79 71 68 66 55 50 47 37 (2 - 227) (1 - 208) (1 - 203) (1 - 196) (0 - 171) (0 - 158) (0 - 150) (0 - 122) 110 97 92 73 69 61 55 32 (13 - 253) (9 - 227) (7 - 217) (4 - 176) (3 - 168) (2 - 151) (1 - 135) (0 - 73) 371 353 317 230 220 201 156 75 (6 - 1044) (5 - 999) (3 - 913) (1 - 680) (1 - 651) (0 - 597) (0 - 469) (0 - 220) Houston

Los Angeles Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-31 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 296 277 258 203 209 199 181 139 (7 - 851) (5 - 809) (3 - 765) (0 - 633) (0 - 648) (0 - 622) (0 - 576) (0 - 458) 130 118 112 93 90 83 77 61 (6 - 345) (4 - 320) (3 - 308) (1 - 266) (1 - 259) (0 - 243) (0 - 228) (0 - 188) 41 38 35 29 27 25 22 15 (1 - 114) (0 - 107) (0 - 99) (0 - 83) (0 - 79) (0 - 75) (0 - 66) (0 - 48) 54 49 46 38 36 33 30 23 (1 - 148) (1 - 137) (0 - 131) (0 - 112) (0 - 107) (0 - 100) (0 - 93) (0 - 73) 164 142 141 121 112 100 96 75 (12 - 432) (7 - 389) (6 - 386) (3 - 343) (2 - 323) (1 - 296) (1 - 286) (0 - 234)

15 15 12 9 9 8 7 5 (1 - 82) (1 - 80) (0 - 71) (0 - 62) (0 - 58) (0 - 57) (0 - 50) (0 - 40) 9 7 7 7 5 4 4 3 (0 - 54) (0 - 48) (0 - 47) (0 - 45) (0 - 39) (0 - 35) (0 - 34) (0 - 27) 9 8 8 7 6 5 5 3 (0 - 71) (0 - 66) (0 - 62) (0 - 55) (0 - 50) (0 - 46) (0 - 42) (0 - 32) 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 (0 - 28) (0 - 25) (0 - 24) (0 - 20) (0 - 20) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 13) 7 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 (0 - 50) (0 - 46) (0 - 44) (0 - 42) (0 - 36) (0 - 33) (0 - 31) (0 - 25) 15 12 11 8 8 7 6 3 (1 - 66) (1 - 59) (0 - 56) (0 - 44) (0 - 42) (0 - 37) (0 - 34) (0 - 19) 35 33 28 19 18 17 13 6 (0 - 236) (0 - 225) (0 - 203) (0 - 148) (0 - 142) (0 - 129) (0 - 101) (0 - 48) 27 25 22 16 17 16 14 10 (0 - 189) (0 - 178) (0 - 166) (0 - 133) (0 - 137) (0 - 130) (0 - 119) (0 - 93) 14 12 11 8 8 7 6 5 (0 - 81) (0 - 74) (0 - 71) (0 - 59) (0 - 57) (0 - 53) (0 - 50) (0 - 40) 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 26) (0 - 24) (0 - 22) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 16) (0 - 14) (0 - 10) 5 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 (0 - 34) (0 - 31) (0 - 29) (0 - 25) (0 - 23) (0 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 15) 19 15 14 11 10 9 8 6 (1 - 102) (0 - 90) (0 - 89) (0 - 77) (0 - 72) (0 - 64) (0 - 62) (0 - 49) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20% 

### New York

Philadelphia



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-32 December 2006

## Table 3-13. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 782 770 693 621 580 577 510 415 (312 - 1365) (304 - 1348) (254 - 1230) (210 - 1115) (185 - 1050) (184 - 1045) (145 - 935) (95 - 777) 795 718 711 679 594 550 527 433 (326 - 1379) (273 - 1267) (268 - 1256) (247 - 1208) (193 - 1079) (166 - 1008) (152 - 972) (99 - 820) 1286 1202 1140 1038 946 895 827 670 (521 - 2239) (465 - 2111) (424 - 2018) (360 - 1858) (303 - 1711) (273 - 1629) (233 - 1517) (149 - 1255) 564 513 502 433 417 383 367 300 (254 - 962) (217 - 889) (209 - 872) (162 - 770) (151 - 744) (129 - 692) (119 - 666) (79 - 557) 864 782 764 743 633 578 553 450 (374 - 1490) (317 - 1369) (304 - 1342) (291 - 1311) (218 - 1140) (184 - 1052) (169 - 1012) (110 - 841) 404 362 346 278 264 239 209 106 (153 - 679) (131 - 610) (124 - 583) (91 - 467) (85 - 443) (74 - 398) (64 - 343) (35 - 150) 1504 1447 1266 863 851 796 575 206 (336 - 2792) (314 - 2692) (255 - 2364) (149 - 1613) (146 - 1590) (134 - 1486) (90 - 1058) (35 - 323) 3053 2879 2730 2237 2304 2189 2044 1654 (1184 - 5374) (1070 - 5107) (971 - 4878) (663 - 4097) (700 - 4205) (633 - 4019) (548 - 3783) (350 - 3125) 1232 1132 1100 958 925 860 818 677 (565 - 2082) (493 - 1939) (470 - 1891) (371 - 1680) (349 - 1631) (306 - 1529) (279 - 1464) (192 - 1237) 315 296 279 238 229 216 199 156 (106 - 566) (95 - 534) (86 - 506) (65 - 439) (60 - 423) (54 - 402) (46 - 371) (29 - 296) 515 476 455 396 374 350 326 264 (235 - 869) (208 - 814) (193 - 782) (154 - 695) (139 - 661) (124 - 623) (109 - 586) (73 - 484) 1327 1190 1183 1055 994 908 882 728 (560 - 2293) (465 - 2090) (460 - 2078) (377 - 1884) (338 - 1788) (285 - 1651) (269 - 1610) (182 - 1358)

196 192 166 143 131 130 111 86 (39 - 442) (37 - 435) (25 - 392) (16 - 352) (12 - 330) (12 - 328) (6 - 291) (1 - 240) 210 181 179 167 139 124 117 91 (56 - 458) (40 - 412) (39 - 408) (34 - 389) (20 - 341) (14 - 316) (12 - 304) (4 - 252) 325 297 276 243 215 200 180 139 (68 - 727) (54 - 679) (45 - 644) (31 - 588) (21 - 537) (16 - 510) (11 - 472) (2 - 388) 153 133 129 105 99 88 83 64 (43 - 320) (32 - 290) (30 - 284) (18 - 245) (15 - 236) (11 - 217) (9 - 208) (2 - 172) 226 197 190 183 147 130 123 94 (56 - 488) (41 - 441) (38 - 431) (34 - 420) (18 - 359) (12 - 328) (9 - 315) (2 - 259) 99 87 82 64 61 55 48 26 (13 - 223) (9 - 199) (8 - 191) (4 - 153) (3 - 145) (2 - 131) (1 - 114) (0 - 54) 315 302 261 175 173 161 117 46 (9 - 869) (8 - 837) (5 - 735) (1 - 502) (1 - 496) (1 - 463) (0 - 333) (0 - 112) Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-33 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 753 695 646 494 513 480 439 339 (140 - 1727) (113 - 1630) (91 - 1547) (35 - 1277) (40 - 1314) (31 - 1252) (20 - 1174) (4 - 962) 335 297 284 234 223 202 189 147 (92 - 696) (71 - 638) (64 - 619) (39 - 539) (34 - 521) (25 - 485) (20 - 462) (7 - 386) 72 67 62 51 49 46 41 31 (8 - 179) (6 - 168) (5 - 159) (2 - 137) (2 - 132) (1 - 125) (1 - 115) (0 - 91) 141 126 118 98 91 83 75 57 (40 - 292) (32 - 269) (28 - 257) (18 - 224) (15 - 211) (11 - 198) (9 - 185) (2 - 150) 345 296 293 250 231 205 197 154 (82 - 752) (57 - 674) (55 - 670) (36 - 599) (28 - 564) (19 - 517) (16 - 503) (4 - 420)

30 29 23 18 16 16 12 8 (4 - 118) (4 - 116) (2 - 101) (1 - 88) (1 - 81) (1 - 80) (0 - 69) (0 - 55) 39 30 29 26 19 15 14 9 (10 - 130) (6 - 111) (6 - 110) (4 - 103) (2 - 85) (1 - 77) (1 - 73) (0 - 57) 51 44 38 31 26 23 20 13 (7 - 195) (5 - 179) (3 - 166) (1 - 148) (1 - 132) (0 - 123) (0 - 112) (0 - 88) 27 22 20 15 13 11 10 7 (5 - 91) (3 - 79) (3 - 77) (1 - 63) (1 - 60) (0 - 54) (0 - 51) (0 - 40) 37 30 28 26 18 15 14 9 (5 - 134) (3 - 117) (2 - 114) (2 - 110) (0 - 89) (0 - 80) (0 - 76) (0 - 59) 14 11 10 7 7 6 5 3 (1 - 60) (1 - 52) (1 - 50) (0 - 39) (0 - 37) (0 - 33) (0 - 29) (0 - 15) 31 29 24 15 15 14 10 4 (0 - 199) (0 - 191) (0 - 166) (0 - 112) (0 - 110) (0 - 103) (0 - 75) (0 - 28) 112 98 86 56 59 53 46 32 (13 - 455) (9 - 421) (6 - 392) (1 - 306) (1 - 317) (1 - 298) (0 - 275) (0 - 216) 61 50 46 33 31 26 23 16 (13 - 201) (8 - 177) (7 - 170) (3 - 141) (2 - 134) (1 - 123) (1 - 115) (0 - 92) 9 8 7 5 5 5 4 3 (1 - 44) (0 - 41) (0 - 38) (0 - 32) (0 - 31) (0 - 29) (0 - 26) (0 - 20) 26 22 19 14 13 11 9 6 (6 - 84) (4 - 75) (3 - 71) (1 - 59) (1 - 55) (1 - 50) (0 - 46) (0 - 36) 58 45 44 34 30 24 23 15 (11 - 208) (6 - 179) (6 - 177) (3 - 152) (2 - 141) (1 - 126) (1 - 122) (0 - 97) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### St. Louis

Washington, DC Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-34 December 2006

## Table 3-14. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%)

0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) Los Angeles Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta

Boston Cleveland

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-35 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-36 December 2006

## Table 3-15. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) 1.1% 1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.5% (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1%) 1.3% 1.2% 1.2% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% (0.6% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.3%) 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.2%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.8% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% (0.6% - 2.4%) (0.6% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 2.2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.4%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% (0.5% - 2%) (0.5% - 1.9%) (0.5% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.1%) 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.2%)

0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) Los Angeles Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta

Boston Cleveland

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-37 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-38 December 2006

## Table 3-16. Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 62 61 53 45 42 41 35 26 (43 - 96) (42 - 94) (35 - 83) (29 - 72) (26 - 67) (26 - 66) (21 - 56) (14 - 42) 52 45 44 41 34 31 29 21 (33 - 82) (28 - 72) (27 - 71) (25 - 67) (19 - 55) (17 - 50) (15 - 46) (9 - 34) 60 56 52 45 40 37 33 23 (34 - 98) (31 - 90) (28 - 83) (23 - 72) (19 - 64) (17 - 59) (13 - 53) (6 - 39) 23 20 19 16 15 14 13 9 (14 - 37) (12 - 33) (11 - 32) (8 - 26) (8 - 24) (7 - 22) (6 - 20) (4 - 15) 46 40 39 37 30 27 25 19 (28 - 74) (24 - 66) (23 - 63) (21 - 60) (16 - 49) (14 - 44) (13 - 41) (8 - 30) 69 61 58 48 45 41 38 27 (49 - 105) (42 - 95) (40 - 91) (31 - 76) (29 - 72) (26 - 65) (23 - 60) (15 - 43) 121 113 100 74 71 66 54 27 (87 - 190) (81 - 178) (71 - 156) (52 - 114) (49 - 109) (45 - 101) (36 - 82) (16 - 42) 161 149 137 102 106 100 89 66 (97 - 261) (88 - 242) (79 - 222) (52 - 164) (55 - 172) (50 - 161) (42 - 144) (24 - 108) 63 57 54 44 42 39 35 27 (41 - 101) (36 - 92) (34 - 87) (26 - 72) (25 - 69) (22 - 63) (20 - 57) (13 - 42) 15 13 12 9 9 8 7 5 (11 - 23) (10 - 21) (9 - 19) (7 - 15) (6 - 13) (6 - 12) (5 - 11) (3 - 7) 27 24 23 19 18 16 15 11 (17 - 43) (15 - 40) (14 - 37) (11 - 31) (10 - 29) (9 - 26) (8 - 23) (5 - 18) 89 76 75 63 58 50 48 36 (60 - 138) (49 - 120) (48 - 119) (39 - 102) (35 - 94) (29 - 82) (27 - 78) (18 - 57)

20 20 16 13 12 11 9 6 (8 - 34) (8 - 33) (5 - 28) (3 - 24) (2 - 22) (2 - 21) (1 - 18) (0 - 14) 15 13 12 11 9 7 7 5 (4 - 27) (3 - 24) (2 - 23) (2 - 22) (1 - 18) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 11) 15 14 12 10 9 8 7 5 (1 - 31) (0 - 29) (0 - 27) (0 - 24) (0 - 21) (0 - 20) (0 - 18) (0 - 13) 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 (1 - 12) (0 - 11) (0 - 10) (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 5) 12 11 10 9 7 6 6 4 (2 - 24) (1 - 21) (1 - 20) (1 - 19) (0 - 16) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) (0 - 10) 23 19 18 14 13 11 10 7 (10 - 37) (7 - 33) (6 - 31) (3 - 25) (3 - 24) (2 - 21) (1 - 19) (0 - 14) 34 31 26 18 17 16 13 6 (5 - 62) (4 - 58) (3 - 50) (1 - 37) (1 - 36) (0 - 33) (0 - 27) (0 - 14) Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-39 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Location Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### 43 39 35 24 25 23 20 14 (6 - 84) (4 - 78) (3 - 72) (0 - 53) (0 - 56) (0 - 52) (0 - 47) (0 - 35) 19 16 15 11 11 10 9 6 (5 - 33) (3 - 30) (3 - 28) (1 - 23) (1 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 18) (0 - 14) 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 (1 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) 7 7 6 5 4 4 3 2 (1 - 14) (1 - 13) (0 - 12) (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 6) 28 22 22 17 16 13 12 8 (10 - 48) (6 - 40) (6 - 40) (3 - 33) (2 - 30) (1 - 26) (1 - 25) (0 - 19)

4 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 (1 - 12) (1 - 11) (0 - 9) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 (0 - 9) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 1) 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) 5 4 4 2 2 2 1 1 (1 - 13) (1 - 11) (0 - 10) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 4) 5 5 4 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 19) (0 - 18) (0 - 15) (0 - 11) (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 4) 7 6 5 3 3 3 2 1 (0 - 25) (0 - 23) (0 - 20) (0 - 14) (0 - 15) (0 - 14) (0 - 12) (0 - 9) 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 9) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 1) 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) 6 4 4 3 2 2 2 1 (1 - 16) (0 - 13) (0 - 12) (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 5) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

St. Louis

Washington, DC Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-40 December 2006

## Table 3-17. Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 94 92 79 69 63 63 53 40 (71 - 133) (69 - 131) (58 - 117) (49 - 105) (44 - 98) (44 - 97) (35 - 84) (25 - 66) 123 106 105 98 81 72 68 50 (95 - 167) (80 - 150) (79 - 148) (73 - 141) (58 - 121) (50 - 110) (46 - 104) (31 - 80) 186 172 160 141 124 116 104 77 (140 - 268) (127 - 252) (116 - 238) (99 - 216) (85 - 195) (78 - 183) (68 - 167) (47 - 127) 73 64 63 51 49 43 41 31 (57 - 99) (49 - 90) (48 - 88) (37 - 77) (35 - 74) (30 - 67) (28 - 64) (20 - 50) 121 106 103 99 80 71 67 50 (92 - 169) (79 - 154) (76 - 151) (73 - 147) (56 - 124) (49 - 113) (45 - 107) (31 - 82) 70 62 60 48 46 42 38 28 (50 - 106) (43 - 96) (41 - 92) (31 - 76) (30 - 73) (27 - 67) (24 - 61) (16 - 44) 120 115 99 70 70 66 52 28 (87 - 187) (83 - 180) (71 - 155) (49 - 109) (49 - 108) (46 - 102) (36 - 80) (18 - 43) 382 355 328 248 258 240 218 165 (283 - 555) (259 - 524) (236 - 494) (166 - 392) (175 - 406) (160 - 382) (141 - 350) (99 - 270) 149 134 129 106 101 92 85 65 (117 - 201) (103 - 185) (99 - 179) (78 - 156) (74 - 150) (65 - 139) (60 - 131) (42 - 104) 27 25 23 18 17 16 14 10 (21 - 40) (19 - 37) (18 - 35) (14 - 29) (13 - 27) (12 - 25) (10 - 22) (7 - 16) 72 65 61 52 48 44 40 30 (56 - 96) (50 - 89) (47 - 86) (38 - 75) (35 - 71) (31 - 66) (28 - 62) (19 - 48) 168 145 143 122 113 100 96 72 (129 - 231) (109 - 207) (108 - 205) (89 - 182) (80 - 171) (69 - 155) (65 - 150) (46 - 117)

36 35 29 23 21 20 16 11 (21 - 54) (20 - 52) (15 - 44) (11 - 38) (8 - 34) (8 - 34) (5 - 28) (1 - 21) 52 42 42 38 29 24 22 14 (33 - 74) (25 - 62) (24 - 61) (21 - 57) (14 - 45) (11 - 39) (9 - 37) (3 - 26) 71 63 57 47 40 36 31 20 (41 - 106) (35 - 96) (29 - 88) (22 - 76) (15 - 66) (12 - 62) (9 - 55) (2 - 40) 30 25 24 18 17 14 13 9 (19 - 43) (15 - 37) (15 - 36) (10 - 28) (9 - 27) (6 - 23) (5 - 22) (2 - 16) 47 40 38 36 27 22 21 14 (29 - 69) (23 - 60) (21 - 58) (20 - 55) (12 - 43) (9 - 38) (7 - 35) (1 - 26) 24 20 19 14 13 12 10 7 (11 - 38) (8 - 34) (7 - 32) (3 - 25) (3 - 24) (2 - 22) (1 - 20) (0 - 14) 35 33 27 18 18 17 13 7 (7 - 62) (6 - 59) (4 - 51) (1 - 35) (1 - 35) (1 - 33) (0 - 26) (0 - 14) Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-41 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Location Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### 142 128 114 76 81 73 64 43 (79 - 216) (68 - 197) (57 - 181) (26 - 132) (29 - 138) (23 - 127) (16 - 115) (3 - 86) 63 54 51 39 36 31 28 19 (41 - 89) (34 - 78) (31 - 75) (21 - 59) (19 - 56) (15 - 50) (13 - 46) (5 - 34) 10 8 8 6 5 5 4 3 (5 - 15) (4 - 13) (3 - 12) (2 - 10) (1 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (0 - 5) 30 26 24 19 17 15 13 9 (20 - 43) (16 - 38) (15 - 35) (11 - 29) (9 - 26) (7 - 24) (6 - 22) (2 - 16) 68 55 55 44 39 32 30 20 (42 - 98) (32 - 82) (31 - 82) (22 - 68) (18 - 62) (13 - 54) (12 - 51) (4 - 38)

10 10 7 5 4 4 3 2 (3 - 21) (3 - 20) (2 - 16) (1 - 13) (1 - 11) (1 - 11) (0 - 9) (0 - 6) 18 13 13 11 7 5 5 2 (8 - 33) (5 - 26) (5 - 25) (4 - 23) (2 - 16) (1 - 14) (1 - 12) (0 - 8) 19 16 13 10 8 7 5 3 (6 - 40) (4 - 35) (3 - 31) (1 - 26) (1 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 17) (0 - 12) 9 7 7 4 4 3 3 1 (4 - 18) (2 - 14) (2 - 14) (1 - 10) (1 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 5) 13 10 9 9 5 4 4 2 (4 - 27) (2 - 22) (2 - 21) (2 - 20) (0 - 14) (0 - 12) (0 - 11) (0 - 8) 6 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 (1 - 14) (1 - 11) (1 - 11) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 4) 6 6 4 3 3 2 2 1 (0 - 20) (0 - 19) (0 - 16) (0 - 10) (0 - 10) (0 - 10) (0 - 8) (0 - 4) 37 31 26 14 16 13 11 6 (11 - 81) (8 - 72) (5 - 64) (1 - 43) (1 - 45) (1 - 41) (0 - 36) (0 - 25) 21 16 15 10 9 7 6 3 (9 - 39) (6 - 32) (5 - 30) (2 - 22) (2 - 20) (1 - 17) (1 - 16) (0 - 11) 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) 10 8 7 5 4 3 3 1 (4 - 19) (3 - 15) (2 - 14) (1 - 11) (1 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 5) 21 15 15 10 9 7 6 3 (8 - 41) (5 - 32) (5 - 31) (2 - 24) (1 - 21) (1 - 18) (1 - 17) (0 - 12) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-42 December 2006

## Table 3-18. Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 6.6% 6.4% 5.6% 4.8% 4.4% 4.4% 3.7% 2.8% (4.6% - 10.1%) (4.4% - 9.9%) (3.7% - 8.8%) (3.1% - 7.7%) (2.8% - 7.1%) (2.7% - 7%) (2.2% - 5.9%) (1.5% - 4.5%) 4.7% 4.1% 4% 3.8% 3.1% 2.8% 2.6% 1.9% (3% - 7.5%) (2.5% - 6.6%) (2.5% - 6.5%) (2.3% - 6.1%) (1.7% - 5%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (0.9% - 3.1%) 3.1% 2.9% 2.6% 2.3% 2% 1.9% 1.7% 1.2% (1.7% - 5%) (1.6% - 4.6%) (1.4% - 4.3%) (1.2% - 3.7%) (1% - 3.3%) (0.8% - 3%) (0.7% - 2.7%) (0.3% - 2%) 3.8% 3.4% 3.3% 2.7% 2.5% 2.3% 2.1% 1.6% (2.3% - 6.2%) (2% - 5.6%) (1.9% - 5.3%) (1.4% - 4.3%) (1.3% - 4.1%) (1.2% - 3.7%) (1% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 2.6%) 4.1% 3.6% 3.5% 3.3% 2.7% 2.5% 2.3% 1.7% (2.5% - 6.7%) (2.1% - 5.9%) (2% - 5.7%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (1.5% - 4.4%) (1.3% - 4%) (1.1% - 3.7%) (0.7% - 2.7%) 6.3% 5.6% 5.3% 4.4% 4.2% 3.8% 3.4% 2.5% (4.5% - 9.6%) (3.9% - 8.7%) (3.6% - 8.3%) (2.9% - 6.9%) (2.7% - 6.6%) (2.4% - 6%) (2.1% - 5.5%) (1.4% - 4%) 3.3% 3.1% 2.7% 2% 1.9% 1.8% 1.5% 0.7% (2.4% - 5.2%) (2.2% - 4.9%) (1.9% - 4.3%) (1.4% - 3.1%) (1.3% - 3%) (1.2% - 2.8%) (1% - 2.2%) (0.4% - 1.1%) 3.9% 3.6% 3.3% 2.5% 2.6% 2.4% 2.2% 1.6% (2.3% - 6.3%) (2.1% - 5.8%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (1.2% - 4%) (1.3% - 4.1%) (1.2% - 3.9%) (1% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 2.6%) 5.3% 4.8% 4.5% 3.7% 3.6% 3.3% 3% 2.2% (3.5% - 8.5%) (3% - 7.7%) (2.8% - 7.4%) (2.2% - 6.1%) (2.1% - 5.8%) (1.9% - 5.3%) (1.7% - 4.8%) (1.1% - 3.6%) 3.6% 3.3% 2.9% 2.3% 2.1% 2% 1.7% 1.1% (2.7% - 5.6%) (2.4% - 5.2%) (2.2% - 4.6%) (1.7% - 3.5%) (1.6% - 3.3%) (1.5% - 3%) (1.3% - 2.6%) (0.8% - 1.6%) 4.6% 4.2% 3.9% 3.2% 3.1% 2.8% 2.5% 1.9% (2.9% - 7.5%) (2.6% - 6.8%) (2.4% - 6.4%) (1.9% - 5.3%) (1.7% - 5%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.3% - 4%) (0.9% - 3.1%) 6% 5.1% 5% 4.2% 3.9% 3.4% 3.2% 2.4% (4% - 9.3%) (3.3% - 8.1%) (3.3% - 8%) (2.6% - 6.9%) (2.4% - 6.3%) (2% - 5.5%) (1.8% - 5.2%) (1.2% - 3.9%)

2.2% 2.1% 1.7% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 0.9% 0.7% (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.8% - 3.5%) (0.5% - 3%) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.5%) 1.4% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% (0.4% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0.2% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1%) 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% (0.1% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) 2.1% 1.8% 1.7% 1.3% 1.2% 1% 0.9% 0.6% (0.9% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.5% - 2.8%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.3%) 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.4%) Percent of All Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta

Boston Cleveland

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-43 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of All Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.2% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) 1.6% 1.4% 1.3% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% (0.4% - 2.8%) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.2%) 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%) 1.3% 1.1% 1% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% (0.2% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 2%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1%) 1.9% 1.5% 1.5% 1.2% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% (0.7% - 3.2%) (0.4% - 2.7%) (0.4% - 2.7%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.3%)

0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-44 December 2006

## Table 3-19. Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 9.9% 9.7% 8.4% 7.3% 6.7% 6.7% 5.6% 4.3% (7.5% - 14.1%) (7.3% - 13.9%) (6.2% - 12.5%) (5.2% - 11.1%) (4.7% - 10.4%) (4.6% - 10.3%) (3.7% - 8.9%) (2.6% - 7%) 11.2% 9.7% 9.6% 9% 7.4% 6.6% 6.2% 4.6% (8.7% - 15.3%) (7.3% - 13.7%) (7.2% - 13.5%) (6.7% - 12.8%) (5.3% - 11%) (4.6% - 10%) (4.2% - 9.5%) (2.9% - 7.3%) 9.6% 8.8% 8.2% 7.2% 6.4% 5.9% 5.3% 4% (7.2% - 13.7%) (6.5% - 12.9%) (6% - 12.2%) (5.1% - 11.1%) (4.4% - 10%) (4% - 9.4%) (3.5% - 8.6%) (2.4% - 6.5%) 12.3% 10.8% 10.5% 8.7% 8.2% 7.3% 6.9% 5.2% (9.6% - 16.7%) (8.3% - 15.2%) (8% - 14.9%) (6.3% - 12.9%) (5.9% - 12.4%) (5.1% - 11.3%) (4.7% - 10.8%) (3.3% - 8.4%) 10.9% 9.6% 9.3% 9% 7.2% 6.4% 6% 4.5% (8.3% - 15.2%) (7.1% - 13.9%) (6.9% - 13.6%) (6.6% - 13.2%) (5.1% - 11.2%) (4.4% - 10.2%) (4% - 9.6%) (2.8% - 7.4%) 6.5% 5.7% 5.5% 4.4% 4.2% 3.9% 3.5% 2.6% (4.6% - 9.7%) (4% - 8.8%) (3.8% - 8.5%) (2.9% - 7%) (2.7% - 6.7%) (2.4% - 6.2%) (2.2% - 5.6%) (1.4% - 4.1%) 3.3% 3.1% 2.7% 1.9% 1.9% 1.8% 1.4% 0.8% (2.4% - 5.1%) (2.3% - 4.9%) (1.9% - 4.2%) (1.3% - 3%) (1.3% - 2.9%) (1.3% - 2.8%) (1% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 1.2%) 9.2% 8.6% 7.9% 6% 6.2% 5.8% 5.3% 4% (6.8% - 13.4%) (6.2% - 12.6%) (5.7% - 11.9%) (4% - 9.4%) (4.2% - 9.8%) (3.8% - 9.2%) (3.4% - 8.4%) (2.4% - 6.5%) 12.6% 11.3% 10.9% 9% 8.5% 7.7% 7.2% 5.5% (9.9% - 16.9%) (8.7% - 15.6%) (8.3% - 15.1%) (6.6% - 13.1%) (6.2% - 12.6%) (5.5% - 11.7%) (5% - 11.1%) (3.6% - 8.8%) 6.5% 6% 5.5% 4.5% 4.2% 3.9% 3.4% 2.5% (5.1% - 9.7%) (4.7% - 9.1%) (4.3% - 8.4%) (3.4% - 7%) (3.2% - 6.6%) (2.9% - 6.1%) (2.5% - 5.4%) (1.8% - 3.8%) 12.3% 11.2% 10.5% 8.9% 8.2% 7.5% 6.9% 5.1% (9.7% - 16.5%) (8.6% - 15.4%) (8.1% - 14.7%) (6.6% - 12.9%) (6% - 12.2%) (5.4% - 11.4%) (4.8% - 10.6%) (3.3% - 8.3%) 11.3% 9.7% 9.7% 8.2% 7.6% 6.7% 6.4% 4.9% (8.7% - 15.6%) (7.3% - 13.9%) (7.2% - 13.8%) (6% - 12.3%) (5.4% - 11.5%) (4.6% - 10.4%) (4.4% - 10.1%) (3.1% - 7.9%)

3.8% 3.7% 3% 2.5% 2.2% 2.2% 1.7% 1.2% (2.2% - 5.7%) (2.2% - 5.5%) (1.6% - 4.7%) (1.1% - 4%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.5% - 3%) (0.1% - 2.2%) 4.7% 3.9% 3.8% 3.5% 2.6% 2.2% 2% 1.3% (3% - 6.8%) (2.3% - 5.7%) (2.2% - 5.6%) (2% - 5.2%) (1.3% - 4.1%) (1% - 3.6%) (0.8% - 3.3%) (0.3% - 2.4%) 3.6% 3.2% 2.9% 2.4% 2% 1.8% 1.6% 1% (2.1% - 5.4%) (1.8% - 4.9%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.8% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.4% - 2.8%) (0.1% - 2.1%) 5.1% 4.3% 4.1% 3.1% 2.9% 2.4% 2.2% 1.5% (3.3% - 7.2%) (2.6% - 6.2%) (2.5% - 6%) (1.7% - 4.8%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.9% - 3.7%) (0.3% - 2.7%) 4.3% 3.6% 3.4% 3.2% 2.4% 2% 1.8% 1.2% (2.6% - 6.3%) (2% - 5.4%) (1.9% - 5.2%) (1.8% - 5%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.8% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.1% - 2.4%) 2.2% 1.9% 1.7% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 0.9% 0.6% (1% - 3.5%) (0.7% - 3.1%) (0.6% - 2.9%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.3%) 0.9% 0.9% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.4%) Percent of All Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta

Boston Cleveland

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-45 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of All Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 3.4% 3.1% 2.8% 1.8% 2% 1.8% 1.5% 1% (1.9% - 5.2%) (1.6% - 4.8%) (1.4% - 4.4%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.7% - 3.3%) (0.6% - 3.1%) (0.4% - 2.8%) (0.1% - 2.1%) 5.4% 4.6% 4.3% 3.3% 3% 2.6% 2.4% 1.6% (3.5% - 7.5%) (2.8% - 6.6%) (2.6% - 6.3%) (1.8% - 5%) (1.6% - 4.7%) (1.3% - 4.2%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.4% - 2.9%) 2.3% 2% 1.8% 1.4% 1.3% 1.1% 1% 0.6% (1.1% - 3.5%) (0.9% - 3.2%) (0.7% - 2.9%) (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.2%) 5.2% 4.5% 4.2% 3.3% 2.9% 2.6% 2.3% 1.5% (3.4% - 7.4%) (2.8% - 6.5%) (2.5% - 6.1%) (1.8% - 5%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.2% - 4.1%) (1% - 3.7%) (0.4% - 2.7%) 4.6% 3.7% 3.7% 2.9% 2.6% 2.2% 2.1% 1.4% (2.9% - 6.6%) (2.1% - 5.6%) (2.1% - 5.5%) (1.5% - 4.6%) (1.2% - 4.2%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.8% - 3.4%) (0.3% - 2.5%)

1.1% 1% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0.4% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) 1.6% 1.2% 1.1% 1% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% (0.7% - 3%) (0.5% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.7%) 1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.3% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.6%) 1.6% 1.2% 1.1% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% (0.6% - 3%) (0.4% - 2.4%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.8%) 1.2% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0.4% - 2.4%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.9%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.7%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.3% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.6%) 1.8% 1.4% 1.3% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.8% - 3.3%) (0.5% - 2.7%) (0.4% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.9%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) 1.7% 1.4% 1.2% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.7% - 3.2%) (0.5% - 2.7%) (0.4% - 2.4%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.8%) 1.4% 1% 1% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% (0.6% - 2.8%) (0.3% - 2.1%) (0.3% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-46 December 2006

## Figure 3-7. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Nu mbers (Across All Locations) of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Among All School Age Children when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definiti ons of Response* Figure 3-7a. Based on 2004 Data

-300% 2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 -250% -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

A lternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## Figure 3-7b. Based on 2002 Data

-300% -250% -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characteri zed by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares th e current standard to a recent year of air quality.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-47

## Figure 3-8. Percent Reductions of Occurrences of Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 15% Among All School Age Children when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separately for Each Location* Figure 3-8a. Based on 2004 Data

-150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

A lternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 131 (10 - 344); 0.2% (0% - 0.4%) Boston: 86 (5 - 238); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Chicago: 110 (1 - 328); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Cleveland: 43 (1 - 125); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Detroit: 79 (2 - 227); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Houston: 110 (13 - 253); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 371 (6 - 1044); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) New York: 296 (7 - 851); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Philadelphia: 130 (6 - 345); 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) Sacramento: 41 (1 - 114); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) St. Louis: 54 (1 - 148); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Washington, DC: 164 (12 - 432); 0.1% (0% - 0.4%)


## Figure 3-8b. Based on 2002 Data

-150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 196 (39 - 442); 0.2% (0% - 0.5%) Boston: 210 (56 - 458); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) Chicago: 325 (68 - 727); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Cleveland: 153 (43 - 320); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.7%) Detroit: 226 (56 - 488); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) Houston: 99 (13 - 223); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 315 (9 - 869); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) New York: 753 (140 - 1727); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Philadelphia: 335 (92 - 696); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.8%) Sacramento: 72 (8 - 179); 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) St. Louis: 141 (40 - 292); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) Washington, DC: 345 (82 - 752); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) 

## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characteri zed by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The percent reductions from the current standard (0.084/4) to a recent year of air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in magnitude (-286% in 2004 and –290% in 2002). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown fo r each location in the box below each figure.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-48

## Figure 3-9. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numb ers (Across All Locations) of All School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Occurren ce of Lung Function Response when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just M eeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definiti ons of Response* Figure 3-9a. Based on 2004 Data

-400% -350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## Figure 3-9b. Based on 2002 Data

-400% -350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characteri zed by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares th e current standard to a recent year of air quality.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-49

## Figure 3-10. Percent Reductions in Numbers of All School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 15% when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alte rnative Standard, Separately for Each Location* Figure 3-10a. Based on 2004 Data

-200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 20 (8 - 34); 2.2% (0.9% - 3.6%) Boston: 15 (4 - 27); 1.4% (0.4% - 2.5%) Chicago: 15 (1 - 31); 0.8% (0% - 1.6%) Cleveland: 6 (1 - 12); 1% (0.1% - 2%) Detroit: 12 (2 - 24); 1.1% (0.2% - 2.1%) Houston: 23 (10 - 37); 2.1% (0.9% - 3.4%) Los Angeles: 34 (5 - 62); 0.9% (0.1% - 1.7%) New York: 43 (6 - 84); 1% (0.2% - 2%) Philadelphia: 19 (5 - 33); 1.6% (0.4% - 2.8%) Sacramento: 4 (1 - 7); 1% (0.2% - 1.8%) St. Louis: 7 (1 - 14); 1.3% (0.2% - 2.4%) Washington, DC: 28 (10 - 48); 1.9% (0.7% - 3.2%) 

## Figure 3-10b. Based on 2002 Data

-200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 36 (21 - 54); 3.8% (2.2% - 5.7%) Boston: 52 (33 - 74); 4.7% (3% - 6.8%) Chicago: 71 (41 - 106); 3.6% (2.1% - 5.4%) Cleveland: 30 (19 - 43); 5.1% (3.3% - 7.2%) Detroit: 47 (29 - 69); 4.3% (2.6% - 6.3%) Houston: 24 (11 - 38); 2.2% (1% - 3.5%) Los Angeles: 35 (7 - 62); 0.9% (0.2% - 1.7%) New York: 142 (79 - 216); 3.4% (1.9% - 5.2%) Philadelphia: 63 (41 - 89); 5.4% (3.5% - 7.5%) Sacramento: 10 (5 - 15); 2.3% (1.1% - 3.5%) St. Louis: 30 (20 - 43); 5.2% (3.4% - 7.4%) Washington, DC: 68 (42 - 98); 4.6% (2.9% - 6.6%) 

## ** The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The percent reductions from the current standard (0.084/4) to a recent year of air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in magnitude (-553% in 2004 and –528% in 2002). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown fo r each location in the box below each figure.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-50

# The estimated reductions in occurr ence of lung function response when O 3 

# concentrations just meet alte rnative daily maximum 8-hour standards, relative to when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard are greater the more st ringent the alternative standard. For example, at the 0.084 ppm 3 rd 

# daily maximum standard (the standard that is closest to the current standard of 0.084 ppm 4 th 

# daily maximum), the aggregate number of occurrences of decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% (across all locations) among all school age children is 8 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard, based on 2004 air quality. At the most st ringent standard cons idered (0.064 ppm 4 th 

# daily maximum), the aggregate number of such occurr ences is estimated to be 61 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard. The pattern is the same when exposure estimates are based on 2002 ai r quality – the corre sponding percents based on 2002 air quality are 10 percent and 60 percent.
Similarly, the estimated percent redu ctions in occurrence of lung function response from when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the curr ent standard to when they just meet an alternative standard are greater the larger the decrement being measured. Using 2004 air quality data, at the most stringent st andard considered, the aggregate number of decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20% among all school age children is estimated to be 71 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the cu rrent standard (compared with 61 percent less for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%, as noted above, and 58 percent less for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%). The pattern is similar when 2002 air quality data are used.
The same patterns can be seen when the measure of interest is the number of children experiencing at leas t one occurrence of lung function response. The estimated reductions in aggregate number of children w ith at least one occu rrence of lung function response when O 3 

# concentrations just meet alternative daily maximum 8-hour standards, relative to when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the curre nt standard, are greater the more stringent the alternative standard. For example, at the 0.084 ppm 3 rd 

# daily maximum standard, the aggregate number of all school age children with at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% is 12 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard, based on 2004 air quality. At the mo st stringent standard considered, this aggregate number is estimated to be 71 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard. The pattern is the same when exposure estimates are based on 2002 air quality – the corresponding percents based on 2002 air quality are 13 percent and 71 percent.
Similarly, the estimated percent reductions in aggregate number of children with at least one lung function response from when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard to when they just meet an alte rnative standard are greater the larger the decrement being measured. Using 2004 air quali ty data, at the most stringent standard considered, the aggregate number of all school age children experiencing at least one decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 20% is estimated to be 81 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard (compared with about 71 percent less for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% and 62 percent less for decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%). The pattern is similar when 2002 air quality data are used.
The same patterns can be seen for active sc hool age children. For example, at the 0.084 ppm 3 rd 

# daily maximum standard (the standa rd that is closest to the current

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-51

# standard of 0.084 ppm 4 th 

# daily maximum), the aggregate number of occurrences of decrements in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15% among active school age children is 8 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current stan dard, based on 2004 air quality. At the most stringent standard considered, the aggregate number of such occurrences is estimated to be 61 percent less than when O 3 

# concentrations just meet the current standard. The pattern is the same when exposure estim ates are based on 2002 air quality – the corresponding percents base d on 2002 air quality are 9 percent and 60 percent.

3.2.2.2 Results for five locations for the current standard and two alternative standards, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data



# In addition to the original alternativ e seven 8-hour daily maximum standards, EPA staff identified a smaller set of three 8- hour daily maximum standards, including the current standard (0.084 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum) and two a lternative standards (0.074 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum and 0.064 ppm. 4 th 

# daily maximum) from the original set of seven. Analyses were carried out for a subset of five locations due to time constraints for completing the assessment – Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York – based on adjusting 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data.

3.2.2.2.1 Results for all school age children



# In this part of the analysis, lung functi on response of interest for all school age children is defined as a decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%. The estimated numbers and percentages of occurrences of lung function response associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and each of the two alternative daily maximum 8-hour standards among all school age childre n (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season are given in Tables 3-20 and 3-21, respectively. The numbers and per centages of these children estimated to experience at least one lung function re sponse associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and each of the two alte rnative standards are given in Tables 3-22 and 3-23, respectivel y. Results based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations are shown in each table.
The percent reductions in numbers of school age children experi encing at least one occurrence of lung function response when O 3 

# concentrations are reduced from those just meeting the current standard to those that w ould just meet each alternative standard, as well as a recent year of air quality, are summ arized in Figures 3-11a, b, and c, using 2004, 2003, and 2002 air quality data, respectively.

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-52

### Table 3-20. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 290 196 131 86 (88 - 593) (39 - 442) (12 - 330) (1 - 240) 511 325 215 139 (171 - 1015) (68 - 727) (21 - 537) (2 - 388) 209 99 61 26 (62 - 419) (13 - 223) (3 - 145) (0 - 54) 1265 315 173 46 (355 - 2642) (9 - 869) (1 - 496) (0 - 112) 1522 753 513 339 (585 - 2885) (140 - 1727) (40 - 1314) (4 - 962)

186 136 92 61 (32 - 431) (14 - 339) (3 - 253) (0 - 182) 265 214 143 93 (36 - 640) (20 - 542) (4 - 400) (0 - 284) 291 98 56 16 (96 - 567) (8 - 234) (1 - 137) (0 - 25) 1700 311 147 27 (610 - 3277) (13 - 833) (2 - 401) (0 - 36) 834 413 284 185 (237 - 1769) (42 - 1061) (8 - 806) (0 - 571)

191 131 91 62 (29 - 456) (10 - 344) (2 - 260) (0 - 191) 167 110 75 48 (6 - 460) (1 - 328) (0 - 239) (0 - 161) 230 110 69 32 (63 - 465) (13 - 253) (3 - 168) (0 - 73) 1470 371 220 75 (393 - 3073) (6 - 1044) (1 - 651) (0 - 220) 563 296 209 139 (77 - 1383) (7 - 851) (0 - 648) (0 - 458) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Atlanta
Chicago

Atlanta New York Houston

Los Angeles

Houston

Houston Based on 2004 Air Quality Data Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data

Based on 2003 Air Quality Data



### New York Location



### Chicago

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta
Chicago

Los Angeles



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-53 December 2006

### Table 3-21. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum8-Hour Standards Among All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five LocationSpecific O 3 

### Seasons Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4

0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.2% 0.1% 0% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.3% 0.1% 0% 0% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)

0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.2% 0.1% 0% 0% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.4% 0.1% 0% 0% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)

0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) 0.3% 0.1% 0% 0% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3- year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Houston

Los Angeles Location

Atlanta
Chicago Based on 2002 Air Quality Data

Los Angeles

New York New York

Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data Atlanta

Houston Los Angeles

New York Chicago

Houston

Chicago Atlanta



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-54 December 2006

### Table 3-22. Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 59 36 21 11 (40 - 81) (21 - 54) (8 - 34) (1 - 21) 123 71 40 20 (83 - 169) (41 - 106) (15 - 66) (2 - 40) 58 24 13 7 (38 - 80) (11 - 38) (3 - 24) (0 - 14) 220 35 18 7 (150 - 297) (7 - 62) (1 - 35) (0 - 14) 346 142 81 43 (244 - 462) (79 - 216) (29 - 138) (3 - 86)

34 23 13 7 (20 - 51) (10 - 37) (3 - 24) (0 - 15) 52 39 22 12 (25 - 81) (15 - 65) (3 - 42) (0 - 26) 72 19 11 5 (49 - 98) (6 - 32) (1 - 21) (0 - 12) 309 37 18 6 (221 - 406) (9 - 65) (2 - 35) (0 - 14) 223 84 46 24 (145 - 312) (34 - 140) (7 - 88) (0 - 54)

34 20 12 6 (19 - 51) (8 - 34) (2 - 22) (0 - 14) 27 15 9 5 (6 - 49) (1 - 31) (0 - 21) (0 - 13) 57 23 13 7 (37 - 79) (10 - 37) (3 - 24) (0 - 14) 220 34 17 6 (149 - 298) (5 - 62) (1 - 36) (0 - 14) 112 43 25 14 (55 - 176) (6 - 84) (0 - 56) (0 - 35) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### New York

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data 

### Atlanta

Houston

Los Angeles

Los Angeles Chicago

Atlanta

New York New York

Chicago

Houston Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data



### Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta
Chicago



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-55 December 2006

### Table 3-23. Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 6.3% 3.8% 2.2% 1.2% (4.2% - 8.6%) (2.2% - 5.7%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.1% - 2.2%) 6.3% 3.6% 2% 1% (4.2% - 8.7%) (2.1% - 5.4%) (0.8% - 3.4%) (0.1% - 2.1%) 5.3% 2.2% 1.2% 0.6% (3.5% - 7.4%) (1% - 3.5%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0% - 1.3%) 6% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% (4.1% - 8.1%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) 8.3% 3.4% 2% 1% (5.9% - 11.2%) (1.9% - 5.2%) (0.7% - 3.3%) (0.1% - 2.1%)

3.6% 2.4% 1.4% 0.7% (2.1% - 5.4%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0% - 1.6%) 2.6% 2% 1.1% 0.6% (1.3% - 4.2%) (0.8% - 3.3%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0% - 1.3%) 6.6% 1.7% 1% 0.5% (4.5% - 9%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.1%) 8.4% 1% 0.5% 0.2% (6% - 11.1%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) 5.4% 2% 1.1% 0.6% (3.5% - 7.5%) (0.8% - 3.4%) (0.2% - 2.1%) (0% - 1.3%)

3.6% 2.2% 1.2% 0.7% (2% - 5.4%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0% - 1.5%) 1.4% 0.8% 0.5% 0.3% (0.3% - 2.5%) (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.7%) 5.2% 2.1% 1.2% 0.6% (3.4% - 7.3%) (0.9% - 3.4%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0% - 1.3%) 6% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% (4.1% - 8.1%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) 2.7% 1% 0.6% 0.3% (1.3% - 4.2%) (0.2% - 2%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.9%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Chicago

Houston Location



### Atlanta
Chicago

Atlanta New York Percent of All Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data



### Houston

Los Angeles

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data 

### Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles

Los Angeles

New York New York

Atlanta



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-56 December 2006

## Figure 3-11. Estimated Percent Reductions From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exer tion Experiencing at Least One O 3 

## - Related Decrement in FEV 1 

## ≥ 15%, Separately for Each of Five Locations*

Figure 3-11a. Based on 2004 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 20 (8 - 34); 2.2% (0.9% - 3.6%) Chicago: 15 (1 - 31); 0.8% (0% - 1.6%) Houston: 23 (10 - 37); 2.1% (0.9% - 3.4%) Los Angeles: 34 (5 - 62); 0.9% (0.1% - 1.7%) New York: 43 (6 - 84); 1% (0.2% - 2%)

* An 8-hr average standard, denoted m/n is characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 – 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The 4th daily maximum standards, denoted m/4, require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified leve l (e.g., 0.084 ppm). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each lo cation in the box below each figure.
**The percent reduction from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2004 air quality was omitted for Los Angeles because it was so large in magnitude (-547%).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-57

## Figure 3-11b. Based on 2003 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2003 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 23 (10 - 37); 2.4% (1.1% - 3.9%) Chicago: 39 (15 - 65); 2% (0.8% - 3.3%) Houston: 19 (6 - 32); 1.7% (0.6% - 3%) Los Angeles: 37 (9 - 65); 1% (0.2% - 1.8%) New York: 84 (34 - 140); 2% (0.8% - 3.4%)

**The percent reductions from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2003 air quality were omitted for Los Angeles and Houston because they were so large in magnitude (-735% in Los Angeles and –279% in Houston).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-58

## Figure 3-11c. Based on 2002 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 36 (21 - 54); 3.8% (2.2% - 5.7%) Chicago: 71 (41 - 106); 3.6% (2.1% - 5.4%) Houston: 24 (11 - 38); 2.2% (1% - 3.5%) Los Angeles: 35 (7 - 62); 0.9% (0.2% - 1.7%) New York: 142 (79 - 216); 3.4% (1.9% - 5.2%)

**The percent reduction from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2002 air quality was omitted for Los Angeles because it was so large in magnitude (-529%).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-59

# In the great majority of cases, the estimat ed numbers of occurre nces of lung function response associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current standard among all school age children (ages 5 – 18) enga ged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season are substantially lower than the corresponding numbers associated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in any of the three years considered. As would be expected, the numbe rs of occurrences decline substantially as the standards become more stringent. Comp aring the current standard to the 0.064, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard, the numbers of occu rrences decline from 53% in Atlanta and New York in 2004 to as much as 91% in Los Angeles in 2003.
3.2.2.2.2 Results for asthmatic school age children



# Lung function response of interest for asth matic school age children was defined as a decrement in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%. The estimated numbers and percentages of occurrences of lung function response associ ated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and each of the two alternative da ily maximum 8-hour standards among asthmatic school age children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season are given in Tables 3- 24 and 3-25, respectively. The numbers and percentages of these children es timated to experience at least one lung function response associat ed with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and each of the two alternative standards are given in Tables 3-26 and 3-27, respectively. Results based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

# concentrations are shown in each table.
The percent reductions in numbers of school age children experi encing at least one occurrence of lung function response when O 3 

# concentrations are reduced from those just meeting the current standard to those that w ould just meet each alternative standard, as well as a recent year of air quality, are summ arized in Figures 3-12a, b, and c, using 2004, 2003, and 2002 air quality data, respectively.

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-60

### Table 3-24. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-HourStandards Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five LocationSpecific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 145 109 81 58 (68 - 244) (44 - 190) (26 - 146) (13 - 108) 257 186 137 97 (125 - 427) (75 - 324) (44 - 247) (22 - 182) 96 52 34 14 (45 - 158) (20 - 88) (11 - 57) (5 - 19) 561 182 102 25 (255 - 942) (42 - 335) (18 - 189) (4 - 39) 834 509 385 275 (435 - 1356) (200 - 894) (119 - 700) (59 - 519)

106 83 61 43 (40 - 187) (26 - 150) (14 - 114) (7 - 82) 163 137 100 69 (56 - 291) (42 - 250) (22 - 187) (9 - 134) 131 55 32 7 (64 - 213) (19 - 95) (9 - 55) (3 - 6) 690 177 86 11 (352 - 1119) (45 - 320) (18 - 153) (4 - 8) 506 304 227 158 (215 - 868) (88 - 557) (47 - 431) (19 - 310)

109 82 61 44 (38 - 196) (22 - 151) (12 - 116) (5 - 86) 114 80 57 38 (27 - 214) (12 - 154) (5 - 113) (1 - 78) 110 61 40 18 (51 - 181) (22 - 103) (12 - 68) (5 - 27) 660 219 134 46 (308 - 1108) (49 - 405) (21 - 253) (4 - 84) 399 240 179 124 (131 - 720) (46 - 458) (21 - 353) (6 - 252) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000.

Location



### Atlanta
Chicago

Atlanta New York Houston

Los Angeles

Houston

Los Angeles

New York Chicago

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data

Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data



### Houston

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta
Chicago



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-61 December 2006

### Table 3-25. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4

1.3% 1% 0.7% 0.5% (0.6% - 2.2%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1%) 1.5% 1.1% 0.8% 0.6% (0.7% - 2.4%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1%) 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.3% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) 1% 0.3% 0.2% 0% (0.5% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) 1.9% 1.2% 0.9% 0.6% (1% - 3.1%) (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.2%)

1% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.7%) 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) 0.7% 0.3% 0.2% 0% (0.4% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) 1.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0% (0.6% - 2%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) 1.2% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% (0.5% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.7%)

1% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) 0.7% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.3% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) 1.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% (0.6% - 2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.9% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Houston

Los Angeles Location

Atlanta
Chicago Based on 2002 Air Quality Data

Los Angeles

New York Chicago Atlanta

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3- year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). New York

Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data

Houston Los Angeles

New York Chicago

Houston Atlanta



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-62 December 2006

### Table 3-26. Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

### >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 18 13 9 5 (14 - 23) (10 - 18) (6 - 13) (3 - 9) 40 27 18 11 (32 - 53) (20 - 39) (12 - 29) (7 - 19) 17 9 6 4 (13 - 23) (6 - 14) (4 - 9) (2 - 6) 61 16 9 4 (51 - 79) (11 - 24) (6 - 14) (2 - 6) 118 63 43 27 (97 - 147) (47 - 91) (29 - 67) (16 - 44)

12 9 6 4 (9 - 17) (6 - 13) (4 - 10) (2 - 6) 21 18 12 7 (15 - 32) (12 - 28) (7 - 19) (4 - 12) 20 8 5 3 (17 - 26) (5 - 12) (3 - 8) (2 - 5) 77 16 9 3 (65 - 95) (12 - 25) (6 - 14) (2 - 5) 81 42 27 17 (64 - 109) (29 - 64) (17 - 44) (9 - 27)

12 8 5 3 (9 - 17) (6 - 12) (3 - 9) (2 - 5) 14 9 6 3 (9 - 22) (5 - 14) (3 - 9) (1 - 6) 17 9 6 4 (14 - 23) (6 - 14) (4 - 10) (2 - 6) 62 16 9 4 (52 - 81) (11 - 25) (6 - 14) (2 - 6) 51 26 17 11 (37 - 76) (16 - 42) (9 - 28) (4 - 17) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### New York

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data 

### Atlanta

Houston

Los Angeles

Los Angeles Chicago

Atlanta

New York New York

Chicago

Houston Number of Asthmatic Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data



### Houston

Los Angeles Location



### Atlanta
Chicago



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-63 December 2006

### Table 3-27. Percent of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Five Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

A Recent Year of Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 15.2% 10.9% 7.3% 4.6% (12.2% - 19.8%) (8.3% - 15.3%) (5.1% - 11.2%) (2.9% - 7.4%) 14.5% 9.8% 6.5% 4.1% (11.6% - 18.9%) (7.3% - 14%) (4.5% - 10.2%) (2.5% - 6.7%) 12.5% 6.7% 4.4% 2.7% (9.9% - 16.7%) (4.8% - 10.1%) (2.8% - 7%) (1.5% - 4.2%) 13.3% 3.4% 2% 0.8% (11.1% - 17.2%) (2.5% - 5.3%) (1.4% - 3%) (0.5% - 1.2%) 18.3% 9.8% 6.6% 4.2% (15.1% - 22.9%) (7.3% - 14.1%) (4.5% - 10.3%) (2.6% - 6.8%)

10.1% 7.5% 5.1% 3.2% (7.6% - 14.5%) (5.4% - 11.5%) (3.3% - 8.2%) (1.8% - 5.2%) 7.6% 6.3% 4.2% 2.6% (5.5% - 11.5%) (4.3% - 9.8%) (2.6% - 6.8%) (1.4% - 4.2%) 15.1% 5.9% 3.9% 2.2% (12.3% - 19.5%) (4% - 9.2%) (2.4% - 6.2%) (1.1% - 3.4%) 16.8% 3.5% 1.9% 0.7% (14.3% - 20.9%) (2.6% - 5.4%) (1.4% - 3%) (0.5% - 1.2%) 12.7% 6.5% 4.2% 2.6% (10% - 17%) (4.5% - 10%) (2.6% - 6.9%) (1.3% - 4.2%)

9.9% 6.9% 4.6% 2.9% (7.4% - 14.2%) (4.8% - 10.6%) (2.9% - 7.4%) (1.6% - 4.7%) 4.9% 3.2% 2.1% 1.2% (3.1% - 7.8%) (1.8% - 5.1%) (1% - 3.4%) (0.3% - 2%) 12.6% 6.7% 4.4% 2.6% (10% - 16.8%) (4.7% - 10.1%) (2.9% - 7%) (1.5% - 4.2%) 13.6% 3.5% 2% 0.8% (11.4% - 17.7%) (2.5% - 5.5%) (1.4% - 3.1%) (0.5% - 1.2%) 8% 4.1% 2.7% 1.6% (5.8% - 11.8%) (2.5% - 6.6%) (1.4% - 4.3%) (0.6% - 2.7%) *Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Chicago

Houston Location



### Atlanta
Chicago

Atlanta New York Percent of Asthmatic Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Based on 2002 Air Quality Data



### Houston

Los Angeles

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Based on 2003 Air Quality Data

Based on 2004 Air Quality Data 

### Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles

Los Angeles

New York New York

Atlanta



### Abt Associates Inc. 3-64 December 2006

## Figure 3-12. Estimated Percent Reductions From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in Asthmatic Children (A ges 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Experiencing at Least One O 3 

## -Related Decrement in FEV 1 

## ≥ 10%, Separately for Each of Five Locations*

Figure 3-12a. Based on 2004 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 8 (6 - 12); 6.9% (4.8% - 10.6%) Chicago: 9 (5 - 14); 3.2% (1.8% - 5.1%) Houston: 9 (6 - 14); 6.7% (4.7% - 10.1%) Los Angeles: 16 (11 - 25); 3.5% (2.5% - 5.5%) New York: 26 (16 - 42); 4.1% (2.5% - 6.6%)

* An 8-hr average standard, denoted m/n is characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 – 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The 4th daily maximum standards, denoted m/4, require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified leve l (e.g., 0.084 ppm). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each lo cation in the box below each figure.

** The percent reduction from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2004 air quality was omitted for Los Angeles because it was so large in magnitude (-288%).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-65

## Figure 3-12b. Based on 2003 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2003 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 9 (6 - 13); 7.5% (5.4% - 11.5%) Chicago: 18 (12 - 28); 6.3% (4.3% - 9.8%) Houston: 8 (5 - 12); 5.9% (4% - 9.2%) Los Angeles: 16 (12 - 25); 3.5% (2.6% - 5.4%) New York: 42 (29 - 64); 6.5% (4.5% - 10%)

** The percent reduction from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2003 air quality was omitted for Los Angeles because it was so large in magnitude (-381%).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-66

## Figure 3-12c. Based on 2002 Air Quality**



## -200% -150% -100%

-50%

0% 50% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative StandardsPercent Change from CurrentStandard



## Atlanta: 13 (10 - 18); 10.9% (8.3% - 15.3%) Chicago: 27 (20 - 39); 9.8% (7.3% - 14%) Houston: 9 (6 - 14); 6.7% (4.8% - 10.1%) Los Angeles: 16 (11 - 24); 3.4% (2.5% - 5.3%) New York: 63 (47 - 91); 9.8% (7.3% - 14.1%)

** The percent reduction from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2002 air quality was omitted for Los Angeles because it was so large in magnitude (-281%).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-67

# The results for asthmatic school age children followed the same patterns as those for all school age children. In the great majo rity of cases, the estimated numbers of occurrences of lung function respons e associated with exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current standard among asthmatic school age children (ages 5 – 18) engaged in moderate exercise for at le ast one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season are substantially lower than the corresponding numbers a ssociated with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in any of the three years cons idered. As would be expected, the numbers of occurrences decline substantially as the standards become more stringent. Comparing the current standard to the 0.064, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard, the numbers of occurrences decline from 46% in New York in 2002 and Atlanta in 2004 to as much as 94% in Los Angeles in 2003.

3.3 Sensitivity Analyses



# Two sources of uncertainty about estimates of O 3 

# -related lung function response among children that have been of particular concern are the estimates of PRB that go into the calculations and the form of the expos ure-response function. We ran sensitivity analyses to address concerns about bo th of these sources of uncertainty.

3.3.1 PRB sensitivity analysis



# The O 3 

# risk assessment presented in this report calculates the risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations – either “as is” O 3 

# concentrations or O 3 

# concentrations “rolled back” to just meet a standard – above PRB. The uncer tainty about the PRB c oncentrations in each of the risk assessment locations induces a corresponding uncertainty about our estimates of risk. We selected three locations – Atlanta, Los Angeles, and New York – for this sensitivity analysis, and calcu lated lung function responses using (1) the original PRB estimates, (2) lower PRB estimates, and (3) hi gher PRB estimates for each location. For Los Angeles and New York, the lower PRB estimates were calculated by subtracting 5 ppb from the original PRB estimates; for Atlanta, the lower PRB estimates were calculated by subtracting 10 ppb from the origin al PRB estimates. In all three locations, the higher PRB estimates were calculated by adding 5 ppb to the original PRB estimates. 4 

# The analyses were run for all school age children, for whom “lung function response” was defined as a decrement in FEV 1 

# > 15%, and for asthmatic school age children, for whom “lung function response” was defined as a decrement in FEV 1 

# > 10%.

4 

## Summarizing their assessment of the validity of the GEOS-CHEM model, the O 3 

## CD (EPA, 2006a) states, “in conclusion, we estimate that the PRB ozone values reported by Fiore et al. (2003) for afternoon surface air over the United States are likel y 10 ppbv too high in the southeas t in summer, and accurate within 5 ppbv in other regions and seasons.” These error estimates are based on comparison of model output with observations for conditions that most nearly reflect thos e given in the PRB definition, i.e., at the lower end of the probability distribution.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-68

# Each table below shows the impact of changing PRB estimates on the assessment of lung function decrement associat ed with exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels, as well as O 3 

# concentrations that just meet each of three alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards – 0.084 ppm, 0.074 ppm, and 0.064 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum – over PRB levels. In all cases, the results are for school age children, ages 5 - 18 (either all such children or asthmatic children only) engaged in moderate exercise for at least one 8-hour period during the O 3 

# season in a given year. Results for both 2002 and 2004 are included in each table. As with the result s presented in Section 3.2, all estimated numbers (of children and of occurrences) we re rounded to the nearest 1000, and all percentages were rounded to one decimal place.
Table 3-28 shows the impact of alterna tive estimates of PRB on the estimated number of occurrences of lung function decr ement among all school age children. Tables 3-29 and 3-30 show the impact on the estima ted number and percent, respectively, of school age children estimated to experience at least one occurrence of lung function response. Tables 3-31, 3-32, and 3-33 s how the corresponding results for asthmatic school age children.

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-69

## Table 3-28. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of Occurrences of

Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=15%) Among All Children (Age 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 191 131 91 62 290 196 131 86 (29 - 456) (10 - 344) (2 - 260) (0 - 191) (88 - 593) (39 - 442) (12 - 330) (1 - 240) 213 153 112 83 312 218 153 108 (29 - 553) (10 - 440) (2 - 356) (0 - 287) (88 - 691) (39 - 539) (12 - 427) (1 - 338) 175 115 75 46 274 179 115 70 (29 - 396) (10 - 283) (2 - 199) (0 - 130) (88 - 532) (39 - 380) (12 - 268) (1 - 178) 1470 371 220 75 1265 315 173 46 (393 - 3073) (6 - 1044) (1 - 651) (0 - 220) (355 - 2642) (9 - 869) (1 - 496) (0 - 112) 1559 460 308 164 1352 402 260 133 (393 - 3424) (6 - 1396) (1 - 1003) (0 - 571) (355 - 2988) (9 - 1215) (1 - 842) (0 - 458) 1363 265 113 0 1160 210 68 0 (393 - 2687) (6 - 659) (1 - 266) (0 - 0) (355 - 2262) (9 - 489) (1 - 116) (0 - 0) 563 296 209 139 1522 753 513 339 (77 - 1383) (7 - 851) (0 - 648) (0 - 458) (585 - 2885) (140 - 1727) (40 - 1314) (4 - 962) 602 334 247 177 1562 793 552 378 (77 - 1553) (7 - 1021) (0 - 817) (0 - 627) (585 - 3058) (140 - 1900) (40 - 1486) (4 - 1135) 510 243 156 86 1468 699 458 284 (77 - 1178) (7 - 646) (0 - 442) (0 - 252) (585 - 2675) (140 - 1517) (40 - 1104) (4 - 753) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### New York

New York - with lower PRB
New York - with higher PRB

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Location

Atlanta Number of Lung Function Responses (in 1000s), Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Number of Lung Function Responses (in 1000s), Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations**

Los Angeles - with higher PRB Atlanta - with lower PRB

Atlanta - with higher PRB

Los Angeles

Los Angeles - with lower PRB



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-70 December 2006

## Table 3-29. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of All Children (Ages 5-18)

Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 34 20 12 6 59 36 21 11 (19 - 51) (8 - 34) (2 - 22) (0 - 14) (40 - 81) (21 - 54) (8 - 34) (1 - 21) 35 21 12 7 60 37 21 12 (19 - 54) (8 - 36) (2 - 25) (0 - 16) (40 - 84) (21 - 56) (8 - 37) (1 - 24) 33 19 11 5 58 35 20 10 (19 - 48) (8 - 31) (2 - 19) (0 - 11) (40 - 79) (21 - 51) (8 - 31) (1 - 18) 220 34 17 6 220 35 18 7 (149 - 298) (5 - 62) (1 - 36) (0 - 14) (150 - 297) (7 - 62) (1 - 35) (0 - 14) 225 38 22 11 225 39 23 11 (149 - 312) (5 - 75) (1 - 49) (0 - 27) (150 - 311) (7 - 75) (1 - 48) (0 - 27) 218 32 16 4 218 33 16 5 (149 - 293) (5 - 57) (1 - 31) (0 - 9) (150 - 292) (7 - 57) (1 - 30) (0 - 9) 112 43 25 14 346 142 81 43 (55 - 176) (6 - 84) (0 - 56) (0 - 35) (244 - 462) (79 - 216) (29 - 138) (3 - 86) 114 45 27 16 348 144 83 45 (55 - 183) (6 - 92) (0 - 63) (0 - 43) (244 - 469) (79 - 222) (29 - 145) (3 - 93) 110 41 23 12 343 140 79 41 (55 - 169) (6 - 78) (0 - 49) (0 - 29) (244 - 455) (79 - 208) (29 - 131) (3 - 79) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000.



### Location

Atlanta Number of All Children (in 1000s) with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Number of All Children (in 1000s) with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations**

Atlanta - with lower PRB

Atlanta - with higher PRB

Los Angeles

Los Angeles - with lower PRB

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Los Angeles - with higher PRB

New York

New York - with lower PRB
New York - with higher PRB



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-71 December 2006

## Table 3-30. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of All Children (Ages 5-18)

Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=15%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 3.6% 2.2% 1.2% 0.7% 6.3% 3.8% 2.2% 1.2% (2% - 5.4%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0% - 1.5%) (4.2% - 8.6%) (2.2% - 5.7%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.1% - 2.2%) 3.7% 2.2% 1.3% 0.7% 6.3% 3.9% 2.3% 1.2% (2% - 5.7%) (0.9% - 3.9%) (0.2% - 2.6%) (0% - 1.7%) (4.2% - 8.9%) (2.2% - 6%) (0.9% - 3.9%) (0.1% - 2.5%) 3.5% 2.1% 1.1% 0.6% 6.2% 3.7% 2.1% 1.1% (2% - 5.1%) (0.9% - 3.3%) (0.2% - 2%) (0% - 1.2%) (4.2% - 8.3%) (2.2% - 5.4%) (0.9% - 3.3%) (0.1% - 1.9%) 6% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% 6% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% (4.1% - 8.1%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) (4.1% - 8.1%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) 6.1% 1% 0.6% 0.3% 6.1% 1.1% 0.6% 0.3% (4.1% - 8.5%) (0.1% - 2%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.7%) (4.1% - 8.5%) (0.2% - 2%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.7%) 5.9% 0.9% 0.4% 0.1% 6% 0.9% 0.4% 0.1% (4.1% - 8%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.2%) (4.1% - 8%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.2%) 2.7% 1% 0.6% 0.3% 8.3% 3.4% 2% 1% (1.3% - 4.2%) (0.2% - 2%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.9%) (5.9% - 11.2%) (1.9% - 5.2%) (0.7% - 3.3%) (0.1% - 2.1%) 2.8% 1.1% 0.7% 0.4% 8.4% 3.5% 2% 1.1% (1.3% - 4.4%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1%) (5.9% - 11.3%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (0.7% - 3.5%) (0.1% - 2.2%) 2.6% 1% 0.5% 0.3% 8.3% 3.4% 1.9% 1% (1.3% - 4.1%) (0.2% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.7%) (5.9% - 11%) (1.9% - 5%) (0.7% - 3.2%) (0.1% - 1.9%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Percent of All Children with at Least One Response, Based on

Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Location

Atlanta - with lower PRB Percent of All Children with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations**

Atlanta

Atlanta - with higher PRB

Los Angeles

Los Angeles - with lower PRB

Los Angeles - with higher PRB

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### New York

New York - with lower PRB
New York - with higher PRB



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-72 December 2006

## Table 3-31. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of Occurrences of

Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=10%) Among Asthmatic Children (Age 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 109 82 61 44 145 109 81 58 (38 - 196) (22 - 151) (12 - 116) (5 - 86) (68 - 244) (44 - 190) (26 - 146) (13 - 108) 129 101 80 63 165 129 101 78 (38 - 245) (22 - 200) (12 - 165) (5 - 135) (68 - 294) (44 - 240) (26 - 196) (13 - 158) 96 69 48 30 132 96 68 44 (38 - 167) (22 - 121) (12 - 86) (5 - 56) (68 - 215) (44 - 161) (26 - 117) (13 - 78) 660 219 134 46 561 182 102 25 (308 - 1108) (49 - 405) (21 - 253) (4 - 84) (255 - 942) (42 - 335) (18 - 189) (4 - 39) 724 283 198 110 625 245 166 88 (308 - 1256) (49 - 553) (21 - 401) (4 - 232) (255 - 1089) (42 - 482) (18 - 336) (4 - 186) 587 146 61 0 490 110 31 0 (308 - 950) (49 - 247) (21 - 95) (4 - 0) (255 - 787) (42 - 180) (18 - 34) (4 - 0) 399 240 179 124 834 509 385 275 (131 - 720) (46 - 458) (21 - 353) (6 - 252) (435 - 1356) (200 - 894) (119 - 700) (59 - 519) 441 281 220 165 876 551 427 317 (131 - 822) (46 - 560) (21 - 455) (6 - 354) (435 - 1460) (200 - 998) (119 - 805) (59 - 624) 347 187 126 71 781 455 331 221 (131 - 600) (46 - 339) (21 - 233) (6 - 133) (435 - 1234) (200 - 773) (119 - 579) (59 - 398) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### Number of Lung Function Responses (in 1000s), Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Number of Lung Function Responses (in 1000s), Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations** Location

Atlanta

Atlanta - with lower PRB

Atlanta - with higher PRB

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### New York

New York - with higher PRB Los Angeles

New York - with lower PRB Los Angeles - with lower PRB

Los Angeles - with higher PRB



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-73 December 2006

## Table 3-32. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Number of Asthmatic Children

(Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 12 8 5 3 18 13 9 5 (9 - 17) (6 - 12) (3 - 9) (2 - 5) (14 - 23) (10 - 18) (6 - 13) (3 - 9) 12 9 6 4 18 13 9 6 (9 - 18) (6 - 14) (3 - 10) (2 - 7) (14 - 24) (10 - 19) (6 - 14) (3 - 10) 11 7 5 3 17 12 8 5 (9 - 16) (6 - 11) (3 - 8) (2 - 4) (14 - 22) (10 - 17) (6 - 12) (3 - 8) 62 16 9 4 61 16 9 4 (52 - 81) (11 - 25) (6 - 14) (2 - 6) (51 - 79) (11 - 24) (6 - 14) (2 - 6) 65 19 12 6 64 18 12 7 (52 - 86) (11 - 30) (6 - 19) (2 - 11) (51 - 84) (11 - 29) (6 - 19) (2 - 11) 61 15 8 3 60 14 8 3 (52 - 79) (11 - 23) (6 - 12) (2 - 4) (51 - 77) (11 - 22) (6 - 12) (2 - 4) 51 26 17 11 118 63 43 27 (37 - 76) (16 - 42) (9 - 28) (4 - 17) (97 - 147) (47 - 91) (29 - 67) (16 - 44) 53 28 19 12 119 65 44 29 (37 - 80) (16 - 46) (9 - 32) (4 - 21) (97 - 151) (47 - 94) (29 - 70) (16 - 48) 50 24 16 9 116 61 41 25 (37 - 73) (16 - 39) (9 - 25) (4 - 14) (97 - 143) (47 - 87) (29 - 63) (16 - 40) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### Atlanta - with lower PRB

Atlanta - with higher PRB

New York - with lower PRB Los Angeles - with lower PRB

Los Angeles - with higher PRB

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Number of Asthmatic Children (in 1000s) with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Number of Asthmatic Children (in 1000s) with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations**

New York

New York - with higher PRB Los Angeles Location

Atlanta



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-74 December 2006

## Table 3-33. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Asthmatic Children

(Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Change in FEV 1 

## >=10%) Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 15.2% 10.9% 7.3% 4.6% 15.2% 10.9% 7.3% 4.6% (12.2% - 19.8%) (8.3% - 15.3%) (5.1% - 11.2%) (2.9% - 7.4%) (12.2% - 19.8%) (8.3% - 15.3%) (5.1% - 11.2%) (2.9% - 7.4%) 15.7% 11.3% 7.8% 5% 15.7% 11.3% 7.8% 5% (12.2% - 20.8%) (8.3% - 16.3%) (5.1% - 12.2%) (2.9% - 8.5%) (12.2% - 20.8%) (8.3% - 16.3%) (5.1% - 12.2%) (2.9% - 8.5%) 14.7% 10.4% 6.8% 4.1% 14.7% 10.4% 6.8% 4.1% (12.2% - 18.9%) (8.3% - 14.4%) (5.1% - 10.3%) (2.9% - 6.5%) (12.2% - 18.9%) (8.3% - 14.4%) (5.1% - 10.3%) (2.9% - 6.5%) 13.3% 3.4% 2% 0.8% 13.3% 3.4% 2% 0.8% (11.1% - 17.2%) (2.5% - 5.3%) (1.4% - 3%) (0.5% - 1.2%) (11.1% - 17.2%) (2.5% - 5.3%) (1.4% - 3%) (0.5% - 1.2%) 13.9% 4% 2.6% 1.4% 13.9% 4% 2.6% 1.4% (11.1% - 18.3%) (2.5% - 6.4%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (0.5% - 2.3%) (11.1% - 18.3%) (2.5% - 6.4%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (0.5% - 2.3%) 13.1% 3.2% 1.7% 0.6% 13.1% 3.2% 1.7% 0.6% (11.1% - 16.8%) (2.5% - 4.9%) (1.4% - 2.6%) (0.5% - 0.8%) (11.1% - 16.8%) (2.5% - 4.9%) (1.4% - 2.6%) (0.5% - 0.8%) 18.3% 9.8% 6.6% 4.2% 18.3% 9.8% 6.6% 4.2% (15.1% - 22.9%) (7.3% - 14.1%) (4.5% - 10.3%) (2.6% - 6.8%) (15.1% - 22.9%) (7.3% - 14.1%) (4.5% - 10.3%) (2.6% - 6.8%) 18.6% 10.1% 6.9% 4.5% 18.6% 10.1% 6.9% 4.5% (15.1% - 23.4%) (7.3% - 14.7%) (4.5% - 10.9%) (2.6% - 7.4%) (15.1% - 23.4%) (7.3% - 14.7%) (4.5% - 10.9%) (2.6% - 7.4%) 18% 9.5% 6.3% 3.9% 18% 9.5% 6.3% 3.9% (15.1% - 22.3%) (7.3% - 13.6%) (4.5% - 9.8%) (2.6% - 6.3%) (15.1% - 22.3%) (7.3% - 13.6%) (4.5% - 9.8%) (2.6% - 6.3%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Los Angeles - with lower PRB

Los Angeles - with higher PRB

New York

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### New York - with higher PRB New York - with lower PRB Atlanta - with higher PRB Percent of Asthmatic Children with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations** Percent of Asthmatic Children with at Least One Response, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations**

Los Angeles Location

Atlanta

Atlanta - with lower PRB



## Abt Associates Inc. 3-75 December 2006

# The impact of changing the assumed PRB levels varied substantially from one location to another and from one standard to another. For example, assuming lower PRB levels increased the estimated number of o ccurrences associated with 2002 “as is” air quality among all children in New York by only 3 percent (from 1,522,000 to 1,562,000); however, it increased the estimated number of occurrences associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the 0.064 4 th 

# daily maximum standard among all children in Los Angeles by 189 percent (from 46,000 to 133,000), based on adjusting 2002 O 3 

# concentrations, and by 119 percent (from 75,000 to 164,000), based on adjusting 2004 O 3 

# concentrations.
The impact was similarly varied among as thmatic children. Assuming lower PRB levels increased the estimated number of o ccurrences associated with 2002 “as is” air quality among asthmatic children in New York by only 5 percent (from 834,000 to 876,000); however, it increased the estimated number of occurrences associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the 0.064 4 th 

# daily maximum standard among asthmatic children in Los Angeles by 252 percent (fro m 25,000 to 88,000), based on adjusting 2002 O 3 

# concentrations, and by 139 percent (from 46,000 to 110,000), based on adjusting 2004 O 3 

# concentrations. As would be expected, however, the impact on the number of lung function occurrences of assuming lower PRB le vels increased from a recent year of air quality to the current standard and from the current standard to successively more stringent alternative standards, for both all children and asthmatic children. The impact on the number of children with at least one lung function occurrence generally followed the same pattern.
The impact of assuming higher PRB levels followed the same patterns but in the opposite direction, resulting in negative pe rcent changes in estimated numbers of lung function occurrence that were successively grea ter in absolute value as we went from a recent year of air quality to the current st andard and from the current standard to successively more stringent alternative standard s. The impacts also varied substantially, ranging from a 4 percent decrease in the estimat ed number of occurrences associated with 2002 “as is” air quality among all children in New York to 100% decreases in the estimated numbers of occurrences associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the 0.064 4 th 

# daily maximum standard among all childre n in Los Angeles, based on adjusting 2002 and 2004 air quality data. 5 

# The results for lung function occurrences among asthmatic children were similar.
3.3.2 Exposure-response functional form sensitivity analysis



# As noted above, the exposure-response functions used in the primary analyses are based on the assumption that the relations hip between exposure and response has a logistic form with 90 percent probability and a linear (hocke ystick) form with 10 percent probability. If we had assumed different pr obabilities for the two alternative functional forms, the resulting exposure-response curves, and the response probabilities associated with exposure to any given O 3 

# concentration, would have been different. In this

5 

## These percentages are based on the rounded occurrence values. If they had been based on the unrounded values, the percent decrease would have been large but not 100%.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-76

# sensitivity analysis, we considered the im pact of two alternat ive exposure-response functions, based on an 80 percent logistic/20 percent linear split and a 50 percent logistic /50 percent linear split, in five locations – Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York. Tables C-13 through C-16 in Appe ndix C show the impact of the alternative exposure-response functions on the estimated num ber of children, ages 5-18, engaged in moderate exertion experiencing at least one lung function response. Tables C-13 and C14 show the impact on the estimated number of all school age child ren experiencing at least one lung function response, defined as a change in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 15%, for a recent year of air quality as well as when O 3 

# concentrations just meet each of three 4 th 

# daily maximum standards – 0.084/4, 0.074/4 and 0.064/ 4, based on adjusting 2004 and 2002 data, respectively. Tables C-15 and C-16 show the corresponding impacts on the estimated number of asthmatic school age children experiencing at l east one lung function response, defined as a change in FEV 1 

# ≥ 

# 10%. Figures 3-13 and 3-14 show the impacts of alternative estimates of exposure-respons e functions on estimated percent changes in response among all school age children and as thmatic school age children, respectively, when O 3 

# concentrations are changed from those just meeting the current standard to a recent year of air quality and to those just meeting each of the two alternative standards given above.
The impacts of changing the functional form varied substantially, and there was no discernable pattern. Not surprisingly, the impacts of changing from the 90%/10% split to the 80%/20% split were generally small, especially for all school age children. In most cases, the number of all school age ch ildren responding estimated by the 80%/20% split was within 5 percent of the estimate obtained using the 90%/10% split. There were, however, some more substantia l changes. The largest di fferences for all school age children occurred for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the most stringent standard, 0.064/4 – a 14% decrease in the estimated number of all children responding (as defined above) in Houston (from about 7,000 to about 6, 000), based on adjusting 2004 air quality, and 14% decreases in the estimated number of children responding in Houston and Los Angeles (from about 7,000 to about 6,000 in each location), based on adjusting 2002 air quality. For asthmatic school age children, the differences in estimated number of children responding tended to be larger. The largest differences were a 33% increase in the estimated number of child ren responding in Atlanta (fro m about 3,000 to about 4,000) for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0. 064/4 standard, based on adjusting 2004 air quality, and a 20% increase in Atlanta (from about 5,000 to about 6,000) for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.064/4 standard, based on adjusting 2002 air quality.
The impacts of changing from the 90%/ 10% split to the 50%/50% split were generally (although not always) larger. The largest impacts were again seen for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the most string ent standard of 0.064/4 – an 86% decrease in the estimated number of a ll children responding in New York (from about 14,000 to about 2,000), based on adjusting 2004 air quali ty, and a 71% decrease in the estimated number of all children responding in Los Angeles (from about 7,000 to about 2,000), based on adjusting 2002 air quality. For asthma tic children, there we re several cases of increases from 50% to 67% for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.074/4 and 0.064/4 standards, based on adjusting bot h 2004 and 2002 air quality.

Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-77

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-78 Figure 3-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Estimated Percent Reductions in Numbers of All Ch ildren (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 15% when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each of Several Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, fo r Five Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons Figure 3-13a. Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations
Atlanta

-350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Chicago

-350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## Houston

-350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Los Angeles*

-350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## New York

-350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50%

0% 50% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## * The percent reductions from the current standard (0.0 84/4) to 2004 air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in magn itude (-553%, -587%, and –1027% fo r the 90/10, 80/20 and 50/50 splits, respectively).

## Figure 3-13b. Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations

Atlanta

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Chicago

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## Houston

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Los Angeles*

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## New York

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## * The percent reductions from the current standard (0.0 84/4) to 2002 air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in ma gnitude (-526%, -549%, and –842% fo r the 90/10, 80/20 and 50/50 splits, respectively).



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-79

## Figure 3-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Estimated Percent Reductions in Numbers of Asth matic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 10% when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each of Several Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Fi ve Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons Figure 3-14a. Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations
Atlanta

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Chicago

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## Houston

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Los Angeles*

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## New York

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## * The percent reductions from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2004 air quality, based on the 90/10, 80/20, and 50/50 split exposure-response functions for Los Ange les were -294%, -280%, and –201%, respectively.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-80

## Figure 3-14b. Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations

Atlanta

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Chicago

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## Houston

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear 

## Los Angeles*

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## New York

-180% -160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

90% logistic-10% linear 80% logistic-20% linear 50% logistic-50% linear



## * The percent reductions from the current standard (0.084/4) to 2002 air quality, based on the 90/10, 80/20, and 50/50 split exposure-response functions for Los Ange les were -287%, -274%, and –198%, respectively.



# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 3-81

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-1 4 ASSESSMENT OF RISK BASED ON EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES

As discussed in the O 3 

# CD, a significant number of epidemiological studies examining a variety of health effects associated with ambient O 3 

# concentrations in various locations throughout the U.S., Canada, Europe, and other regions of the world have been published since the last O 3 

# NAAQS review. As a result of the availability of these epidemiological studies and air quality information, EPA staff decided to expand the O 3 

# risk assessment to include an assessment of selected health risks attributable to ambient O 3 

# concentrations over PRB concentrations and the reduced health risks associated with just meeting the current O 3 

# standard and alternative O 3 

# standards in selected urban locations in the U.S. The methods and results of this portion of the risk assessment are discussed below.

4.1 Methods
4.1.1 General approach

As in the recently completed particulate matter (PM) risk assessment (see EPA, 2005c, Chapter 4, and Abt Associates 2005), the general approach used in this part of the O 3 

# risk assessment relies upon C-R functions which have been estimated in epidemiological studies. Since these studies estimate C-R functions using ambient air quality data from fixed-site, population-oriented monitors, the appropriate application of these functions in a risk assessment similarly requires the use of ambient air quality data at fixed-site, ambient monitors. The general O 3 

# health risk model combines information about O 3 

# air quality for specific urban areas with C-R functions derived from epidemiological studies and baseline health incidence data for specific health endpoints and population estimates to derive estimates of the incidence of specified health effects attributable to ambient O 3 

# concentrations during the period examined. Although the O 3 

# season varies somewhat from one location to another, in most locations it coincides roughly with spring and summer. To allow comparisons across locations, and because O 3 

# effects observed in epidemiological studies have been more clearly and consistently shown for warm season analyses, all analyses for this portion of the risk assessment were carried out for the same time period, April through September. The analyses are conducted for “as is” air quality and for air quality simulated to reflect just meeting the current O 3 

# ambient standard, as well as air quality simulated to reflect just meeting alternative O 3 

# ambient standards. Because O 3 

# concentrations varied substantially over the 3-year period from 2002 through 2004, separate analyses were carried out using air quality data from 2002, in which O 3 

# concentrations were relatively higher in most locations for this 3-year period, and air quality data from 2004, in which O 3 

# concentrations were relatively lower in most locations for this 3-year period, to provide generally upper- and lower-end cases within this 3-year period. Two of the 12 urban areas, Houston and Los Angeles, had similar or higher O 3 

# concentrations in 2004 than in 2002. In addition to the 2002 and 2004 analyses, a more limited set of analyses, focusing only on mortality in a subset of five urban areas (Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York), was carried out using air quality data from 2003. The major

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-2 components of the portion of the health risk assessment based on data from epidemiological studies are illustrated in Figure 4-1.
In the first part of the epidemiology-based portion of the risk assessment, we estimated health effects incidence associated with “as is” O 3 

# levels. In the second part, we estimated the reduced health effects incidence associated with those O 3 

# concentrations that would result if the current and alternative O 3 

# standards were just met in the assessment locations. In both parts, we considered only the incidence of health effects associated with O 3 

# concentrations in excess of estimated PRB O 3 

# levels.
Both parts of the epidemiology-based portion of the risk assessment may be viewed as assessing the change in incidence of the health effect associated with a change in O 3 

# concentrations from some upper levels to specified (lower) levels. The important operational difference between the two parts is in the upper O 3 

# levels. In the first part, the upper O 3 

# levels are “as is” concentrations. In contrast, the upper O 3 

# levels in the second part are the estimated O 3 

# levels that would occur when the current 8-hour daily maximum O 3 

# standard is just met in the assessment locations or when one of several alternative 8-hour daily maximum O 3 

# standards is just met in these locations. The second part therefore requires that a method be developed to simulate just meeting the current or alternative standards. This method is described in Chapter 4 of the Staff Paper and in Rizzo (2005, 2006).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-3 Figure 4-1. Major Components of Ozone Health Risk Assessment Based on Epidemiology Studies



# Ambient Monitoring for Selected Urban Areas

Air Quality Adjustment Procedures

Current and Alternative Proposed Standards Changes in Distribution of O 3 

# Air Quality Risk Estimates:



# • Recent Air Quality



# • Current Standard



# • Alternative Standards Health Risk Model

Estimates of City-specific Baseline Health Effects Incidence Rates and Population Data Human Epidemiological Studies Concentration - Response Relationships 

# Concentration-Response Air Quality

Modeled Background Concentrations Recent (“As Is”) Ambient O 3 

# Levels Ambient Monitoring for Selected Urban Areas

Air Quality Adjustment Procedures

Current and Alternative Proposed Standards Changes in Distribution of O 3 

# Air Quality Risk Estimates:



# • Recent Air Quality



# • Current Standard



# • Alternative Standards Health Risk Model

Estimates of City-specific Baseline Health Effects Incidence Rates and Population Data Human Epidemiological Studies Concentration - Response Relationships 

# Concentration-Response Air Quality

Modeled Background Concentrations Recent (“As Is”) Ambient O 3 

# Levels

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-4 To estimate the change in incidence of a given health effect resulting from a change in ambient O 3 

# concentrations from “as is” levels to PRB levels, or from O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current or an alternative standard to PRB levels, in an assessment location, the following analysis inputs are necessary:

 Air quality information including: (1) “as is” air quality data for O 3 

# from ambient monitors in the assessment location, (2) “as is” concentrations adjusted to reflect patterns of air quality estimated to occur when the area just meets the specified standard, and (3) estimates of PRB O 3 

# concentrations appropriate to this location. (These air quality inputs are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of this report and in Chapters 2 and 4 of the Staff Paper.

 Concentration-response function(s) which provide an estimate of the relationship between the health endpoint of interest and O 3 

# concentrations (preferably derived in the assessment location, although functions estimated in other locations can be used at the cost of increased uncertainty -- see Section 4.1.9.1.3).

 Baseline health effects incidence rate and population . The baseline incidence rate provides an estimate of the incidence rate (number of cases of the health effect per O 3 

# season, usually per 10,000 or 100,000 population) in the assessment location corresponding to “as is” O 3 

# levels in that location. To derive the total baseline incidence per O 3 

# season, the baseline incidence rate must be multiplied by the corresponding population number (e.g., if the baseline incidence rate is number of cases per O 3 

# season per 100,000 population, it must be multiplied by the number of 100,000s in the population). (Section 4.1.8 summarizes considerations related to the baseline incidence rate and population data inputs to the risk assessment).
These inputs are combined to estimate health effect incidence changes associated with specified changes in O 3 

# levels. Although some epidemiological studies have estimated linear or logistic C-R functions, by far the most common form is the exponential (or log-linear) form:

x 

# Bey  

#  , (4-1)

where x is the ambient O 3 

# level, y is the incidence of the health endpoint of interest at O 3 

# level x, β is the coefficient of ambient O 3 

# concentration (describing the extent of change in y with a unit change in x), and B is the incidence at x=0, i.e., when there is no ambient O 3 

# . The relationship between a specified ambient O 3 

# level, x 0 

# , for example, and the incidence of a given health endpoint associated with that level (denoted as y 0 

# ) is then

0 0 x 

# Bey  

# 


# . (4-2)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-5 Because the log-linear form of C-R function (equation (4-1)) is by far the most common form, we use this form to illustrate the “health impact function” used in this portion of the risk assessment. 6



# If we let x 0 

# denote the baseline (upper) O 3 

# level, and x 1 

# denote the lower O 3 

# level, and y 0 

# and y 1 

# denote the corresponding incidences of the health effect, we can derive the following relationship between the change in x, Δx= (x 0 

# - x 1 

# ), and the corresponding change in y, Δy, from equation (4-1) 7 

# :   

## y y y y e x 

##      

## ( ) [ ]. 0 1 0 

## 1  

# (4-3)

Alternatively, the difference in health effects incidence can be calculated indirectly using relative risk. Relative risk (RR) is a measure commonly used by epidemiologists to characterize the comparative health effects associated with a particular air quality comparison. The risk of mortality at ambient O 3 

# level x 0 

# relative to the risk of mortality at ambient O 3 

# level x 1 

# , for example, may be characterized by the ratio of the two mortality rates: the mortality rate among individuals when the ambient O 3 

# level is x 0 

# and the mortality rate among (otherwise identical) individuals when the ambient O 3 

# level is x 1 

# . This is the RR for mortality associated with the difference between the two ambient O 3 

# levels, x 0 

# and x 1 

# . Given a C-R function of the form shown in equation (4-1) and a particular difference in ambient O 3 

# levels, Δx, the RR a ssociated with that difference in ambient O 3 

# , denoted as RR Δx 

# , is equal to e βΔx 

# . The difference in health effects incidence, Δy, corresponding to a given difference in ambient O 3 

# levels, Δx, can then be calculated based on this RR Δx 

# as
)]/1(1[)( 010 x



# RR yyyy  

# 

. (4-4)

Equations (4-3) and (4-4) are simply alternative ways of expressing the relationship between a given difference in ambient O 3 

# levels, Δx > 0, and the corresponding difference in health effects incidence, Δy. These health impact equations are the key equations that combine air quality information, C-R function information, and baseline health effects incidence information to estimate ambient O 3 

# health risk.
4.1.2 Air quality considerations

Air quality considerations are discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of this report and Chapters 2 and 4 of the Staff Paper and in Rizzo (2005, 2006). Here we describe those air qualityconsiderations that are directly relevant to the estimation of health risks in the epidemiologybased portion of the risk assessment.

6 

## The derivations of health impact functions from concentration-response functions for all three functional forms found in the epidemiological literature – the log-linear, the linear and the logistic – are given in section B.2 of Appendix B. 7 

## If Δx < 0 – i.e., if Δx = (x 1 

## - x 0 

## ) – then the relationship between Δx and Δy can be shown to be 

## ]1[)( 001 

##   x 

## eyyyy  

## . If Δx < 0, Δy will similarly be negative. However, the magnitude of Δy will be the same whether Δx > 0 or Δx < 0 – i.e., the absolute valu e of Δy does not depend on which equation is used.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-6 In the first part of the epidemiology-based portion of the risk assessment, we estimated the change in health effect incidence, Δy, associated with a change in O 3 

# concentrations from current (“as is”) levels of O 3 

# to PRB levels. In the second part, we estimated the change in health effect incidence associated with a change in O 3 

# concentrations from the levels simulated to just meet a standard (i.e., the current 8-hour daily maximum standard as well as each of several alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards) to PRB levels.
To estimate the change in incidence of a health effect associated with a change in O 3 

# concentrations from “as is” levels to PRB levels in an assessment location, we need two time series of O 3 

# concentrations for that location: (1) hourly “as is” O 3 

# concentrations, and (2) hourly PRB O 3 

# concentrations. In order to be consistent with the approach generally used in the epidemiological studies that estimated O 3 

# C-R functions, the (spatial) average ambient O 3 

# concentration on each hour for which measured data are available is deemed most appropriate for the risk assessment. Consistent with the approach used in the recently completed PM risk assessment (see EPA, 2005c, Chapter 4, and Abt Associates 2005), a composite monitor data set was created for each assessment location. The concentration at the composite monitor in a given hour on a given day is simply the average of the monitor-specific concentrations for that hour on that day.
Several different exposure metrics, the 24-hour average, the daily 8-hour maximum, and the daily 1-hour maximum, have been used in epidemiological O 3 

# studies. We therefore calculated daily changes at the composite monitor in the O 3 

# exposure metric appropriate to a given C-R function. For example, if a C-R function related daily mortality to daily 1-hour maximum O 3 

# concentrations, we calculated the daily changes in 1-hour maximum O 3 

# concentrations at the composite monitor. In the first part of the epidemiology-based risk assessment, in which we estimated risks associated with the recent levels of O 3 

# (“as is” levels) above PRB levels, this required the following steps (we use the 1-hr daily maximum as an example in the discussion below):

 Using the monitor-specific input streams of hourly “as is” O 3 

# concentrations, calculate a stream of hourly “as is” O 3 

# concentrations at the composite monitor. The “as is” O 3 

# concentration at the composite monitor for a given hour on a given day is the average of the monitor-specific “as is” O 3 

# concentrations for that hour on that day.

 Using the stream of “as is” hourly O 3 

# concentrations at the composite monitor, just created, calculate the 1-hour maximum “as is” O 3 

# concentration for each day at the composite monitor.

 Using the monitor-specific input streams of hourly PRB O 3 

# concentrations, calculate a stream of hourly PRB O 3 

# concentrations at the composite monitor.

 Using the stream of PRB hourly O 3 

# concentrations at the composite monitor, just created, calculate the 1-hour maximum PRB O 3 

# concentration for each day at the composite monitor.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-7  For each day, calculate Δx = (the 1 -hour maximum “as is” O 3 

# concentration for that day at the composite monitor) - (the 1-hour maximum PRB O 3 

# concentration for that day at the composite monitor). 8



# The calculations for the second part of the epidemiology-based risk assessment, in which we estimated risks associated with estimated O 3 

# levels that just meet the current and alternative 8-hr standards above PRB levels were done analogously, using the monitor-specific series of adjusted hourly concentrations rather than the monitor-specific series of “as is” hourly concentrations. Similarly, calculations for C-R functions that used a different exposure metric (e.g., the 24-hour average) were done analogously, using the exposure metric appropriate to the C-R function.
4.1.3 Selection of health endpoints

EPA staff has carefully reviewed the epidemiological evidence evaluated in Chapter 7 and in Chapter 7 Annex as well as in Appendix 8A of the O 3 

# CD. Tables 8A-1 through 8A-5 in Appendix 8A of the CD summarize the available U.S. and Canadian studies reporting effects of acute (short-term) O 3 

# exposures for various health effect categories. Given the substantial number of health endpoints and studies addressing O 3 

# effects, we included in this quantitative O 3 

# risk assessment only the better- understood (in terms of health consequences) health endpoint categories for which the weight of the evidence supports the inference of a likely causal relationship between O 3 

# and the effect category. In addition, we included only those categories for which there are studies that satisfy the study selection criteria discussed below.

Based on its review of the evidence evaluated in the O 3 

# CD, EPA staff included in the portion of the O 3 

# risk assessment based on epidemiology studies the following broad categories of health endpoints associated with short-term exposures:

 premature total, respiratory, and cardiorespiratory mortality;

 hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses; and

 asthmatic symptoms in moderate/severe asthmatic children.

4.1.4 Selection of urban areas

Several objectives were considered in selecting potential urban areas for which to conduct the epidemiology-based O 3 

# risk assessment. An urban area was considered for inclusion only if it satisfied the following criteria:

 It has sufficient air quality data for the 3-year period (2002-2004).

 It is the same as or close to the location where at least one C-R function for one of the recommended health endpoints (see above) has been estimated by a study that satisfies the study selection criteria (see below).

8 

## Note that the maximum-concentration hour for a given day in the “as is” series is not necessarily the same hour as the maximum-concentration hour for that day in the PRB series.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-8  For the hospital admission categories, relatively recent location-specific baseline incidence data, specific to International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes, or an equivalent illness classification system, are available. 9



# Because baseline mortality incidence data are available at the county level, this is not a constraint in the selection of urban areas for the O 3 

# risk assessment. Data on hospital admissions for recent years, however, specific to ICD codes, are available in some cities but not others. The availability of this type of incidence data was therefore a consideration in the selection of urban areas to include in the analysis.
In addition, we took into account the following considerations in selecting from among those urban locations that satisfied the above selection criteria:

 Locations with more health endpoints were preferred to those with fewer.

 The overall set of urban locations should represent a range of geographic areas and population demographics among those areas not meeting the current O 3 

# 8-hour daily maximum standard within the U.S.

Based on the selection criteria and additional considerations listed above, we included the following urban areas in our assessment of risk based on epidemiological studies:

 Atlanta

 Boston

 Chicago

 Cleveland

 Detroit

 Houston

 Los Angeles

 New York City

 Philadelphia

 Sacramento

 St. Louis

 Washington, D.C.
4.1.5 Selection of epidemiological studies

As discussed above, we included in the O 3 

# risk assessment only the better-understood health effects for which the weight of the evidence supports a likely causal inference. Thus, in cases where the majority of the available studies did not report a statistically significant relationship, the effect endpoint was not included. Once it had been determined that a health endpoint would be included in the analysis, however, inclusion of a study on that health endpoint was not based on statistical significance. That is, consistent with the approach taken in the

9 

## The absence of hospital admissions baseline incidence data does not necessarily mean that we cannot use an urban area in the risk assessment, only that we cannot use it for the hospital admissions endpoint.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-9 particulate matter (PM) risk as sessment (see EPA, 2005c, Chapte r 4, and Abt Associates, 2005), no credible study on an included he alth endpoint was excluded from the analysis on the basis of lack of statistical significance.
We applied the following selection criteria for any study that estimated one or more O 3 

# C-R functions for a selected health endpoint in an urban location to be used for the O 3 

# risk assessment:

• 

# It is a published, peer-re viewed study that has been evaluated in the O 3 

# CD and judged adequate by EPA staff for purpos es of inclusion in this risk assessment based on that evaluation.

• 

# It directly measured, rather than estimated, O 3 

# on a reasonable proportion of the days in the study.

• 

# It either did not rely on Generalized Additiv e Models (GAMs) using the S-Plus software to estimate C-R functions or has appropriately re-estimated these functions using revised methods. 10



# • 

# For studies of mortality associated with short-term exposure to O 3 

# , the study reported results for the O 3 

# season in the location in which the study was conducted. 11



# 4.1.6 A summary of selected health e ndpoints, urban areas and studies



# Based on applying the criteria and considerations discussed above, the health endpoints, urban locations, and epidemiology studi es that were included in the O 3 

# risk assessment are given in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1. Locations and Health Endpoints Included in the O 3 

## Risk Assessment Based on Epidemiological Studies*

Urban Area Premature Mortality Hospital Admissions for Respiratory Illnesses Asthmatic Symptoms in Children

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004) Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Huang et al. (2004)** Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities**

Boston Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Gent et al. (2003)

10 

## The GAM S-Plus problem was discovered prior to the recent final PM risk assessment carried out as part of the PM NAAQS review. It is discussed in the PM Criteria Document (EPA, 2004), PM Staff Paper (EPA, 2005c), and PM Health Risk Assessment Technical Supp ort Document (Abt Associates, 2005). 11 

## In most locations, the O 3 

## season is generally the warm season; in Houston, Los Angeles, and Sacramento, however, the O 3 

## season however, the O 3 

## season is all year.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-10 Urban Area Premature Mortality Hospital Admissions for Respiratory Illnesses Asthmatic Symptoms in Children
Chicago Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities

Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Schwartz (2004) Schwartz (2004) – 14 cities

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Schwartz et al. (1996)

Detroit Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Schwartz (2004) Schwartz (2004) – 14 cities Ito (2003) Ito (2003)

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Schwartz (2004) Schwartz (2004) – 14 cities Los Angeles Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Linn et al. (2000)

New York Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities

Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Thurston et al. (1992)

Philadelphia Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities

Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. (2004) – 19 cities Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Sacramento Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities

St. Louis Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities Washington, D.C. Bell et al. (2004) – 95 cities *Studies listed for a given assessment location reported a C-R function specifically for that location unless otherwise specified. A study reporting a multi-city C-R function is listed for a given assessment location only if that location is included among the cities used to estimate the multi-city C-R function. **This study estimated C-R functions for cardiorespiratory mortality.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-11 4.1.7 Selection of concentration-response functions

Studies often report more than one estimated C-R function for the same location and health endpoint. Sometimes models including different sets of co-pollutants are estimated in a study; sometimes different lags are estimated. In some cases, two or more different studies estimated a C-R function for O 3 

# and the same health endpoint in the same location (this is the case, for example, with O 3 

# and mortality associated with shortterm exposures). For some health endpoints, there are studies that estimated multi-city O 3 

# C-R functions, while other studies estimated single-city functions.
All else being equal, a C-R function estimated in the assessment location is preferable to a function estimated elsewhere, since it avoids uncertainties related to potential differences due to geographic location. That is why the urban areas selected for the epidemiological studies-based O 3 

# risk assessment are those locations in which C-R functions have been estimated. There are several advantages, however, to using estimates from multi-city studies versus studies carried out in single cities. Multi-city studies are applicable to a variety of settings, since they estimate a central tendency across multiple locations. When they are estimating a single C-R function based on several cities, multi-city studies also tend to have more statistical power and provide effect estimates with relatively greater precision than single city studies due to larger sample sizes, reducing the uncertainty around the estimated coefficient. In addition, because selection of cities is done a priori based on criteria such as population size, multi-city studies are less subject to publication bias than single-city studies. Because single-city and multi-city studies have different advantages, if a single-city C-R function has been estimated in a risk assessment location and a multi-city study that includes that location is also available for the same health endpoint, we used both functions for that location in the risk assessment.

Some O 3 

# epidemiological studies estimated C-R functions in which O 3 

# was the only pollutant entered into the health effects model (i.e., single pollutant models) as well as other C-R functions in which O 3 

# and one or more co-pollutants (e.g., PM, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide) were entered into the health effects model (i.e., multi-pollutant models). To the extent that any of the co-pollutants present in the ambient air may have contributed to the health effects attributed to O 3 

# in single pollutant models, risks attributed to O 3 

# might be overestimated where C-R functions are based on single pollutant models. However, if co-pollutants are highly correlated with O 3 

# , their inclusion in an O 3 

# health effects model can lead to misleading conclusions in identifying a specific causal pollutant. When collinearity exists, inclusion of multiple pollutants in models often produces unstable and statistically insignificant effect estimates for both O 3 

# and the co-pollutants. Given that single and multi-pollutant models each have both potential advantages and disadvantages, with neither type clearly preferable over the other in all cases, we report risk estimates based on both single- and multi-pollutant models where both are available.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-12 Many daily time-series epidemiological studies estimated C-R functions in which the O 3 

# -related incidence on a given day depends only on same-day O 3 

# concentration or previous-day O 3 

# concentration (or some variant of those, such as a two-day average concentration). Such models necessarily assume that the longer pattern of O 3 

# levels preceding the O 3 

# concentration on a given day does not affect incidence of the health effect on that day. To the extent that an O 3 

# -related health effect on a given day is affected by O 3 

# concentrations over a longer period of time, then these models would be mis-specified, and this mis-specification would affect the predictions of daily incidence based on the model.
A few recent studies (e.g., Bell et al., 2004; Huang et al., 2004) have estimated distributed lag models, in which health effect incidence is a function of O 3 

# concentrations on several days – that is, the incidence of the health endpoint on day t is a function of the O 3 

# concentration on day t, day (t-1), day (t-2), and so forth. Such models can be reconfigured so that the sum of the coefficients of the different O 3 

# lags in the model can be used to predict the changes in incidence on several days. For example, corresponding to a change in O 3 

# on day t in a distributed lag model with 0-day, 1-day, and 2-day lags considered, the sum of the coefficients of the 0-day, 1-day, and 2-day lagged O 3 

# concentrations can be used to predict the sum of incidence changes on days t, (t+1) and (t+2). This is explained more fully in Appendix G.
The extent to which time-series studies using single-day O 3 

# concentrations may underestimate the relationship between short-term O 3 

# exposure and mortality is unknown; however, there is some evidence, based on analyses of PM 10 

# data, that mortality on a given day may be influenced by prior PM exposures up to more than a month before the date of death (Schwartz, 2000b). The extent to which short-term exposure studies (including those that consider distributed lags) may not capture the possible impact of long-term exposures to O 3 

# is similarly not known. Currently, there is insufficient information to adequately adjust for the potential impact of longer-term exposure on mortality associated with O 3 

# exposures, if any, and this uncertainty should be kept in mind as one considers the results from the short-term exposure O 3 

# risk assessment.
Epidemiological studies sometimes present several C-R functions, each incorporating a different lag structure. The question of lags and the problems of correctly specifying the lag structure in a model have been discussed extensively [see, for example, the PM CD (EPA, 2004, section 8.4.4); the PM Staff Paper (EPA, 2005c, sections 3.5.5.2 and 4.2.6.3); the O 3 

# CD (EPA, 2006a, section 7.1.3.3); and Schwartz, 2000)]. The O 3 

# CD notes that “analyzing a large number of lags and simply choosing the largest and most significant results may bias the air pollution risk estimates away from the null.” (EPA, 2006a, section 7.1.3.3). On the other hand, there is recent evidence (Schwartz, 2000) that the relationship between PM and health effects may best be described by a distributed lag (i.e., the incidence of the health effect on day n is influenced by PM concentrations on day n, day n-1, day n-2 and so on). If this is true for O 3 

# as well, then a model with only a single lag may result in an underestimation of the multiday effect. For mortality associated with short-term exposure to O 3 

# , Bell et al. (2004) and Huang et al. (2004) present the results for distributed lag models that take into account exposure from

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-13 the previous 6 days. When a study reported several single lag models for a health effect, we based our initial selection of the appropriate lag structure for each health effect on the overall assessment provided in the O 3 

# CD (EPA, 2006a), based on all studies reporting CR functions for that health effect.

In summary:

 if a single-city C-R function was estimated in a risk assessment location and a multi-city function which includes that location was also available for the same health endpoint, we used both functions for that location in the risk assessment;

 risk estimates based on both single- and multi-pollutant models were used when both were available;

 distributed lag models were used, when available; when a study reported several single lag models for a health effect, we based our initial selection of the appropriate lag structure for the health effect on the overall assessment in the O 3 

# CD (EPA, 2006a), based on all studies reporting C-R functions for that health effect.
The locations, health endpoints, studies, and C-R functions included in that portion of the risk assessment based on epidemiological studies are summarized in Table 4-2.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-14 Table 4-2. Summary of Locations, Concentration-Response Functions, Months Included and Counties Included

Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 2 

## 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Bell et al. (2004) - Atlanta non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October Fulton, De Kalb 3



## Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September --- Atlanta March - October

Huang et al. (2004) - Atlanta cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Fulton, De Kalb

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Gent et al. (2003) Chest tightness in

asthmatic children none 1-hr max. April - September CT and Springfield area of MA 4 

## Boston April -

September

Gent et al. (2003) Chest tightness in asthmatic children none 8-hr max. April - September CT and Springfield area of MA 4

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-15 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Gent et al. (2003) Chest tightness in

asthmatic children PM 2.5 

## 1-hr max. April - September CT and Springfield area of MA 4


## Gent et al. (2003) Shortness of breath in

asthmatic children none 1-hr max. April - September CT and Springfield area of MA 4


## Gent et al. (2003) Shortness of breath in

asthmatic children none 8-hr max. April - September CT and Springfield area of MA 4


## Gent et al. (2003) Wheeze in asthmatic

children PM 2.5 

## 1-hr max. April - September

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September --- Chicago April -

September

Huang et al. (2004) -

Chicago cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Cook

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-16 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Schwartz (2004) - 14-city non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September ---

Schwartz (2004) - Chicago non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September Cook 5



## Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Bell et al. (2004) - Cleveland non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October Cuyahoga

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - Cleveland cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Cuyahoga Cleveland April - October

Schwartz et al. (1996) hosp. adms. for resp.

illness none 1-hr max. “warm season” Cuyahoga

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October --- Detroit April - October

Bell et al. (2004) - Detroit non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-17 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - Detroit cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Wayne

Schwartz (2004) - 14-city non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September ---

Schwartz (2004) - Detroit non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September Wayne 5



## Ito (2003) – GAM stringent 6 

## non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

Ito (2003) – GAM stringent respiratory mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

Ito (2003) – GAM stringent unscheduled hospital

adms. for pnuemonia none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

Ito (2003) – GAM stringent unscheduled hospital

adms. for COPD none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

Ito (2003) – GLM 7 

## unscheduled hospital

adms. for pnuemonia none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-18 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Ito (2003) – GLM unscheduled hospital

adms. For COPD none 24-hr avg. April - October Wayne

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Bell et al. (2004) - Houston non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. All year Harris

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - Houston cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Harris

Schwartz (2004) - 14-city non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September --- Houston All year

Schwartz (2004) - Houston non-accidental mortality none 1-hr max. May - September Harris 5



## Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October --- Los Angeles All year

Bell et al. (2004) - Los Angeles non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. All year Los Angeles

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-19 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - Los Angeles cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Los Angeles

Linn et al. (2000) unscheduled hosp. adms.

for pulmonary illness none 24-hr avg. All year; separately by

season Los Angeles,

Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange 8


## Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September --- New York April -

September

Huang et al. (2004) -

19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-20 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - New York cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Bronx, Kings, New York, Richmond, Queens, Westchester
Thurston et al. (1992) unscheduled hosp. adms.

for respiratory illness none 1-hr max. June - August Bronx, Kings, New York, Richmond, Queens 9



## Thurston et al. (1992) unscheduled hosp. adms.

for asthma none 1-hr max. June - August Bronx, Kings, New York, Richmond, Queens Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality PM 10 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality NO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September ---

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - September --- Philadelphia April - October

Huang et al. (2004) - 19 cities cardiorespiratory

mortality CO 24-hr avg. June - September ---

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-21 Risk Assessment Location Ozone Season in

Risk Assessment Location 

# Study/ C-R

Function Health Endpoint Other Pollutants in Model Exposure

Metric Months

Included for CR Functions 1 

## Counties

Included for C-R Functions

Huang et al. (2004) - Phila. cardiorespiratory

mortality none 24-hr avg. June - September Philadelphia

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. June - August Philadelphia

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) non-accidental mortality TSP, SO 2 

## 24-hr avg. June - August Philadelphia

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October --- Sacramento All year

Bell et al. (2004) - Sacramento non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. All year Sacramento

Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October --- St. Louis April - October

Bell et al. (2004) - St. Louis non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. St. Louis city (FIPS 29510) Washington, D.C. April - October Bell et al. (2004) - 95 cities non-accidental mortality none 24-hr avg. April - October ---

1 

## The months listed here are the months for which the C-R function was estimated. However, all C-R functions were applied in the risk assessment to April – Sept. 2 

## The authors report that the results were robust to adjustment for PM 10 

## , but do not report the multi-pollutant functions. 3 

## Counties used by Bell et al. and Huang et al. are provided at http://www.ihapss.jhsph.edu/data/NMMAPS/documentation/counties.htm and in the June 2000 NMMAPS report (Number 94, Part II) are given in Appendix A, Table A.1. 4 

## Specific counties not given. 5 

## Personal communication via email (6-12-05) from J. Schwartz.
6 

## Generalized Additive Model, using a stringent convergence criterion. 7 

## Generalized Linear Model. 8 

## Excluding mountain and desert regions of the first three counties. 9 

## The paper doesn’t list the counties, but notes that, in the case of New York City, surrounding counties were not included; this implies that only the five counties of which New York City is comprised are included in the analysis. This was confirmed in a personal communication from the author (G. Thurston).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-22 4.1.8 Baseline health effects incidence considerations

The most common epidemiologically-based health risk model expresses the reduction in health risk (  y) associated with a given reduction in O 3 

# concentrations (  x) as a percentage of the baseline incidence (y). To accurately assess the impact of changes in O 3 

# air quality on health risk in the selected urban areas, information on the baseline incidence of health effects (i.e., the incidence under “as is” air quality conditions) in each location is therefore needed.
Incidence rates express the occurrence of a disease or event (e.g., asthma episode, hospital admission, premature death) in a specific period of time, usually per year. Rates are expressed either as a value per population group (e.g., the number of cases in Philadelphia County) or a value per number of people (e.g., number of cases per 10,000 population), and may be age and sex specific. Incidence rates vary among geographic areas due to differences in population characteristics (e.g, age distribution) and factors promoting illness (e.g., smoking, air pollution levels). The sizes of the populations in the assessment locations that are relevant to the risk assessment (i.e., the populations for which the O 3 

# C-R functions are estimated and to which the baseline incidences refer) are given in Table 4-3.
We obtained estimates of location-specific baseline mortality rates for each of the O 3 

# risk assessment locations for 2002 from CDC Wonder, an interface for public health data dissemination from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 12 

# Rates were calculated for the specific sets of counties for which C-R functions were estimated. The mortality rates are derived from U.S. death records and U.S. Census Bureau post-censal population estimates, and are reported in Table 4-4. National rates are provided from CDC Wonder for 2002 for comparison. The epidemiological studies used in the risk assessment reported causes of mortality using the ninth revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9) codes. However, the tenth revision has since come out, and baseline mortality incidence rates for 2002 shown in Table 4-4 use ICD-10 codes. The groupings of ICD-9 codes used in the epidemiological studies and the corresponding ICD-10 codes used to calculate year 2002 baseline incidence rates are given in Table 4-5.

12 

## United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Compressed Mortality File (CMF) compiled from CMF 1968-1988, Series 20, No. 2A 2000, CMF 1989-1998, Series 20, No. 2E 2003 and CMF 1999-2002, Series 20, No. 2H 2004 on CDC WONDER On-line Database. See http://wonder.cdc.gov/

.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-23 Table 4-3. Relevant Population Sizes for O 3 

## Risk Assessment Locations
Population* City Counties

Total Ages  30 Ages  65 Children, Ages ≤ 12, with moderate/severe asthma**

Atlanta Fulton, DeKalb 1,482,000

--- --- --- Boston Suffolk 690,000

--- --- Boston Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Worcester

--- --- --- 25,000 Chicago Cook 5,376,000

--- --- --- Cleveland Cuyahoga 1,394,000 --- 217,000

Detroit Wayne 2,061,000

--- --- --- Houston Harris 3,400,000

--- --- --- Los Angeles Los Angeles 9,518,000

--- --- --- Los Angeles Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange

--- 8,378,000

--- --- New York Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York, Richmond 8,006,000

--- --- --- New York Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York, Richmond,

Westchester 8,930,000

--- --- ---

Philadelphia Philadelphia 1,517,000

--- --- --- Sacramento Sacramento 1,223,000

--- --- --- St. Louis St. Louis City 348,000

--- --- --- Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. 572,000

--- --- ---
* 

## Total population and age-specific population estimates taken from the 2000 U.S. Census. Populations are rounded to the nearest thousand. The urban areas given in this table are those considered in the studies used in the O 3 

## risk assessment, with the exception of the larger Boston area, which is the CSA for Boston (since the study that estimated a C-R function for respiratory symptoms observed in moderate and severe asthmatic children (ages 0 -12) was conducted in Springfield, MA and CT). ** Population derived as follows: The populations of children <5 and 5 - 12 in the counties listed were multiplied by corresponding percents of children [in each age group] in New England with “current asthma” -- 5.1% and 10.7% for the two age groups, respectively (see "The Burden of Asthma in New England." Asthma Regional Council. March 2006. Table S-2. www.asthmaregionalcouncil.org ). These estimated numbers of asthmatic children were then multiplied by the estimated percent of asthmatic children using maintenance medications (40%) (obtained via email 4-05-06 from Jeanne Moorman, CDC) and the results were summed.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-24 Table 4-4. Baseline Mortality Rates (per 100,000 Population) for 2002 for O 3 

## Risk Assessment Locations*
Type of Mortality (ICD-9 Codes) City Counties

Non-accidental (<800) Cardiorespiratory

(390-448; 490-496; 487; 480- 486; 507) Respiratory (460-519)

Boston Suffolk 736

--- --- Philadelphia Philadelphia 1,057 242

--- New York Bronx, Kings, Queens, New

York, Richmond, Westchester 704 199

---

Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. 942

--- --- Atlanta Fulton, DeKalb 623 131

--- St. Louis St. Louis City 1147

--- --- Chicago Cook 781 189

--- Houston Harris 533 123

--- Los Angeles Los Angeles 569 155

--- Sacramento Sacramento 686

--- --- Detroit Wayne 913 234 76
Cleveland Cuyahoga 1,058 268

--- National

--- 790 196 80



# * Data from United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Compressed Mortality File (CMF) compiled from CMF 1968-1988, Series 20, No. 2A 2000, CMF 1989-1998, Series 20, No. 2E 2003 and CMF 1999-2002, Series 20, No. 2H 2004 on CDC WONDER On-line Database. See http://wonder.cdc.gov/

.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-25 Table 4-5. ICD-9 Codes used in Epidemiological Studies and Corresponding ICD-10 Codes

Causes of Death ICD-9 Codes ICD-10 Codes

Non-accidental <800 A00-R99 Cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507 G45.0-G45.2, G45.4-G45.9, G54.0, G93.6, G93.8, G93.8, G95.1, I00-I13.9, I20.0-I22.9, I24.1-I64, I67.0-I78.9, M21.9, M30.0-M31.9, R00.1, R00.8, R01.2, J40-J47, J67, J10-J18, J69 Respiratory 460-519 J00-J01.9, J02.8-J02.9, J03.8-J64, J66.0-J94.9, J98.0-J98.9, P28.8, R06.5, R09.1



# Hospital admissions studies included in the O 3 

# risk assessment were conducted in Los Angeles, Cleveland, Detroit, and New York City. Because Thurston et al. (1992) estimated a linear C-R function for New York City, a baseline incidence rate is not required to estimate risks. However, a baseline incidence rate is needed to calculate hospital admissions as a percent of the total (baseline) hospital admissions. Baseline rates of unscheduled hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses and for asthma in New York City (the five boroughs) were calculated from the year 2001 data provided to us by the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative. Baseline rates for Detroit were calculated from hospitalization data for Wayne County for the year 2000, obtained from the Michigan Health and Hospital Association in April 2002. Baseline rates of unscheduled hospital admissions for Los Angeles (Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties) were calculated from patient discharge data for 1999, obtained from California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, which also provided records of hospital admissions for the study by Linn et al. (2000). The records provided for the Linn study included both ICD codes and All-Patient-Refined Diagnosis-Related Group (APR-DRG). Because Linn et al. (2000) used diagnosis categories based on the APR-DRG, we made sure that the records we obtained from California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development also contained the APR-DRG so that baseline incidence rates could be calculated for hospital admissions categories that matched those used in the Linn study. In addition, we used a flag in the dataset indicating whether an admission was scheduled or unscheduled to ensure that the rates we calculated were for unscheduled admissions only.
Schwartz et al. (1996) report several percentiles as well as the mean of the distribution of daily hospital admissions for respiratory illness (ICD-9 codes 460-519) among people ages 65 and older in Cuyahoga County, which contains Cleveland, Ohio, during the years 1988-90. The mean daily hospital admissions in this age group in Cuyahoga County was 22 in 1988-90. To estimate a daily rate, we obtained the population age 65 and older in Cuyahoga County in 1990 13 

# and divided the mean daily

13 

## 1990 U.S. Census, at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/BasicFactsServlet

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-26 hospital admissions for respiratory illness by that population. Baseline incidence rates for hospital admissions used in the risk assessment are shown in Table 4-6.

Table 4-6. Baseline Rates for Hospital Admissions Used in the O 3 

## Risk Assessment
Rate per 100,000 Relevant Population Los Angeles 1 

## New York 2 

## Detroit 3 

## Cleveland 4


## Relevant Population: Ages 30+ All Ages Ages 65+ Ages 65+ Admissions for: Pulmonary illness (DRG Codes 75 – 101) – spring 208 --- --- --- Pulmonary illness (DRG Codes 75 – 101) –

summer 174 --- --- --- Respiratory illness (ICD codes 466, 480-486, 490, 491, 492, 493) --- 800 --- ---
Asthma (ICD code 493) --- 327 --- --- Pneumonia (ICD codes 480-486)

--- --- 2,068 --- COPD (ICD codes 490-496)

--- --- 1,593 --- Respiratory illness ((ICD codes 460-519)

--- --- --- 3,632

1 

## Rates of unscheduled hospital admissions were calculated from patient discharge data for 1999, obtained from California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, which also provided records of hospital admissions for the study by Linn et al. (2000). 2 

## Rates of unscheduled hospital admissions were calculated from patient discharge data for 2001, obtained from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative. 3 

## Rates were calculated from hospitalization data for Wayne County for the year 2000, obtained from the Michigan Health and Hospital Association in April 2002. 4 

## Based on mean daily hospital admissions for ages 65+ for ICD-9 codes 460-519 -- Table 1 in Schwartz et al. (1996).



# Baseline rates of symptoms among moderate/severe asthmatic children in the Boston area were estimated by using the median rates of the respiratory symptoms reported in Table 3 of Gent et al. (2003). Each symptom rate, the percentage of days on which the symptom occurred, was calculated for each subject by dividing the number of days of the symptom by the number of days of participation in the study and then multiplying by 100. Median symptom rates among maintenance medication users for wheeze, chest tightness, and shortness of breath were 2.8%, 1.2%, and 1.5% of days, respectively.

4.1.9 Addressing uncertainty and variability

Any estimation of “as is” risk and reduced risks associated with just meeting the current O 3 

# standards should address both the variability and uncertainty that generally underlie such an analysis. In Section 3.1.5 we discussed the difference between uncertainty and variability, and gave examples of each. The discussion in that section is

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-27 applicable to the uncertainty and variability to be addressed in the portion of the risk assessment based on epidemiological studies as well.
As with the controlled human exposure studies portion of the risk assessment, the epidemiology-based portion incorporates some of the variability in key inputs to the analysis by using location-specific inputs (e.g., location-specific population data and baseline incidence rates). Although spatial variability in these key inputs across all U.S. locations has not been fully characterized, variability across the selected locations is imbedded in the analysis by using, to the extent possible, inputs specific to each urban area. As in the controlled human exposure studies portion of the risk assessment, temporal variability is more difficult to address, because the risk assessment focuses on some unspecified time in the future. To minimize the degree to which values of inputs to the analysis may be different from the values of those inputs at that unspecified time, we have used recent input data – for example, year 2004 and year 2002 air quality data for all of the urban locations, and recent population data (from the 2000 Census). However, future changes in inputs have not been predicted (e.g., future population levels). To address the impact of variability in O 3 

# concentrations from one year to another, we carried out the risk assessment for two years separately – 2002 and 2004 – which represent generally upper- and lower-ends of overall O 3 

# concentrations during the threeyear period under consideration.
A number of important sources of uncertainty in the epidemiology-based portion of the risk assessment were addressed where possible. The following are among the major sources of uncertainty:

 Uncertainties related to estimating the C-R functions, including

o uncertainty about the extent to which the association between O 3 

# and the health endpoint actually reflects a causal relationship.

o uncertainty surrounding estimates of O 3 

# coefficients in C-R functions used in the analyses.

o uncertainty about the specification of the model (including the shape of the C-R relationship), particularly whether or not there are thresholds below which no response occurs.

o uncertainty related to the transferability of O 3 

# C-R functions from study locations and time periods to the locations and time periods selected for the risk assessment. A C-R function in a study location may not provide an accurate representation of the C-R relationship in the analysis location(s) and time periods because of

 the possible role of associated co-pollutants, which vary from location to location and over time, in influencing O 3 

# risk,

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-28  variations in the relationship of total ambient exposure (both outdoor and ambient contributions to indoor exposure) to ambient monitoring in different locations (e.g, due to differences in air conditioning use in different regions of the U.S. or changes in usage over time),
 differences in population characteristics (e.g., the proportions of members of sensitive subpopulations) and population behavior patterns across locations or over time in the same location.

 Uncertainties related to the air quality data, including

o the adjustment procedure that was used to simulate just meeting the current and alternative O 3 

# standards.

o uncertainties about estimated background concentrations for each location.

 Uncertainties associated with use of baseline health effects incidence information that is not specific to the analysis locations.
The specific sources of uncertainty in the O 3 

# risk assessment are described in detail below and are summarized in Table 4-7.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-29 Table 4-7. Key Uncertainties in the Risk Assessment 

# Uncertainty Comments Causality Statistical association does not prove causation. However, the risk assessment considers only health endpoints for which the overall weight of the evidence supports the assumption that O 3 

# is likely causally related based on the totality of the health effects evidence. Empirically estimated C-R relations Because C-R functions are empirically estimated, there is uncertainty surrounding these estimates. Omitted confounding variables could cause bias in the estimated O 3 

# coefficients. However, including potential confounding variables that are highly correlated with one another can lead to unstable estimators. Both single- and multi-pollutant models were used whereavailable. In addition, for those studies which provided both single-location and multiplelocation estimates, single-location estimates were adjusted, using a Bayesian adjustment procedure, to make more efficient use of the data in the study. This is explained more fully below. Functional form of C-R relation Statistical significance of coefficients in an estimated C-R function does not necessarily mean that the mathematical form of the function is the best model of the true C-R relation. Lag structure of C-R relation There is some evidence that a distributed lag might be the most appropriate model for O 3 

# effects associated with short-term exposures. Most studies, however, included only a single lag term in their models. (Two important exceptions are Bell et al. (2004) and Huang et al. (2004).) Omitted lags could cause an underestimation in the predicted incidence associated with a given reduction in O 3 

# concentrations. Transferability of C-R relations C-R functions may not provide an adequate representation of the C-R relationship in times and places other than those in which they were estimated. For example, populations in the analysis locations may have more or fewer members of sensitive subgroups than locations in which functions were derived, which would introduce additional uncertainty related to the use of a given C-R function in the analysis location. However, in the majority of cases, the risk assessment relies on C-R functions estimated from studies conducted in the same location. Extrapolation of C-R relations beyond the range of observed O 3 

# data A C-R relationship estimated by an epidemiological study may not be valid at concentrations outside the range of concentrations observed during the study.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-30 Uncertainty Comments Adequacy of ambient O 3 

# monitors as surrogate for population exposure Possible differences in how the spatial variation in ambient O 3 

# levels across each urban area are characterized in the original epidemiological studies compared to the more recent ambient O 3 

# data used to characterize current air quality would contribute to uncertainty in the health risk estimates. Adjustment of air quality distributions to simulate just meeting current O 3 

# standards. The pattern and extent of daily reductions in O 3 

# concentrations that would result if the current O 3 

# standard or alternative O 3 

# standards were just met is not known. There remains uncertainty about the shape of the air quality distribution of hourly levels upon just meeting an O 3 

# standard that will depend on future air quality control strategies. Background O 3 

# concentrations The calculation of O 3 

# risk associated with “as is” air quality and of reduced risks that would result if the current or an alternative standard were just met requires as inputs the background O 3 

# concentrations in each of the assessment locations. Background concentrations for each location were estimated based on the GEOS-CHEM model simulations for all hours of an “average day” in a given month, for each of the months from April through September. There is uncertainty about these estimated background levels.Baseline health effects data Data on baseline incidence is uncertain for a variety of reasons. For example, location- and agegroup-specific baseline rates may not be available in all cases. Baseline incidence may change over time for reasons unrelated to O 3.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-31 We handled uncertainties in the risk assessment as follows:

 Limitations and assumptions in estimating risks and reduced risks are clearly stated and explained.

 The uncertainty resulting from the statistical uncertainty associated with the estimate of the O 3 

# coefficient in a C-R function was characterized either by confidence intervals or by Bayesian credible intervals around the corresponding point estimate of risk. Confidence intervals and credible intervals express the range within which the true risk is likely to fall if the uncertainty surrounding the O 3 

# coefficient estimate were the only uncertainty in the analysis. They do not, for example, reflect the uncertainty concerning whether the O 3 

# coefficients in the study location and the assessment location are the same.

 Where possible, we made use of multi-city information to adjust location-specific estimates to make more efficient use of the data (see Section 4.1.9.1.2 below).
Although the O 3 

# risk assessment considered mortality as well as morbidity health effects, not all health effects that may result from O 3 

# exposure were included. Only those for which there was sufficient epidemiological evidence from studies that met the study selection criteria (see Section 4.1.5) were included in the risk assessment. Other health effects reported to be associated with exposure to O 3 

# (e.g., increased doctor’s visits, increased emergency department visits) are considered qualitatively in the Staff Paper. Thus, it is important to recognize that the O 3 

# risk assessment represents only a portion of the health risks associated with O 3 

# exposures.
In addition, we limited application of a C-R function to only that portion of the population on which estimation of the function was based. For example, unscheduled hospital admissions for pneumonia were examined in Ito (2003) for people ages 65 and older. It is likely that the effect of O 3 

# on hospital admissions for these illnesses and conditions does not begin at age 65; however, data are not available to estimate the number of cases avoided for younger age groups for the urban area examined by Ito (2003). Therefore, some number of potentially avoided health effects was not captured in this analysis.

4.1.9.1 Concentration-response functions

The C-R function is a key element of the O 3 

# risk assessment. The quality of the risk assessment depends, in part, on (1) whether the C-R functions used in the risk assessment are good estimates of the relationship between the population health response and ambient O 3 

# concentration in the study locations, (2) how applicable these functions are to the analysis periods and locations, and (3) the extent to which these relationships apply beyond the range of the O 3 

# concentrations from which they were estimated. These issues are discussed in the subsections below.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-32 4.1.9.1.1 Uncertainty associated with the appropriate model form

The relationship between a health endpoint and O 3 

# can be characterized in terms of the form of the function describing the relationship – e.g., linear, log-linear, or logistic – and the value of the O 3 

# coefficient in that function. Although most epidemiological studies estimated O 3 

# coefficients in log-linear models, there is still substantial uncertainty about the correct functional form of the relationship between O 3 

# and various health endpoints – especially at the low end of the range of O 3 

# values, where data are generally too sparse to discern possible thresholds. While there are likely biological thresholds in individuals for specific health responses, the available epidemiological studies generally have not supported or refuted the existence of thresholds at the population level for O 3 

# exposures within the range of air quality observed in the studies. A recent study, Bell et al. (2006), specifically addressed the question of thresholds, however, and found no evidence to support the threshold hypothesis. Applying several different statistical approaches specifically designed to address the threshold issue to data on air pollution, weather and mortality for 98 U.S. cities from 1987 to 2000, they found that “even low levels of tropospheric ozone are associated with increased risk of premature mortality” (Bell et al., 2006).

4.1.9.1.2 Uncertainty associated with the estimated concentration-response

functions in the study locations

The uncertainty associated with an estimate of the O 3 

# coefficient in a C-R function reported by a study depends on the sample size and the study design. The O 3 

# CD has evaluated the substantial body of O 3 

# epidemiological studies. In general, critical considerations in evaluating the design of an epidemiological study include the adequacy of the measurement of ambient O 3 

# , the adequacy of the health effects incidence data, and the consideration of potentially important health determinants and potential confounders and effect modifiers such as:

 other pollutants;

 exposure to other health risks, such as smoking and occupational exposure; and

 demographic characteristics, including age, sex, socioeconomic status, and access to medical care.
The possible confounding effects of copollutants, including other criteria air pollutants, has often been noted as a problem in air pollutant risk assessments, particularly when these other pollutants are highly correlated with the pollutant of interest. O 3 

# is generally not highly correlated with other criteria air pollutants, although it may be more highly correlated with fine particles, especially during the summer months. A recent meta-analysis of time-series studies of O 3 

# and mortality, however, found that the effect of O 3 

# on mortality was insensitive to whether particulate matter was included in the

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-33 model (Bell et al., 2005 ). The issue of possible confounding by copollutants is discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.2.2 of the Staff Paper (EPA, 2007a).

The selection of studi es included in the O 3 

# risk assessment was guided by the evaluations in the O 3 

# CD. One of the criteria for sele cting studies addresses the adequacy of the measurement of ambient O 3 

# . This criterion was that O 3 

# was directly measured, rather than estimated, on a reasonable proportion of the days in the study. This criterion was designed to minimize e rror in the estimated O 3 

# coefficients in the C-R functions used in the risk assessment.

Ambient concentrations at central monitors, however, may not provide a good representation of pers onal exposures. The O 3 

# CD (EPA, 2006a) identifies the following three components to exposure measurement error: (1) the use of average population rather than individual exposur e data; (2) the difference between average personal ambient exposure and ambient concentrations at centr al monitoring sites; and (3) the difference between true and measured ambient concentrations (O 3 

# CD, p. 7-7). The O 3 

# CD notes that “these components are expe cted to have different effect s, with the first and third likely not causing bias in a pa rticular direction (“nondifferent ial error”) but increasing the standard error, while the s econd component may result in downward bias, or attenuation of the risk estimate” (O 3 

# CD, pp. 7-7 to 7-8). While a concentration-response function may understate the effect of personal exposures to O 3 

# on the incidence of a health effect, however, it will give an unbiased estimate of the effect of ambient concentrations on the incidence of the health eff ect, if the ambient concentra tions at monitoring stations provide an unbiased estimate of the ambient concentrations to which the population is exposed. In this case, if O 3 

# is actually the causal agent, the understatement of the impact of personal exposures isn’t an issue (since EP A regulates ambient co ncentrations rather than personal exposures). If O 3 

# is not the causal agent, howev er, then there is a problem of confounding copollutants or other f actors, so that reducing ambient O 3 

# concentrations might not result in the expected reductions in the health effect. A more comprehensive discussion of exposure measurement is given in Section 3.4.2.1 of EPA’s Staff Paper (EPA, 2007a).
To the extent that a study did not address all relevant factors (i.e., all factors that affect the health endpoint), there is uncertainty associ ated with the C-R function estimated in that study, beyond th at reflected in the confidence or credible interval. It may result in either over- or underestimat es of risk associated with ambient O 3 

# concentrations in the location in which the study was carried out. Techniques for addressing the problem of confounding fact ors and other study design issues have improved over the years, however , and the epidemiological studies currently available for use in the O 3 

# risk assessment provide a higher level of confidence in study quality than ever before.
When a study is conducted in a single location, the problem of possible confounding co-pollutants may be particularly difficult, if co-pollutants are highly correlated in the study lo cation. Single-pollu tant models, which omit co-pollutants, may produce overestimates of the O 3 

# effect, if some of the effects of other pollutants (omitted

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-34 from the model) are falsely attributed to O 3 

# . Statistical estimates of an O 3 

# effect based on a multi-pollutant model can be more uncertain, and even statistically insignificant, if the co-pollutants included in the model are highly correlated with O 3 

# . As a result of theseconsiderations, we report risk estimates based on both single-pollutant and multipollutant models, when both are reported by a study.
As noted above, the uncertainty resulting from the statistical uncertainty associated with the estimate of the O 3 

# coefficient in a C-R function was characterized either by confidence intervals (if the coefficient was estimated using a classical statistical approach) or by Bayesian credible intervals (if the coefficient was estimated using a Bayesian approach) around the corresponding point estimate of risk.
Two studies, Bell et al. (2004) and Huang et al. (2004), reported both multilocation and single-location C-R functions in a variety of locations, using a Bayesian two-stage hierarchical model. In these cases, the single-location estimates can be adjusted to make more efficient use of the data from all locations. The resulting “shrinkage” estimates are so called because they “shrink” the location-specific estimatestowards the overall mean estimate (the mean of the posterior distribution of the multilocation C-R function coefficient). The greater the uncertainty about the estimate of the location-specific coefficient relative to the estimate of between-study heterogeneity, the more the location-specific estimate is “pulled in” towards the overall mean estimate. Bell et al. (2004) calculated these shrinkage estimates, which were presented in Figure 2 of that paper. These location-specific shrinkage estimates, and their adjusted standard errors were provided to us by the study authors and were used in the risk assessment.
The location-specific estimates reported in Table 1 of Huang et al. (2004) are not “shrinkage” estimates. However, the study authors provided us with the posterior distribution for the heterogeneity parameter,  , for their distributed lag model, shown inFigure 4(b) of their paper. Given this posterior distribution, and the original locationspecific estimates presented in Table 1 of their paper, we calculated location-specific “shrinkage” estimates using a Bayesian method described in DuMouchel (1994) (see Section B-3 in Appendix B for a complete explanation of the calculation of these “shrinkage” estimates). As with the shrinkage estimates presented in Bell et al. (2004), the resulting Bayesian shrinkage estimates use the data from all of the locations considered in the study more efficiently than do the original location-specific estimates. The calculation of these shrinkage estimates is thus one way to address the relatively large uncertainty surrounding estimates of coefficients in location-specific C-R functions.
Several recent meta-analyses (Bell et al. 2005; Levy et al., 2005; and Ito et al., 2005) have addressed the impact of various factors on estimates of mortality associated with short-term exposures to O 3 

# . We reviewed these meta-analyses for additional information that might be used to assist in characterizing the uncertainties associated with risk estimates for this health outcome. Overall, the meta-analyses helped delineate the sources of heterogeneity in the estimated relationships between mortality and short-term exposure to O 3 

# , the robustness of these estimated relationships to inclusion of PM in the model, the relative importance of 0-day lag among the different lag structures considered,

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-35 and the indication of publication bias in single-city studies and meta-analyses of such studies. Because of this last issue in particular, while the meta-analyses provided insight into relevant issues, we considered multi-city studies preferable for use in the risk assessment.

4.1.9.1.3 Applicability of concentration-response functions in different locations

As described in Section 4.1.4, risk assessment locations were selected on the basis of where C-R functions have been estimated, to avoid the uncertainties associated withapplying a C-R function estimated in one location to another location. However, multicity C-R functions were also applied to any risk assessment location contained in the set of locations used to estimate the C-R function. The accuracy of the results based on a multi-location C-R function rests in part on how well this multi-location C-R function represents the relationship between ambient O 3 

# and the given population health response in the individual cities involved in the study.
The relationship between ambient O 3 

# concentration and the incidence of a given health endpoint in the population (the population health response) depends on (1) the relationship between ambient O 3 

# concentration and personal exposure to ambientgenerated O 3 

# and (2) the relationship between personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# and the population health response. Both of these are likely to vary to some degree from one location to another.
The relationship between ambient O 3 

# concentration and personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# will depend on patterns of behavior, such as the amount of time spent outdoors, as well as on factors affecting the extent to which ambient-generated O 3 

# infiltrates into indoor environments. The relationship between personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# and the population health response will depend on the population exposed.
Exposed populations differ from one location to another in characteristics that are likely to affect their susceptibility to O 3 

# air pollution. For instance, people with preexisting conditions such as chronic bronchitis are probably more susceptible to the adverse effects of exposure to O 3 

# , and populations vary from one location to another in the prevalence of specific diseases. Also, some age groups may be more susceptible than others, and population age distributions also vary from one location to another. Closely matching populations observed in studies to the populations of the assessment locations is not possible for many characteristics (for example, smoking status, workplace exposure, socioeconomic status, and the prevalence of highly susceptible subgroups).
Other pollutants may also play a role in either causing or modifying health effects, either independently or in combination with O 3 

# (see Section 8.1.3.2 in the 2004 PM CD and Section 7.1.3.5 in the O 3 

# CD). Inter-locational differences in these pollutants could also induce differences in the O 3 

# C-R relationship between one location and another.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-36 In summary, the C-R relationship is most likely not the same everywhere. Even if the relationship between personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# and population health response were the same everywhere, the relationship between ambient concentrations and personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# differs among locations. Similarly, even if the relationship between ambient concentrations and personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# were the same everywhere, the relationship between personal exposure to ambient-generated O 3 

# and population health response may differ among locations. In either case, the C-R relationship would differ.
4.1.9.1.4 Extrapolation beyond observed air quality levels

Although a C-R function describes the relationship between ambient O 3 

# and a given health endpoint for all possible O 3 

# levels (potentially down to zero), the estimation of a C-R function is based on real ambient O 3 

# values that are limited to the range of O 3 

# concentrations in the location in which the study was conducted. Thus, uncertainty in the shape of the estimated C-R function increases considerably outside the range of O 3 

# concentrations observed in the study.
Because we are interested in the effects of anthropogenic O 3 

# , in this initial analysis, the O 3 

# risk assessment assumes that the estimated C-R functions adequately represent the true C-R relationship down to PRB O 3 

# levels in the assessment locations. Because those studies that reported the minimum O 3 

# levels observed all reported levels below PRB O 3 

# levels, the problem of extrapolation to levels below those air quality levels observed in a study does not arise.
The C-R relationship may also be less certain towards the upper end of the concentration range being considered in a risk assessment, particularly if the O 3 

# concentrations in the assessment location exceed the O 3 

# concentrations observed in thestudy location. Even though it may be reasonable to model the C-R relationship as loglinear over the ranges of O 3 

# concentrations typically observed in epidemiological studies, it may not be log-linear over the entire range of O 3 

# levels at the locations considered in the O 3 

# risk assessment.
4.1.9.2 The air quality data
4.1.9.2.1 Adequacy of O 3 

# air quality data

The method of averaging data from monitors across a metropolitan area in the risk assessment is similar to the methods used to characterize ambient air quality in most of the epidemiology studies. Ideally, the measurement of average hourly ambient O 3 

# concentrations in the study location is unbiased. In this case, unbiased risk predictions in the assessment location depend, in part, on an unbiased measurement of average hourly ambient O 3 

# concentrations in the assessment location as well. If, however, the measurement of average hourly ambient O 3 

# concentrations in the study location is biased, unbiased risk predictions in the assessment location are still possible if the measurement of average hourly ambient O 3 

# concentrations in the assessment location incorporates the

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-37 same bias as exists in the study location measurements. Because this is not known, however, the errors in the O 3 

# measurements in the assessment locations are a source of uncertainty in the risk assessment.

O 3 

# air quality data were not available for all hours of the ozone season in the year chosen for the risk assessment in all of the assessment locations. Missing O 3 

# concentrations were filled in, as described in section 3.2 of the Exposure Assessment TSD.
The results of the risk assessment are generalizable to other years only to the extent that ambient O 3 

# levels in the available data are similar to ambient O 3 

# levels in those locations in the other years. A substantial difference between O 3 

# levels in the year used in the risk assessment and O 3 

# levels in the other years could imply a substantial difference in predicted incidences of health effects. For the initial phase of the assessment, we selected two years, 2002 and 2004, in the 2002 – 2004 three-year period. O 3 

# levels in 2004 in most of the 12 urban areas were somewhat lower than in other recent years, due to both meteorological conditions that were not conducive to O 3 

# formation and lower emissions of NO x 

# due to newly implemented regional controls on major power plants in the eastern U.S. O 3 

# levels in 2002 were generally higher than in either 2003 or 2004 except in Detroit, Houston and Los Angeles. For 5 urban areas (Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, New York) additional risk estimates were developed based on 2003 air quality data.

4.1.9.2.2 Estimation of PRB O 3 

# concentrations

The PRB O 3 

# concentrations that were used in the risk assessment are monthly averaged GEOS-CHEM model predictions, and the measured ambient O 3 

# concentrations are frequently lower than these PRB values. After assessing the uncertainty of the GEOS-Chem model predictions, the O 3 

# CD estimates that “the PRB ozone values reported by Fiore et al. (2003a) for afternoon surface air over the United States are likely 10 ppbv too high in the southeast in summer, and accurate within 5 ppbv in other regions and seasons” (O 3 

# CD, page 3-53). This raises the question of how best to deal with this in our estimation of risk above PRB. We considered two different approaches, described in Appendix F, calculating the bias expected in each case. As described in Appendix F, the relative magnitudes of the expected biases from the two approaches depends on whether we have overestimated or underestimated the monthly average PRB. The frequency with which the measured ambient O 3 

# concentrations are lower than our estimated PRB values suggests that these monthly PRB averages were overestimated. Fiore et al. (2002a) noted that the GEOS-CHEM model tends to overpredict O 3 

# concentrations in highly populated coastal areas, lending additional support for this hypothesis in Houston, where the frequency of estimated PRB concentrations above monitored “as is” concentrations was the greatest. On the assumption that monthly PRB averages were overestimated, the lowest-bias method to estimating risk above PRB is to set negative  O 3 

# (= “as is” O 3 

# concentration – PRB O 3 

# concentration) to zero. We believe this approach minimizes bias.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-38 4.1.9.2.3 Simulation of reductions in O 3 

# concentrations to just meet the current or

an alternative standard

The pattern of hourly O 3 

# concentrations that would result if the current O 3 

# standard or an alternative standard were just met in any of the assessment locations is, of course, not known. This therefore adds uncertainty to estimates of reduced risk when O 3 

# concentrations just meet a standard.
Although the initial phase of health risk assessment uses air quality data from two years, 2002 and 2004, it simulates just attaining a standard in each year separately, since we are estimating annual reduced health risks. Design values based on the most recent three-year period available are used to determine the amount of adjustment to apply to each of these years. Because O 3 

# levels in 2004 were, in most locations, the lowest of the three most recent years, applying a design value based on the most recent three-year period available only to O 3 

# levels in 2004 would result in lower estimates of remaining risk than would be the case if either of the other two years of the three-year period were evaluated in the assessment. Conversely, because O 3 

# levels in 2002 were, in most locations, the highest of the three most recent years, applying the same design value only to O 3 

# levels in 2002 would result in higher estimates of remaining risk than would be the case if either of the other two years of the three-year period were evaluated in the assessment. Using both a year of generally higher O 3 

# levels (2002) and a year of generally lower O 3 

# levels (2004) provides plausible ranges of estimates of annual remaining risk and reductions in health risks in each location.

4.1.9.3 Baseline health effects incidence rates

Most of the C-R functions used in the O 3 

# risk assessment are log-linear (see equation 4-1 in Section 4.1.1). Given this functional form, the percent change in incidence of a health effect corresponding to a change in O 3 

# depends only on the change in O 3 

# levels (and not the actual value of either the initial or final O 3 

# concentration). This percent change is multiplied by a baseline incidence, y 0 

# , in order to determine the change in health effects incidence, as shown in equation (4-3) in Section 4.1.1:

  

## y y e x 

##    0 

## 1[ ]





# Predicted changes in incidence therefore depend on the baseline incidence of the health effect.
4.1.9.3.1 Quality of incidence data

County-specific incidence data were available for mortality for all counties. We have also obtained hospital admissions baseline incidence data for all the urban areas for which we have hospital admissions C-R functions for O 3 

# (Detroit, Los Angeles, and Cleveland). This is clearly preferable to using non-local data, such as national or regional incidence rates. As with any health statistics, however, misclassification of disease, errors in coding, and difficulties in correctly assigning residence location are potential

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-39 problems. These same potential sources of error are present in most epidemiological studies. In most cases, the reporting institutions and agencies utilize standard forms and codes for reporting, and quality control is monitored.
Data on hospital admissions are actually hospital discharge data rather than admissions data. Because of this, the date associated with a given hospital stay is the date of discharge rather than the date of admissions. Therefore, there may be some hospital admissions in an assessment location that are within the O 3 

# season that are not included in the baseline incidence rate, if the date of discharge was after the ozone season ended, even though the date of admissions was within the ozone season. Similarly, there may be some hospital admissions that preceded the O 3 

# season that are included in the baseline incidence rate because the date of discharge was within the ozone season. This is a very minor problem, however, partly because the percentage of such cases is likely to be very small, and partly because the error at the beginning of the O 3 

# season (i.e., admissions that should not have been included but were) will largely cancel the error at the end of the O 3 

# season (i.e., admissions that should have been included but were not).
Another minor uncertainty surrounding the hospital admissions baseline incidence rates arises from the fact that these rates are based on the reporting of hospitals within each of the assessment counties. Hospitals report the numbers of ICD code-specific discharges in a given year. If people from outside the county use these hospitals, and/or if residents of the county use hospitals outside the county, these rates will not accurately reflect the numbers of county residents who were admitted to the hospital for specific illnesses during the year, the rates that are desired for the risk assessment. Once again, however, this is likely to be a very minor problem because the health conditions studied tend to be acute events that require immediate hospitalization, rather than planned hospital stays.
Regardless of the data source, if actual incidence rates are higher than the incidence rates used, risks will be underestimated. If actual incidence rates are lower than the incidence rates used, then risks will be overestimated.
Both morbidity and mortality rates change over time for various reasons. One of the most important of these is that population age distributions change over time. The old and the extremely young are more susceptible to many health problems than is the population as a whole. The most recent available data were used in the risk assessment.However, the average age of the population in many locations will increase as postWorld War II children age. Consequently, the baseline incidence rates for some endpoints may rise, resulting in an increase in the number of cases attributable to any given level of O 3 

# pollution. Alternatively, areas which experience rapid in-migration, as is currently occurring in the South and West, may tend to have a decreasing mean population age and corresponding changes in incidence rates and risk. Temporal changes in incidence are relevant to both morbidity and mortality endpoints. However, recent data were used in all cases, so temporal changes are not expected to be a large source of uncertainty.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-40 4.1.9.3.2 Lack of daily health effects incidence rates

Both ambient O 3 

# levels and the daily health effects incidence rates corresponding to ambient O 3 

# levels vary somewhat from day to day. Those analyses based on C-R functions estimated by short-term exposure studies calculate daily changes in incidence and sum them over the days of the O 3 

# season to predict a total change in health effect incidence during the O 3 

# season (standardized in this analysis to April through September). However, only annual baseline incidence rates are available. Average daily baseline incidence rates, necessary for short-term daily C-R functions, were calculated by dividing the annual rate by the number of days in the year for which the baseline incidence rates were obtained. To the extent that O 3 

# affects health, however, actual incidence rates would be expected to be somewhat higher than average on days with high O 3 

# concentrations; using an average daily incidence rate would therefore result in underestimating the changes in incidence on such days. Similarly, actual incidence rates would be expected to be somewhat lower than average on days with low O 3 

# concentrations; using an average daily incidence rate would therefore result in overestimating the changes in incidence on low O 3 

# days. Both effects would be expected to be small, however, and should largely cancel one another out.

4.2 Results

The results of the assessment of health risks associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations (representing levels measured in a recent year) over PRB levels are presented in Section 4.2.1. The assessment of health risks associated with 2004 and 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels for all of the assessment locations are presented in Section 4.2.1.1. The mortality-specific results associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations are presented, for a subset of five locations (Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York), in Section 4.2.1.2.

The results of the assessment of the reduced health risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour daily maximum standard are presented in Section 4.2.2. The results for all locations for the current standard and the original set of seven standards, based on 2002 and 2004 air quality data, are presented in Section 4.2.2.1. The results for the five locations listed above for the current standard and five alternative standards, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data, are presented in Section 4.2.2.2.
In both portions of the risk assessment, with the exception of respiratory symptoms-days, all estimated incidences were rounded to the nearest whole number, and all estimated incidences per 100,000 relevant population and all percentages were rounded to one decimal place. Estimated incidences of respiratory symptom-days and corresponding incidences per 100,000 relevant population were rounded to the nearest 100. These rounding conventions are not intended to imply confidence in that level of precision, but rather to avoid the confusion that can result when a greater amount of rounding is used (for example, when the central tendency estimate and both the lower and

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-41 upper bounds of the 95 confidence or credible interval of in cidence per 100,000 relevant population are all less than 0.5.)
There is uncertainty surroundi ng all estimates of inciden ce associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in any location. Because we had to simulate the profiles of O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the curren t and alternative 8-hour daily maximum O 3 

# standards in each location, there is additio nal uncertainty surrounding estimates of the reduced incidence associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet these O 3 

# standards. We tried to minimize the extent of this un certainty by avoiding the application of a C-R function estimated in one location to another lo cation as much as possible. As discussed in Section 4.1.9, however, there are othe r sources of uncertainty. The uncertainty surrounding risk estimates resulting from the statistical uncertainty of the O 3 

# coefficients in the C-R functions used is characterized by ninety-five percent confidence or credible intervals around estimates of incidence, incidence per 100, 000 relevant population, and the percent of total incidence that is O 3 

# -related. In some cases, the lower bound of a confidence interval falls below zero. This does not imply that additional exposure to O 3 

# has a beneficial effect, but only that the estimated O 3 

# coefficient in the C-R function was not statistically significantly different from zero. Lack of statis tical significance could mean that there is no relationship between O 3 

# and the health endpoint or it could mean that there wasn’t sufficient statistical power to detect a relationship that exists. Conversely, statistical significance does not prove causation. The case for a causal relationship between O 3 

# and a health endpoint rests on a variety of types of supporting evidence, and overall confidence in such a cau sal relationship varies substantially across health endpoints that have b een associated with ambient O 3 

# , as illustrated in Figure 3-5 of the Staff Paper (EPA, 2007a).

4.2.1 Assessment of the health risks associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of policy relevant background levels

4.2.1.1 Assessment of the health risks associated with 2004 and 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of po licy relevant background levels



# The results of the assessment of mort ality risks associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations (representing levels meas ured in 2004 and in 2002 for all of the assessment locations are summarized across urba n areas in Figures 4-2a and b through 4- 8a and b, and in Tables 4-8 and 4-11. Figures 4-2a and b through 4-8a and b show results expressed as percent of total incidence. The corres ponding figures showing results expressed as number of cases per 100,000 re levant population are gi ven in Appendix D. Figures 4-2a through 4-8a show results base d on year 2004 air quality data; Figures 4-2b through 4-8b show results based on 2002 air quality data. Only one study, Ito (2003) for hospital admissions in Detroit, provided diffe rent lag models. The results from these different lag models are shown in Figures 4-6a and b. All results are for health risks associated with short-term exposures to O 3 

# concentrations in exce ss of PRB levels from April through September.
Although we carried out the analysis in each of the assessment locations, to reduce the number of tables in this section of the report, we sele cted one location (New

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-42 York City) to include here for illustrative purposes. Tables 4-12 and 4-13 show results in New York for health endpoints associated with short-term exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of estimated PRB concentrations for 2004 and 2002 air quality data, respectively. Results for the other locations corresponding to those shown for New York in Tables 4-12 and 4-13 are shown in Appendix D, in Tables D-1 through D-22.
The central tendency estimates in all of the figures and in Tables 4-8 through 4-13 and D-1 through D-22 are based on the O 3 

# coefficients estimated in the studies, or, in the case of the location-specific estimates from Huang et al. (2004), on “shrinkage” estimates based on the O 3 

# coefficients estimated in the study (see Section 4.1.9.1.2). The ranges are based either on the 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs) around those estimates (if the coefficients were estimated using classical statistical techniques) or on the 95 percent credible intervals (if the coefficients were estimated using Bayesian statistical techniques).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-43 Figure 4-2. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background: Single-Pollutant, Single-City Models (April – September)

Figure 4-2a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-2b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-44 Figure 4-3. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi-Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

## , PM 10 

## , SO 2 

## ] Figure 4-3a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-3b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-45 Figure 4-4. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) Figure 4-4a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-4b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-46 Figure 4-5. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) Figure 4-5a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-5b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-47 Figure 4-6. Estimated Annual Percent of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] Figure 4-6a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-6b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -6.0% -5.0% -4.0% -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0%

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -6.0% -5.0% -4.0% -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0%

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-48 Figure 4-7. Estimated Annual Percent of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

## Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure 4-7a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-7b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington,D.C.Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm
Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm
Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm
Attributable to ozone < 0.03 ppm

0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington,D.C.Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.07 ppm<=ozone<0.08 ppm Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone < 0.03 ppm

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-49 Figure 4-8. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

## Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure 4-8a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-8b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

## Table 4-8. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2004*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 0.4 0.1% (-26 - 38) (-1.8 - 2.6) (-0.6% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 0.8 0.3% (4 - 20) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 1.0 0.3% (2 - 12) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 0.9 0.2% (16 - 81) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.1% - 0.4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 394 7.3 1.9% (125 - 658) (2.3 - 12.2) (0.6% - 3.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 148 2.8 0.7% (46 - 250) (0.9 - 4.6) (0.2% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 27 1.9 0.4% (-17 - 69) (-1.2 - 5) (-0.2% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 1.2 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.4 - 2) (0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 33 1.6 0.4% (-11 - 76) (-0.5 - 3.7) (-0.1% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 0.8 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 128 6.2 1.4% (-21 - 274) (-1 - 13.3) (-0.2% - 2.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 70 3.4 0.7% (22 - 117) (1.1 - 5.7) (0.2% - 1.2%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 40 2.0 0.4% (-37 - 116) (-1.8 - 5.6) (-0.4% - 1.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 35 1.0 0.4% (2 - 67) (0.1 - 2) (0% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 0.5 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 93 2.7 1% (9 - 176) (0.3 - 5.2) (0.1% - 1.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 78 2.3 0.9% (24 - 130) (0.7 - 3.8) (0.3% - 1.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 62 0.6 0.2% (-149 - 271) (-1.6 - 2.8) (-0.5% - 1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 133 1.4 0.5% (45 - 221) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.2% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 60 0.7 0.2% (20 - 100) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 1.5 0.3% (8 - 38) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1% - 0.5%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 82 5.4 1% (52 - 112) (3.4 - 7.4) (0.6% - 1.4%) Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-50 December 2006Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 1.0 0.3% (-36 - 59) (-3 - 4.8) (-0.9% - 1.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 1.4 0.4% (6 - 29) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 1.0 0.2% (-6 - 13) (-1.7 - 3.6) (-0.3% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 0.9 0.2% (1 - 5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 1.5 0.3% (3 - 14) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1% - 0.5%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Sacramento

St Louis

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington, D.C.



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-51 December 2006

## Table 4-9. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2002*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 0.6 0.2% (-37 - 54) (-2.5 - 3.6) (-0.8% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 1.2 0.4% (6 - 29) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 1.5 0.4% (3 - 17) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 69 1.3 0.3% (23 - 115) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.1% - 0.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 505 9.4 2.4% (161 - 840) (3 - 15.6) (0.8% - 4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 191 3.6 0.9% (60 - 321) (1.1 - 6) (0.3% - 1.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 61 4.3 0.8% (-38 - 157) (-2.7 - 11.3) (-0.5% - 2.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 38 2.8 0.5% (13 - 64) (0.9 - 4.6) (0.2% - 0.9%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 57 2.8 0.6% (-18 - 131) (-0.9 - 6.3) (-0.2% - 1.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 1.4 0.3% (10 - 48) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1% - 0.5%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 181 8.8 1.9% (-30 - 385) (-1.4 - 18.7) (-0.3% - 4.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 99 4.8 1% (31 - 165) (1.5 - 8) (0.3% - 1.8%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 69 3.4 0.7% (-64 - 198) (-3.1 - 9.6) (-0.7% - 2.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 0.9 0.3% (2 - 57) (0.1 - 1.7) (0% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 0.4 0.2% (5 - 24) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 85 2.5 0.9% (8 - 161) (0.2 - 4.7) (0.1% - 1.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 71 2.1 0.8% (22 - 119) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.2% - 1.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 51 0.5 0.2% (-124 - 224) (-1.3 - 2.4) (-0.5% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 110 1.2 0.4% (37 - 184) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 105 1.2 0.3% (35 - 174) (0.4 - 2) (0.1% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 37 2.4 0.5% (12 - 62) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.2% - 0.8%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 132 8.7 1.6% (83 - 180) (5.5 - 11.9) (1% - 2.2%) Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-52 December 2006Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 16 1.3 0.4% (-48 - 78) (-3.9 - 6.4) (-1.1% - 1.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 1.9 0.6% (8 - 39) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.2% - 0.9%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 1.9 0.3% (-11 - 23) (-3.1 - 6.7) (-0.5% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 1.7 0.3% (2 - 10) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 2.6 0.6% (5 - 25) (0.9 - 4.4) (0.2% - 0.9%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Sacramento

St Louis

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-53 December 2006

## Table 4-10. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2004*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence


### 8 0.5 0.8% (-3 - 18) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.3% - 1.8%) 8 0.5 0.8% (3 - 13) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.3% - 1.3%) 23 0.4 0.4% (-21 - 66) (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.4% - 1.3%) 38 0.7 0.7% (14 - 61) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.3% - 1.2%) 16 1.2 0.9% (0 - 32) (0 - 2.3) (0% - 1.7%) 14 1.0 0.7% (5 - 22) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.3% - 1.2%) 15 0.7 0.6% (-2 - 31) (-0.1 - 1.5) (-0.1% - 1.3%) 14 0.7 0.6% (5 - 22) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2% - 0.9%) 12 0.4 0.6% (-2 - 26) (0 - 0.8) (-0.1% - 1.2%) 13 0.4 0.6% (5 - 20) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2% - 1%) 99 1.0 1.3% (1 - 195) (0 - 2.1) (0% - 2.6%) 115 1.2 1.6% (44 - 185) (0.5 - 1.9) (0.6% - 2.5%) 73 0.8 0.8% (23 - 123) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3% - 1.4%) 54 0.6 0.6% (21 - 87) (0.2 - 1) (0.2% - 1%) 20 1.3 1.1% (1 - 39) (0.1 - 2.6) (0.1% - 2.1%) 17 1.1 0.9% (6 - 27) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3% - 1.5%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. *All results are for cardiorespiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a singlepollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

19 U.S. Cities Houston

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Philadelphia 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Risk Assessment Location



### 19 U.S. Cities Study Location



### Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-54 December 2006

## Table 4-11. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2002*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence



### 11 0.7 1.1% (-4 - 25) (-0.2 - 1.7) (-0.4% - 2.6%) 11 0.8 1.2% (4 - 18) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.5% - 1.9%) 32 0.6 0.6% (-29 - 93) (-0.5 - 1.7) (-0.6% - 1.8%) 53 1.0 1% (20 - 86) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.4% - 1.7%) 36 2.6 2% (-1 - 72) (-0.1 - 5.2) (0% - 3.9%) 31 2.2 1.6% (12 - 49) (0.8 - 3.5) (0.6% - 2.6%) 26 1.2 1.1% (-3 - 54) (-0.1 - 2.6) (-0.1% - 2.2%) 24 1.1 1% (9 - 38) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4% - 1.6%) 10 0.3 0.5% (-1 - 22) (0 - 0.6) (-0.1% - 1%) 11 0.3 0.5% (4 - 17) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.2% - 0.8%) 82 0.9 1.1% (1 - 162) (0 - 1.7) (0% - 2.2%) 95 1.0 1.3% (36 - 153) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.5% - 2.1%) 128 1.4 1.4% (41 - 213) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5% - 2.4%) 94 1.1 1.1% (36 - 151) (0.4 - 1.7) (0.4% - 1.7%) 33 2.2 1.8% (2 - 63) (0.1 - 4.1) (0.1% - 3.4%) 27 1.8 1.5% (10 - 43) (0.7 - 2.8) (0.6% - 2.3%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. *All results are for cardiorespiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a singlepollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

19 U.S. Cities Houston

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Philadelphia 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Risk Assessment Location



### 19 U.S. Cities Study Location



### Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-55 December 2006

### Table 4-12. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: New York, NY, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all 24 hr avg. none 60 0.7 0.2% (20 - 100) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.1% - 0.3%) Huang et al. (2004)*** all 24 hr avg. none 73 0.8 0.8% (23 - 123) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3% - 1.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 54 0.6 0.6% (21 - 87) (0.2 - 1) (0.2% - 1%) all 24 hr avg. CO 30 0.3 0.3% (9 - 51) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 26 0.3 0.3% (5 - 47) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 32 0.4 0.4% (-12 - 76) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 22 0.2 0.2% (0 - 44) (0 - 0.5) (0% - 0.5%) Thurston et al. (1992)  all 1 hr max. none 447 5.6 1.3% (108 - 786) (1.4 - 9.8) (0.3% - 2.2%) Thurston et al. (1992)** ** all 1 hr max. none 382 4.8 2.9% (81 - 683) (1 - 8.5) (0.6% - 5.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

***New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County.  New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 1-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels**  Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)***

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-56 December 2006

## Table 4-13. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: New York, NY, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence


### all 24 hr avg. none 105 1.2 0.3% (35 - 174) (0.4 - 2) (0.1% - 0.6%) Huang et al. (2004)*** all 24 hr avg. none 128 1.4 1.4% (41 - 213) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5% - 2.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 94 1.1 1.1% (36 - 151) (0.4 - 1.7) (0.4% - 1.7%) all 24 hr avg. CO 52 0.6 0.6% (15 - 89) (0.2 - 1) (0.2% - 1%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 45 0.5 0.5% (8 - 82) (0.1 - 0.9) (0.1% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 56 0.6 0.6% (-22 - 132) (-0.2 - 1.5) (-0.2% - 1.5%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 39 0.4 0.4% (0 - 77) (0 - 0.9) (0% - 0.9%) Thurston et al. (1992)  all 1 hr max. none 608 7.6 1.7% (147 - 1068) (1.8 - 13.3) (0.4% - 3%) Thurston et al. (1992)** ** all 1 hr max. none 519 6.5 4% (110 - 928) (1.4 - 11.6) (0.8% - 7.1%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

***New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County.  New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels**  Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)***

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

1-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-57 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-58 As discussed in Section 4.1.4, assessment locations were chosen in part on the basis of whether an acceptable C-R function had been reported for that location. As a result, risks were estimated in a given assessment location only for those health endpoints for which there is at least one acceptable C-R function reported for that location. The set of health effects shown in Tables 4-12 and 4-13 and Tables C-1 through C-22 therefore varies from one location to another. For example, hospital admissions for pneumonia associated with short-term exposure to O 3 

# is included in Tables C-9 and C-10 for Detroit, but no hospital admissions endpoints are included in Tables C-1 through C-6 for Atlanta, Boston, and Chicago, because there was no study that met the selection criteria that reports a C-R function for hospital admissions reported in the O 3 

# epidemiological literature for any of those cities evaluated in the O 3 

# CD. For non-accidental mortality associated with short-term exposure to O 3 

# , Figures 4-4a and b display estimates for only nine of the twelve risk assessment locations because single-city C-R functions for this health outcome were not available for the other three locations.
All results discussed below are for April through September. The top graph on each page shows results based on 2004 air quality, and the bottom graph shows results based on 2002 air quality. Figures 4-2a and b show estimated percent of non-accidental mortality related to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels, based on single-pollutant, single-city models across all locations for which such models were available. Tables 4-8 and 4-9 show estimates of incidence, incidence per 100,000 relevant population, and percent of total incidence of non-accidental mortality related to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels in all locations, based on both single-city and multi-city models, using air quality data for 2004 and 2002, respectively.

Estimates of O 3 

# -related (non-accidental) mortality based on 2004 air quality (Table 4-8) ranged from 0.4 per 100,000 relevant population in Atlanta (Bell et al., 2004) to 7.3 per 100,000 relevant population in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). The corresponding range based on 2002 air quality (Table 4-9) is from 0.4 per 100,000 relevant population in Houston (Bell et al., 2004) to 9.4 per 100,000 relevant population in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). Estimated O 3 

# -related (non-accidental) mortality reported by Schwartz (2004) for Chicago, Detroit, and Houston, based on both the single-city and the multi-city C-R functions, tend to be higher than other estimates in those locations in large part because Schwartz used the 1-hr maximum O 3 

# concentration, rather than the 24-hour average, as the exposure metric. The changes from “as is” 1-hr maximum to PRB 1-hr maximum O 3 

# concentrations were generally larger in the assessment locations than the corresponding changes from “as is” 24-hr average to PRB 24-hr average O 3 

# concentrations. As a percent of total incidence, estimated O 3 

# -related (non-accidental) mortality ranged from 0.1 percent in Atlanta (Bell et al., 2004) to 1.9 percent in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004), using 2004 air quality data. Using 2002 air quality data, the range was from 0.2 percent in Atlanta (Bell et al., 2004), Houston (Bell et al., 2004), and Los Angeles (Bell et al., 2004) to 2.4 percent in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). Although 7 of the 12 estimates from single-city single-pollutant models shown in Figure 4-4 were not statistically significant, all 12 were positive.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-59 Figures 4-3a and b show estimated percent of cardiorespiratory mortality related to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels, based on multi-city single-pollutant versus multi-pollutant models from Huang et al. (2004) across all locations for which such models were available. Tables 4-10 and 4-11 show estimates of incidence, incidence per 100,000 relevant population, and percent of total incidence of cardiorespiratory mortality related to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations over PRB levels in all risk assessment locations covered in Huang et al. (2004), based on both single-city and multi-city single-pollutant models from that study. Estimates of O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality ranged from 0.4 per 100,000 relevant population in Chicago (using the single-city C-R function) and Houston (using both the single-city and the multi-city C-R functions) to 1.3 per 100,000 relevant population in Philadelphia (using the single-city C-R function), when 2004 air quality data was used. The corresponding range using 2002 air quality data was from 0.3 per 100,000 relevant population in Houston (using both the single-city and the multi-city C-R functions) to 2.6 per 100,000 relevant population in Cleveland (using the single-city C-R function). As a percent of total incidence, estimated O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality ranged from 0.4 percent in Chicago (using the single-city C-R function) to 1.6 percent in Los Angeles (using the multi-city C-R function), when 2004 air quality data was used. The corresponding range using 2002 air quality data was from 0.5 percent in Houston (using both the single-city and the multi-city C-R functions) to 2 percent in Cleveland (using the single-city C-R function). All of the estimates of O 3 

# -relatedcardiorespiratory mortality based on Huang et al. (2004), from both single-city and multicity models, and from both single-pollutant and multi-pollutant models, were positive. Five of the single-city single-pollutant “shrinkage” estimates (for Atlanta, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, and Houston) and the estimate from the multi-city multi-pollutant model with PM 10 

# were not statistically significant. All the rest of the estimates of O 3 

# - related cardiorespiratory mortality based on Huang et al. (2004) were statistically significant.
Figures 4-4a and b show estimated percent of non-accidental mortality that is O 3 

# - related, based on single-city versus multi-city models across all locations for which both types of model were available. Estimates of O 3 

# -related non-accidental mortality based on single-city models tended to have wider confidence or credible intervals than those based on multi-city models, with both multi-city models (from Bell et al., 2004 and Schwartz, 2004) producing statistically significant results. However, the choice of single-city versus multi-city model did not have a uniform affect on the magnitude of the point estimate. In some cases (Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Sacramento), the multi-city models produced larger estimates than the single-city models, while in other cases (Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Houston, and St. Louis) the reverse was true.
Bayesian credible intervals around the “shrinkage” estimates of O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality (see Section 4.1.9.1.2) based on single-city models in Huang et al. (2004) were uniformly larger than the corresponding credible intervals around estimates based on the multi-city model from that study. As noted above, all of the estimates were positive and, with the exception of the single-city estimate for Chicago, all were statistically significant.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-60 Estimated O 3 

# -related pneumonia hospital admissions in Detroit (Ito 2003), shown in Figures 4-6a and b, increased monotonically with increasing lag, with the greatest estimate predicted by a 3-day lag model. None of the estimates of O 3 

# -related unscheduled hospital admissions in Detroit were statistically significant.
Figures 4-7a and b and 4-8a and b show the estimated annual percent of nonaccidental mortality and cardiorespiratory mortality, respectively, associated with shortterm exposure to “as is” O 3 

# concentrations within specified ranges. In 2004, all O 3 

# - related non-accidental mortality was associated with O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.06 ppm, and most of that was associated with O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.04 ppm. In 2002, all O 3 

# -related non-accidental mortality was associated with O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.08 ppm, and the great majority was associated with O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.06 ppm. The results for cardiorespiratory mortality follow a similar pattern.

4.2.1.2 Assessment of the mortality risks associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of policy relevant background levels in five urban

areas
The non-accidental mortality risks associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels in Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York are shown in Table 4-14. The corresponding cardiorespiratory mortality risks are shown in Table 4-15. The non-accidental mortality risks associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels, measured as percent of total incidence, are very similar to those associated with 2002 and/or 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels, as can be seen by comparing the results in Table 4-14 with the results for a recent year of air quality in Tables H-6 (for 2004) and 4-36 (for 2002) for the five locations included in the 2003 analysis. The cardiorespiratory mortality risks associated with 2003 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels, measured as percent of total incidence, are similarly very close to those associated with 2002 and/or 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels, as can be seen by comparing the results in Table 4-15 with the results for a recent year of air quality in Tables H-12 (for 2004) and 4-39 (for 2002) for the five locations included in the 2003 analysis.

## Table 4-14. Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2003*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 0.4 0.1% (-26 - 37) (-1.7 - 2.5) (-0.6% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 0.8 0.3% (4 - 20) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 64 1.2 0.3% (22 - 107) (0.4 - 2) (0.1% - 0.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 445 8.3 2.1% (141 - 742) (2.6 - 13.8) (0.7% - 3.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 168 3.1 0.8% (53 - 282) (1 - 5.3) (0.2% - 1.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 36 1.1 0.4% (2 - 70) (0.1 - 2) (0% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 0.5 0.2% (6 - 30) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 101 3.0 1.1% (9 - 191) (0.3 - 5.6) (0.1% - 2.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 84 2.5 0.9% (26 - 141) (0.8 - 4.2) (0.3% - 1.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 56 0.6 0.2% (-136 - 246) (-1.4 - 2.6) (-0.5% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 121 1.3 0.4% (41 - 201) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 79 0.9 0.3% (27 - 132) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.1% - 0.4%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-61 December 2006

## Table 4-15. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: April - September, 2003*

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence


### 8 0.5 0.8% (-2 - 17) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.3% - 1.8%) 8 0.5 0.8% (3 - 13) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.3% - 1.3%) 30 0.6 0.6% (-27 - 86) (-0.5 - 1.6) (-0.5% - 1.7%) 49 0.9 1% (19 - 80) (0.4 - 1.5) (0.4% - 1.6%) 13 0.4 0.6% (-2 - 27) (0 - 0.8) (-0.1% - 1.3%) 13 0.4 0.6% (5 - 21) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2% - 1%) 90 0.9 1.2% (1 - 178) (0 - 1.9) (0% - 2.4%) 104 1.1 1.4% (40 - 168) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.5% - 2.3%) 97 1.1 1.1% (31 - 161) (0.3 - 1.8) (0.3% - 1.8%) 71 0.8 0.8% (27 - 114) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3% - 1.3%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Atlanta

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Risk Assessment Location



### 19 U.S. Cities Study Location



### Chicago

19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

Chicago

*All results are for cardiorespiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a singlepollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### Houston

Los Angeles

New York Houston

Los Angeles

New York



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-62 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-63 4.2.2 Assessment of the reduced health risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour standards

The results of the assessment of the reduced health risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards are presented in two parts. In Section 4.2.2.1, we present results for the current standard and the original set of seven alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards considered, based on adjusting 2002 and 2004 air quality. In Section 4.2.2.2, we present results for the current standard and a smaller set of two alternative standards in Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality. As noted above (see Section 3.2.2), an 8-hr average standard, denoted m/n, is characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 – 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The 3 rd 

# , 4 th 

# , and 5 th 

# daily maximum standards, denoted m/n, for n = 3, 4, and 5, require that the average of the three annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).
4.2.2.1 Results for all locations for the current standard and the original set of seven standards, based on 2002 and 2004 air quality data

The results of the assessment of the reduced mortality risks associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards (based on 2004 and in 2002 air quality data for all of the assessment locations) are summarized across urban areas in Figures 4-9a and b through 4-17a and b, and in Tables 4-16 through 4-27. Figures 4-9a and b through 4-15a and b show results expressed as percent of total incidence. The corresponding figures showing results expressed as number of cases per 100,000 relevant population are given in Appendix E. Figures 4-16a and b and 4-17a and b show results for O 3 

# -related non-accidental and cardiorespiratory mortality, respectively, expressed as estimated percent reductions from the current standard to alternative standards, separately for each location. These percent reductions were calculated as mortality under the current standard minus mortality under an alternative standard divided by mortality under the current standard. A reduction in mortality therefore results in a positive percent – i.e., a positive reduction. Figures 4-9a through 4-17a show results based on year 2004 air quality data; Figures 4-9b through 4- 17b show results based on 2002 air quality data. Tables 4-16, 4-17, and 4-18 show estimated incidence, incidence per 100,000 relevant population, and percent of total incidence, respectively, of non-accidental mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards, based on 2004 O 3

# concentrations. Tables 4-19, 4-20, and 4-21 show results for the same measures of nonaccidental mortality risk based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations. Tables 4-22 through 4-27 show the corresponding results for cardiorespiratory mortality. All results are for health risks associated with short-term exposures to O 3 

# concentrations in excess of PRB levels from April through September.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-64 Tables 4-28 through 4-30 show results in New York City for health endpoints associated with short-term exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards, based on 2004 O 3 

# concentrations. Tables 4- 31 through 4-33 show the corresponding results based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations. Results for the other locations corresponding to those shown for New York in Tables 4- 28 through 4-33 are shown in Appendix E, in Tables E-1 through E-66.
As described in the previous section, the central tendency estimates in all of the figures and tables are based on the O 3 

# coefficients estimated in the studies, or, in the case of the location-specific estimates from Huang et al. (2004), on “shrinkage” estimates based on the O 3 

# coefficients estimated in the study (see Section 4.1.9.1.2). The ranges are based either on the 95 percent confidence intervals around those estimates (if the coefficients were estimated using classical statistical techniques) or on the 95 percent credible intervals (if the coefficients were estimated using Bayesian statistical techniques).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-65 Figure 4-9. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met: SinglePollutant, Single-City Models (April – September) Figure 4-9a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-9b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-66 Figure 4-10. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi-Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

## , PM 10 

## , SO 2 

## ] Figure 4-10a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-10b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -0.2% 0.3% 0.8% 1.3% 1.8% 2.3%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -0.2% 0.3% 0.8% 1.3% 1.8% 2.3%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-67 Figure 4-11. Estimated Annual Percent of (Non-Accidental) Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) Figure 4-11a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-11b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Huang et al., 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Huang et al., 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-68 Figure 4-12. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) Figure 4-12a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-12b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-69 Figure 4-13. Estimated Annual Percent of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] Figure 4-13a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-13b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -5.0% -4.0% -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0%

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)



### -5.0% -4.0% -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0%

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-70 Figure 4-14. Estimated Annual Percent of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure 4-14a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-14b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington,D.C.Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington,D.C.Percent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-71 Figure 4-15. Estimated Annual Percent of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure 4-15a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure 4-15b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5%AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm
Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm
Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5%AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaPercent of Total Incidence (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-72 Figure 4-16. Estimated Percent Reductions From the Current Standard to Alternative Standards in O 3 

## -Related Non-Accidental Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities)*

Figure 4-16a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

* The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each location in the box below each figure. -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Atlanta: 9 (3 - 15); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Boston: 6 (2 - 9); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) Chicago: 33 (11 - 55); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Cleveland: 12 (4 - 20); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Detroit: 12 (4 - 20); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Houston: 11 (4 - 18); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 67 (22 - 111); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) New York: 43 (15 - 72); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Philadelphia: 17 (6 - 28); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Sacramento: 12 (4 - 21); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.5%) St Louis: 2 (1 - 4); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Washington: 7 (2 - 12); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-73 Figure 4-16b. Based on 2002 Air Quality

-120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Atlanta: 14 (5 - 23); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.5%) Boston: 9 (3 - 15); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Chicago: 55 (18 - 91); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%) Cleveland: 31 (10 - 52); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.7%) Detroit: 24 (8 - 39); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%) Houston: 9 (3 - 15); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 52 (17 - 86); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) New York: 84 (28 - 139); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%) Philadelphia: 30 (10 - 50); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.6%) Sacramento: 18 (6 - 30); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.7%) St Louis: 5 (2 - 8); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) Washington: 14 (5 - 23); 0.5% (0.2% - 0.8%)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-74 Figure 4-17. Estimated Percent Reductions From the Current Standard to Alternative Standards in O 3 

## -Related Cardiorespiratory Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Huang et al., 2004 - - 19 U.S. Cities)*

Figure 4-17a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

* The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each location in the box below each figure. -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Atlanta: 6 (2 - 10); 0.6% (0.2% - 1%) Chicago: 26 (10 - 41); 0.5% (0.2% - 0.8%) Cleveland: 10 (4 - 15); 0.5% (0.2% - 0.8%) Detroit: 10 (4 - 16); 0.4% (0.2% - 0.7%) Houston: 8 (3 - 13); 0.4% (0.1% - 0.6%) Los Angeles: 57 (22 - 93); 0.8% (0.3% - 1.3%) New York: 39 (15 - 63); 0.4% (0.2% - 0.7%) Philadelphia: 12 (5 - 19); 0.7% (0.3% - 1.1%)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-75 Figure 4-17b. Based on 2002 Air Quality

-120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Atlanta: 9 (4 - 15); 0.9% (0.4% - 1.5%) Chicago: 42 (16 - 68); 0.8% (0.3% - 1.3%) Cleveland: 25 (10 - 40); 1.3% (0.5% - 2.1%) Detroit: 19 (7 - 31); 0.8% (0.3% - 1.3%) Houston: 6 (2 - 10); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.5%) Los Angeles: 45 (17 - 72); 0.6% (0.2% - 1%) New York: 75 (29 - 120); 0.8% (0.3% - 1.4%) Philadelphia: 22 (8 - 35); 1.2% (0.5% - 1.9%)

## Table 4-16. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 (-20 - 29) (-20 - 29) (-18 - 26) (-16 - 23) (-15 - 22) (-15 - 22) (-13 - 19) (-11 - 16) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 9 8 7 7 7 6 5 (3 - 15) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 33 31 29 26 23 22 19 14 (11 - 55) (10 - 52) (10 - 48) (9 - 43) (8 - 39) (7 - 36) (6 - 32) (5 - 24) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 314 300 288 268 249 238 222 183 (99 - 525) (95 - 501) (91 - 482) (85 - 448) (79 - 417) (75 - 399) (70 - 372) (58 - 307) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 118 113 108 101 93 89 83 69 (37 - 199) (35 - 190) (34 - 182) (31 - 170) (29 - 157) (28 - 151) (26 - 140) (21 - 116) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 19 18 17 15 14 14 13 10 (-12 - 49) (-11 - 46) (-11 - 44) (-9 - 39) (-9 - 37) (-9 - 36) (-8 - 33) (-6 - 26) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 11 11 9 9 9 8 6 (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 18) (3 - 16) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (2 - 11) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 22 21 21 17 16 15 11 (-8 - 56) (-7 - 51) (-7 - 49) (-7 - 48) (-6 - 40) (-5 - 38) (-5 - 35) (-4 - 27) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 11 11 11 9 8 8 6 (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 18) (4 - 18) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (2 - 10) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 107 102 99 97 87 83 78 66 (-17 - 229) (-17 - 218) (-16 - 212) (-16 - 209) (-14 - 186) (-13 - 178) (-13 - 168) (-11 - 142) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 58 55 54 53 47 45 42 36 (18 - 98) (17 - 93) (17 - 91) (17 - 89) (15 - 79) (14 - 76) (13 - 72) (11 - 61) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 29 27 26 25 21 20 18 14 (-27 - 85) (-25 - 78) (-24 - 75) (-23 - 73) (-20 - 62) (-18 - 57) (-17 - 53) (-13 - 41) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 22 20 19 17 16 15 13 8 (1 - 42) (1 - 39) (1 - 37) (1 - 32) (1 - 30) (1 - 28) (1 - 25) (0 - 15) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 11 10 10 8 8 7 6 4 (4 - 18) (3 - 16) (3 - 16) (3 - 13) (3 - 13) (2 - 12) (2 - 11) (1 - 6) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 70 66 65 59 57 55 52 42 (6 - 132) (6 - 126) (6 - 123) (5 - 112) (5 - 109) (5 - 104) (5 - 99) (4 - 80) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 58 55 54 49 48 46 43 35 (18 - 98) (17 - 93) (17 - 91) (15 - 83) (15 - 81) (14 - 77) (14 - 73) (11 - 59) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 31 30 27 22 20 19 16 9 (-74 - 135) (-72 - 131) (-66 - 120) (-52 - 95) (-49 - 90) (-46 - 83) (-38 - 69) (-22 - 41) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 67 64 59 47 44 41 34 20 (22 - 111) (22 - 107) (20 - 98) (16 - 78) (15 - 74) (14 - 68) (11 - 56) (7 - 33) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 43 38 39 35 33 29 29 24 (15 - 72) (13 - 63) (13 - 65) (12 - 58) (11 - 55) (10 - 48) (10 - 49) (8 - 39) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Cleveland

New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-76 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 15 15 13 13 12 11 9 (6 - 28) (5 - 25) (5 - 25) (4 - 22) (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (3 - 15) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 59 54 54 47 46 42 41 33 (37 - 81) (34 - 75) (34 - 74) (30 - 65) (29 - 63) (27 - 58) (26 - 56) (21 - 46) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 8 8 7 7 7 6 5 (-25 - 42) (-25 - 41) (-23 - 39) (-21 - 35) (-21 - 34) (-20 - 34) (-19 - 31) (-16 - 26) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 12 11 10 10 10 9 8 (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 15) (3 - 13) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 (-4 - 9) (-4 - 8) (-4 - 8) (-3 - 6) (-3 - 6) (-2 - 5) (-2 - 5) (-1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 (1 - 4) (1 - 3) (1 - 3) (1 - 3) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 (2 - 12) (2 - 10) (2 - 11) (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-77 December 2006

## Table 4-17. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based Adjusting on 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (-1.3 - 1.9) (-1.3 - 1.9) (-1.2 - 1.8) (-1.1 - 1.6) (-1 - 1.5) (-1 - 1.5) (-0.9 - 1.3) (-0.7 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.8 5.6 5.4 5 4.6 4.4 4.1 3.4 (1.9 - 9.8) (1.8 - 9.3) (1.7 - 9) (1.6 - 8.3) (1.5 - 7.7) (1.4 - 7.4) (1.3 - 6.9) (1.1 - 5.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.3 (0.7 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.6 - 3.4) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.5 - 2.9) (0.5 - 2.8) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.4 - 2.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.7 (-0.8 - 3.5) (-0.8 - 3.3) (-0.8 - 3.2) (-0.7 - 2.8) (-0.6 - 2.7) (-0.6 - 2.6) (-0.6 - 2.4) (-0.5 - 1.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (-0.4 - 2.7) (-0.3 - 2.5) (-0.3 - 2.4) (-0.3 - 2.3) (-0.3 - 2) (-0.3 - 1.8) (-0.2 - 1.7) (-0.2 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.2 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.2 4 3.8 3.2 (-0.8 - 11.1) (-0.8 - 10.6) (-0.8 - 10.3) (-0.8 - 10.1) (-0.7 - 9) (-0.7 - 8.6) (-0.6 - 8.2) (-0.5 - 6.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.7 (0.9 - 4.7) (0.8 - 4.5) (0.8 - 4.4) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.7 - 3.8) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.6 - 3.5) (0.5 - 2.9) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1 1 0.9 0.7 (-1.3 - 4.1) (-1.2 - 3.8) (-1.2 - 3.6) (-1.1 - 3.6) (-1 - 3) (-0.9 - 2.8) (-0.8 - 2.6) (-0.6 - 2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.2 (0.2 - 3.9) (0.2 - 3.7) (0.2 - 3.6) (0.2 - 3.3) (0.2 - 3.2) (0.1 - 3.1) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1 (0.5 - 2.9) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.8 - 1.4) (-0.8 - 1.4) (-0.7 - 1.3) (-0.5 - 1) (-0.5 - 0.9) (-0.5 - 0.9) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Cleveland



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-78 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.1 3 2.8 2.7 2.2 (2.5 - 5.3) (2.3 - 4.9) (2.2 - 4.9) (2 - 4.3) (1.9 - 4.2) (1.8 - 3.8) (1.7 - 3.7) (1.4 - 3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 (-2.1 - 3.4) (-2 - 3.3) (-1.9 - 3.1) (-1.8 - 2.9) (-1.7 - 2.8) (-1.7 - 2.7) (-1.5 - 2.5) (-1.3 - 2.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (-1.2 - 2.7) (-1.1 - 2.4) (-1 - 2.3) (-0.8 - 1.8) (-0.8 - 1.7) (-0.7 - 1.5) (-0.6 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1 1.1 1 1 0.8 0.9 0.7 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1.2) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient.



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-79 December 2006

### Table 4-18. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% (0.5% - 2.5%) (0.5% - 2.4%) (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 2.1%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% (-0.2% - 2.4%) (-0.2% - 2.3%) (-0.2% - 2.3%) (-0.2% - 2.2%) (-0.1% - 2%) (-0.1% - 1.9%) (-0.1% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 1.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Cleveland

New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-80 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.5% - 1%) (0.4% - 0.9%) (0.4% - 0.9%) (0.4% - 0.8%) (0.4% - 0.8%) (0.3% - 0.7%) (0.3% - 0.7%) (0.3% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.6% - 1%) (-0.6% - 1%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.7%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.2% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-81 December 2006

## Table 4-19. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 4 (-30 - 43) (-30 - 43) (-28 - 40) (-26 - 38) (-24 - 35) (-24 - 35) (-22 - 32) (-19 - 27) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 14 13 12 11 11 10 9 (5 - 23) (5 - 23) (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 19) (3 - 17) (3 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 8 8 8 7 7 7 6 (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 10) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 55 52 50 47 44 43 40 34 (18 - 91) (18 - 87) (17 - 84) (16 - 79) (15 - 74) (14 - 71) (13 - 67) (11 - 57) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 427 412 401 381 361 350 335 294 (136 - 712) (131 - 687) (127 - 669) (121 - 636) (115 - 603) (111 - 585) (106 - 559) (93 - 493) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 161 156 151 144 136 132 126 111 (51 - 271) (49 - 261) (47 - 254) (45 - 242) (43 - 229) (41 - 222) (39 - 212) (35 - 187) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 47 46 43 42 40 39 35 (-31 - 128) (-30 - 123) (-29 - 120) (-27 - 112) (-26 - 109) (-25 - 105) (-25 - 102) (-22 - 91) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 31 30 29 27 27 26 25 22 (10 - 52) (10 - 50) (10 - 49) (9 - 45) (9 - 44) (9 - 43) (8 - 41) (7 - 37) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 46 43 43 42 38 35 34 29 (-15 - 106) (-14 - 100) (-14 - 98) (-14 - 97) (-12 - 87) (-11 - 81) (-11 - 79) (-9 - 67) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 22 22 22 19 18 18 15 (8 - 39) (7 - 37) (7 - 36) (7 - 36) (6 - 32) (6 - 30) (6 - 29) (5 - 25) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 158 150 148 147 134 128 125 111 (-26 - 336) (-24 - 320) (-24 - 316) (-24 - 313) (-22 - 287) (-21 - 274) (-20 - 268) (-18 - 239) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 86 82 81 80 73 70 68 61 (27 - 144) (26 - 137) (25 - 136) (25 - 134) (23 - 123) (22 - 117) (21 - 115) (19 - 102) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 56 53 52 51 46 43 42 36 (-52 - 162) (-49 - 151) (-48 - 150) (-48 - 147) (-42 - 132) (-40 - 124) (-39 - 120) (-33 - 103) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 16 16 13 13 12 11 7 (1 - 34) (1 - 32) (1 - 31) (1 - 26) (1 - 25) (1 - 23) (1 - 21) (0 - 13) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 8 8 7 6 6 5 3 (3 - 15) (3 - 13) (3 - 13) (2 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (1 - 5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 63 59 58 53 51 48 46 36 (6 - 119) (5 - 113) (5 - 110) (5 - 100) (5 - 97) (4 - 92) (4 - 87) (3 - 69) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 53 50 49 44 43 40 38 30 (16 - 88) (16 - 84) (15 - 82) (14 - 74) (13 - 72) (13 - 68) (12 - 64) (9 - 51) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 23 21 15 15 13 11 7 (-58 - 105) (-55 - 100) (-50 - 91) (-36 - 66) (-35 - 64) (-32 - 59) (-26 - 48) (-16 - 29) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 52 49 45 33 32 29 24 14 (17 - 86) (17 - 82) (15 - 74) (11 - 54) (11 - 53) (10 - 48) (8 - 39) (5 - 23) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 84 76 78 73 70 64 65 57 (28 - 139) (25 - 126) (26 - 130) (24 - 121) (23 - 116) (21 - 106) (22 - 108) (19 - 95) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Cleveland

New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-82 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 30 28 28 26 26 24 24 21 (10 - 50) (10 - 47) (9 - 47) (9 - 43) (9 - 42) (8 - 40) (8 - 40) (7 - 35) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 107 101 101 93 91 86 85 75 (67 - 146) (63 - 138) (63 - 137) (58 - 127) (57 - 124) (54 - 117) (53 - 116) (47 - 103) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 (-37 - 60) (-36 - 58) (-35 - 57) (-32 - 53) (-32 - 52) (-31 - 50) (-30 - 49) (-27 - 44) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 17 17 16 15 15 14 13 (6 - 30) (6 - 29) (6 - 28) (5 - 26) (5 - 26) (5 - 25) (5 - 24) (4 - 22) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 (-9 - 20) (-9 - 19) (-8 - 18) (-8 - 16) (-7 - 15) (-7 - 15) (-6 - 14) (-5 - 12) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 12 13 12 12 10 11 10 (5 - 23) (4 - 20) (4 - 21) (4 - 19) (4 - 19) (3 - 17) (4 - 18) (3 - 16) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-83 December 2006

## Table 4-20. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-2 - 2.9) (-2 - 2.9) (-1.9 - 2.7) (-1.8 - 2.5) (-1.6 - 2.4) (-1.7 - 2.4) (-1.5 - 2.2) (-1.3 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.9 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.9 7.7 7.5 7.1 6.7 6.5 6.2 5.5 (2.5 - 13.2) (2.4 - 12.8) (2.4 - 12.4) (2.3 - 11.8) (2.1 - 11.2) (2.1 - 10.9) (2 - 10.4) (1.7 - 9.2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.1 (0.9 - 5) (0.9 - 4.9) (0.9 - 4.7) (0.8 - 4.5) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.7 - 3.9) (0.6 - 3.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.1 3 2.9 2.8 2.5 (-2.2 - 9.2) (-2.1 - 8.8) (-2.1 - 8.6) (-1.9 - 8) (-1.9 - 7.8) (-1.8 - 7.5) (-1.8 - 7.3) (-1.6 - 6.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.6 (0.8 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.6) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.7 - 3.3) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 3) (0.5 - 2.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 2.1 2.1 2 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.4 (-0.7 - 5.2) (-0.7 - 4.8) (-0.7 - 4.8) (-0.7 - 4.7) (-0.6 - 4.2) (-0.6 - 3.9) (-0.5 - 3.8) (-0.5 - 3.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.7 7.3 7.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.4 (-1.3 - 16.3) (-1.2 - 15.5) (-1.2 - 15.4) (-1.2 - 15.2) (-1.1 - 13.9) (-1 - 13.3) (-1 - 13) (-0.9 - 11.6) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 4.2 4 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.3 2.9 (1.3 - 7) (1.2 - 6.6) (1.2 - 6.6) (1.2 - 6.5) (1.1 - 6) (1.1 - 5.7) (1 - 5.6) (0.9 - 4.9) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.1 2 1.7 (-2.5 - 7.8) (-2.4 - 7.4) (-2.3 - 7.3) (-2.3 - 7.2) (-2.1 - 6.4) (-1.9 - 6) (-1.9 - 5.8) (-1.6 - 5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 (0.2 - 3.5) (0.2 - 3.3) (0.2 - 3.2) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.6) (0.1 - 2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 0.9 (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.4 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.2) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 (-0.6 - 1.1) (-0.6 - 1.1) (-0.5 - 1) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.3 - 0.6) (-0.3 - 0.5) (-0.2 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Cleveland

New York Houston

Los Angeles Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-84 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.4 (0.7 - 3.3) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 2.9) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.3) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 7 6.6 6.6 6.1 6 5.7 5.6 5 (4.4 - 9.6) (4.2 - 9.1) (4.2 - 9.1) (3.9 - 8.4) (3.8 - 8.2) (3.6 - 7.7) (3.5 - 7.6) (3.1 - 6.8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 (-3 - 4.9) (-2.9 - 4.8) (-2.8 - 4.6) (-2.6 - 4.3) (-2.6 - 4.2) (-2.5 - 4.1) (-2.4 - 4) (-2.2 - 3.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 (-2.6 - 5.6) (-2.5 - 5.4) (-2.4 - 5.2) (-2.2 - 4.7) (-2.1 - 4.5) (-2 - 4.3) (-1.8 - 4) (-1.5 - 3.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1 0.8 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.2) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.4 2.1 2.2 2 2 1.8 1.9 1.7 (0.8 - 3.9) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.8 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.6 - 3) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.6 - 2.9) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-85 December 2006

### Table 4-21. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.7% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.7%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2% 2% 1.9% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.6% 1.4% (0.6% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 3.3%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.5% - 2.9%) (0.5% - 2.8%) (0.5% - 2.7%) (0.4% - 2.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% (-0.4% - 1.7%) (-0.4% - 1.7%) (-0.4% - 1.6%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) (-0.3% - 1.4%) (-0.3% - 1.4%) (-0.3% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 1%) (-0.1% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% (-0.3% - 3.6%) (-0.3% - 3.4%) (-0.3% - 3.4%) (-0.3% - 3.3%) (-0.2% - 3%) (-0.2% - 2.9%) (-0.2% - 2.8%) (-0.2% - 2.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (-0.6% - 1.7%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.3% - 1.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Atlanta

Boston

Chicago Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Cleveland

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-86 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% (0.8% - 1.8%) (0.8% - 1.7%) (0.8% - 1.7%) (0.7% - 1.6%) (0.7% - 1.5%) (0.7% - 1.5%) (0.7% - 1.4%) (0.6% - 1.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (-0.9% - 1.4%) (-0.8% - 1.4%) (-0.8% - 1.3%) (-0.8% - 1.3%) (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 1.2%) (-0.6% - 1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.4% - 0.9%) (-0.4% - 0.9%) (-0.4% - 0.8%) (-0.4% - 0.8%) (-0.3% - 0.7%) (-0.3% - 0.7%) (-0.3% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). St Louis Sacramento

Washington Philadelphia

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-87 December 2006

### Table 4-22. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
6 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 (-2 - 14) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 11) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 9) (-1 - 7) 6 6 6 5 5 5 4 3 (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (2 - 7) (1 - 5) 16 15 14 12 11 10 9 7 (-14 - 45) (-13 - 42) (-12 - 39) (-11 - 35) (-10 - 31) (-9 - 29) (-8 - 26) (-6 - 19) 26 24 22 20 18 17 15 11 (10 - 41) (9 - 39) (9 - 36) (8 - 32) (7 - 29) (6 - 27) (6 - 24) (4 - 18) 11 11 10 9 9 8 8 6 (0 - 23) (0 - 21) (0 - 21) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) 10 9 9 8 7 7 6 5 (4 - 15) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 12) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) 11 10 10 9 8 7 7 5 (-1 - 23) (-1 - 21) (-1 - 20) (-1 - 20) (-1 - 17) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 14) (-1 - 11) 10 9 9 9 7 7 6 5 (4 - 16) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 14) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 3 (-1 - 16) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 11) (-1 - 10) (0 - 6) 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 3 (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 5) 50 48 44 35 33 30 25 15 (0 - 98) (0 - 95) (0 - 88) (0 - 69) (0 - 65) (0 - 61) (0 - 50) (0 - 30) 57 56 51 40 38 35 29 17 (22 - 93) (21 - 90) (19 - 83) (15 - 65) (15 - 62) (13 - 57) (11 - 47) (7 - 28) 53 47 48 43 41 36 36 29 (17 - 89) (15 - 78) (15 - 80) (14 - 71) (13 - 68) (11 - 60) (11 - 60) (9 - 49) 39 34 35 31 30 26 26 21 (15 - 63) (13 - 55) (13 - 57) (12 - 50) (11 - 48) (10 - 42) (10 - 42) (8 - 34) 15 14 13 12 11 10 10 8 (1 - 28) (1 - 26) (1 - 26) (1 - 23) (1 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 20) (0 - 16) 12 11 11 10 9 9 8 7 (5 - 19) (4 - 18) (4 - 18) (4 - 16) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 11)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston Study Location

Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-88 December 2006

### Table 4-23. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.6) (-0.2 - 0.5) (-0.2 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0 - 1.6) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 0.9) 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-0.1 - 1.1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 1) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.5) 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.3) 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.3) 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 (0 - 1.9) (0 - 1.7) (0 - 1.7) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.1) 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Philadelphia

19 U.S. Cities Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location

Detroit

Houston Houston Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Los Angeles

New York Detroit Study Location

Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth. *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-89 December 2006

### Table 4-24. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based Adjusting on 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.2%) 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.5%) 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.4% (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston Study Location

Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-90 December 2006

## Table 4-25. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 6 (-3 - 20) (-3 - 20) (-3 - 19) (-3 - 18) (-2 - 17) (-2 - 17) (-2 - 15) (-2 - 13) 9 9 9 8 8 8 7 6 (4 - 15) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 9) 26 25 24 22 21 20 19 16 (-23 - 73) (-22 - 70) (-21 - 68) (-20 - 64) (-19 - 60) (-18 - 57) (-17 - 54) (-14 - 46) 42 40 39 36 34 33 31 26 (16 - 68) (15 - 65) (15 - 63) (14 - 59) (13 - 55) (13 - 53) (12 - 50) (10 - 43) 30 28 28 26 25 24 24 21 (-1 - 59) (-1 - 57) (-1 - 56) (-1 - 52) (-1 - 51) (-1 - 49) (-1 - 47) (-1 - 42) 25 24 24 22 21 21 20 18 (10 - 40) (9 - 39) (9 - 38) (8 - 35) (8 - 34) (8 - 33) (8 - 32) (7 - 29) 21 20 19 19 17 16 16 13 (-2 - 44) (-2 - 41) (-2 - 40) (-2 - 40) (-2 - 36) (-2 - 33) (-2 - 33) (-2 - 28) 19 18 18 17 16 15 14 12 (7 - 31) (7 - 29) (7 - 29) (7 - 28) (6 - 25) (6 - 24) (5 - 23) (5 - 20) 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 2 (-1 - 13) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 5) 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 2 (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 7) (2 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 4) 38 37 33 24 24 22 18 11 (0 - 76) (0 - 73) (0 - 66) (0 - 48) (0 - 47) (0 - 43) (0 - 35) (0 - 21) 45 43 39 28 27 25 20 12 (17 - 72) (16 - 69) (15 - 62) (11 - 45) (10 - 44) (10 - 41) (8 - 33) (5 - 20) 102 93 95 89 86 78 79 70 (33 - 170) (30 - 155) (31 - 159) (28 - 148) (27 - 143) (25 - 130) (25 - 133) (22 - 116) 75 68 70 65 63 57 58 51 (29 - 120) (26 - 109) (27 - 113) (25 - 105) (24 - 101) (22 - 92) (22 - 94) (19 - 82) 26 25 25 23 23 21 21 19 (1 - 51) (1 - 48) (1 - 48) (1 - 44) (1 - 44) (1 - 41) (1 - 41) (1 - 36) 22 21 21 19 19 18 17 15 (8 - 35) (8 - 33) (8 - 33) (7 - 30) (7 - 30) (7 - 28) (7 - 28) (6 - 25)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston Study Location



### Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-91 December 2006

### Table 4-26. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2 - 1.3) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (-0.4 - 1.4) (-0.4 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.9) 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) 2.1 2 2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 (-0.1 - 4.2) (-0.1 - 4.1) (-0.1 - 4) (0 - 3.7) (0 - 3.6) (0 - 3.5) (0 - 3.4) (0 - 3) 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 (0.7 - 2.9) (0.7 - 2.8) (0.6 - 2.7) (0.6 - 2.5) (0.6 - 2.5) (0.6 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.5 - 2.1) 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (-0.1 - 2.1) (-0.1 - 2) (-0.1 - 2) (-0.1 - 1.9) (-0.1 - 1.7) (-0.1 - 1.6) (-0.1 - 1.6) (-0.1 - 1.3) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 (0.4 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) 1.1 1 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1.3) 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 0.9) 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.2 (0.1 - 3.4) (0.1 - 3.2) (0.1 - 3.2) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.4) 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.5 - 2.2) (0.5 - 2.2) (0.5 - 2) (0.5 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.6)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Philadelphia

19 U.S. Cities Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location

Detroit

Houston Houston Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Los Angeles

New York Detroit Study Location

Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-92 December 2006

### Table 4-27. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.2% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.4% - 1.1%) (-0.3% - 1.1%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) 1.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.1% (0% - 3.2%) (0% - 3%) (0% - 3%) (0% - 2.8%) (0% - 2.7%) (0% - 2.6%) (0% - 2.5%) (0% - 2.3%) 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.5%) 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% (-0.1% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 1.7%) (-0.1% - 1.7%) (-0.1% - 1.6%) (-0.1% - 1.5%) (-0.1% - 1.4%) (-0.1% - 1.3%) (-0.1% - 1.1%) 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 1.1% 1% 1.1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.3%) 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.1% 1% (0.1% - 2.8%) (0.1% - 2.6%) (0.1% - 2.6%) (0.1% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 2.2%) (0% - 2%) 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% (0.5% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.3%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston Study Location

Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities Cleveland

19 U.S. Cities

Philadelphia

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-93 December 2006

### Table 4-28. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 43 38 39 35 33 29 29 24 (15 - 72) (13 - 63) (13 - 65) (12 - 58) (11 - 55) (10 - 48) (10 - 49) (8 - 39) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 53 47 48 43 41 36 36 29 (17 - 89) (15 - 78) (15 - 80) (14 - 71) (13 - 68) (11 - 60) (11 - 60) (9 - 49) all 24 hr avg. none 39 34 35 31 30 26 26 21 (15 - 63) (13 - 55) (13 - 57) (12 - 50) (11 - 48) (10 - 42) (10 - 42) (8 - 34) all 24 hr avg. CO 22 19 20 17 17 14 15 12 (6 - 37) (6 - 32) (6 - 33) (5 - 29) (5 - 28) (4 - 25) (4 - 25) (3 - 20) all 24 hr avg. NO2 19 16 17 15 14 13 13 10 (3 - 34) (3 - 30) (3 - 31) (3 - 27) (3 - 26) (2 - 23) (2 - 23) (2 - 19) all 24 hr avg. PM10 23 20 21 19 18 16 16 13 (-9 - 55) (-8 - 48) (-8 - 50) (-7 - 44) (-7 - 42) (-6 - 37) (-6 - 37) (-5 - 30) all 24 hr avg. SO2 16 14 14 13 12 11 11 9 (0 - 32) (0 - 28) (0 - 29) (0 - 25) (0 - 24) (0 - 21) (0 - 22) (0 - 17) all 1 hr max. none 366 334 341 314 304 279 278 241 (89 - 644) (81 - 588) (82 - 599) (76 - 551) (73 - 534) (67 - 490) (67 - 489) (58 - 424)

all 1 hr max. none 313 286 291 268 259 238 238 206 (66 - 559) (61 - 510) (62 - 520) (57 - 479) (55 - 464) (51 - 425) (51 - 425) (44 - 368)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Thurston et al.

(1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)******

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-94 December 2006

### Table 4-29. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) all 1 hr max. none 4.6 4.2 4.3 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.5 3 (1.1 - 8) (1 - 7.3) (1 - 7.5) (0.9 - 6.9) (0.9 - 6.7) (0.8 - 6.1) (0.8 - 6.1) (0.7 - 5.3)

all 1 hr max. none 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.2 3 3 2.6 (0.8 - 7) (0.8 - 6.4) (0.8 - 6.5) (0.7 - 6) (0.7 - 5.8) (0.6 - 5.3) (0.6 - 5.3) (0.5 - 4.6)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities

(2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental

0-day lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Thurston et al. (1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)****** 3-day lag

1-day lag Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag Lag Exposure

Metric

0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Study Ages

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-95 December 2006

### Table 4-30. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 1 hr max. none 1% 0.9% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.2%)

all 1 hr max. none 2.4% 2.2% 2.2% 2% 2% 1.8% 1.8% 1.6% (0.5% - 4.3%) (0.5% - 3.9%) (0.5% - 4%) (0.4% - 3.6%) (0.4% - 3.5%) (0.4% - 3.2%) (0.4% - 3.2%) (0.3% - 2.8%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Thurston et al.

(1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)******

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-96 December 2006

### Table 4-31. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 84 76 78 73 70 64 65 57 (28 - 139) (25 - 126) (26 - 130) (24 - 121) (23 - 116) (21 - 106) (22 - 108) (19 - 95) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 102 93 95 89 86 78 79 70 (33 - 170) (30 - 155) (31 - 159) (28 - 148) (27 - 143) (25 - 130) (25 - 133) (22 - 116) all 24 hr avg. none 75 68 70 65 63 57 58 51 (29 - 120) (26 - 109) (27 - 113) (25 - 105) (24 - 101) (22 - 92) (22 - 94) (19 - 82) all 24 hr avg. CO 42 38 39 36 35 32 32 28 (12 - 71) (11 - 64) (11 - 66) (11 - 61) (10 - 59) (9 - 54) (9 - 55) (8 - 48) all 24 hr avg. NO2 36 33 34 31 30 28 28 25 (6 - 66) (6 - 60) (6 - 61) (6 - 57) (5 - 55) (5 - 50) (5 - 51) (4 - 45) all 24 hr avg. PM10 45 41 42 39 37 34 35 30 (-17 - 105) (-16 - 96) (-16 - 98) (-15 - 91) (-14 - 88) (-13 - 80) (-13 - 82) (-12 - 72) all 24 hr avg. SO2 31 28 29 27 26 23 24 21 (0 - 61) (0 - 56) (0 - 57) (0 - 53) (0 - 51) (0 - 47) (0 - 48) (0 - 42) all 1 hr max. none 513 472 483 452 439 404 410 365 (124 - 902) (114 - 830) (117 - 850) (109 - 795) (106 - 772) (98 - 710) (99 - 721) (88 - 642)

all 1 hr max. none 438 403 413 386 375 345 350 312 (93 - 783) (86 - 720) (88 - 738) (82 - 690) (80 - 670) (73 - 617) (75 - 626) (66 - 558)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Thurston et al.

(1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)******

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-97 December 2006

### Table 4-32. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 1.1 1 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1.3) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) all 1 hr max. none 6.4 5.9 6 5.6 5.5 5 5.1 4.6 (1.5 - 11.3) (1.4 - 10.4) (1.5 - 10.6) (1.4 - 9.9) (1.3 - 9.6) (1.2 - 8.9) (1.2 - 9) (1.1 - 8)

all 1 hr max. none 5.5 5 5.2 4.8 4.7 4.3 4.4 3.9 (1.2 - 9.8) (1.1 - 9) (1.1 - 9.2) (1 - 8.6) (1 - 8.4) (0.9 - 7.7) (0.9 - 7.8) (0.8 - 7)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities

(2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental

0-day lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Thurston et al. (1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)****** 3-day lag

1-day lag Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag Lag Exposure

Metric

0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Study Ages

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-98 December 2006

### Table 4-33. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: New York, NY, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 1.1% 1% 1.1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.2%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) all 1 hr max. none 1.5% 1.3% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.2% 1% (0.4% - 2.6%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 2.4%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 2%) (0.3% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.8%)

all 1 hr max. none 3.3% 3.1% 3.1% 2.9% 2.9% 2.6% 2.7% 2.4% (0.7% - 6%) (0.7% - 5.5%) (0.7% - 5.6%) (0.6% - 5.3%) (0.6% - 5.1%) (0.6% - 4.7%) (0.6% - 4.8%) (0.5% - 4.2%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. *****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ******New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

3-day lag Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*****Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Thurston et al.

(1992)******

Thurston et al. (1992)******

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-99 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-100 The results in this portion of the risk assessment follow the same patterns as the results discussed in Section 4.2.1 for risks associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations, because they are largely driven by the same C-R function coefficient estimates and confidence or credible intervals.
All results discussed below are for April through September. The top graph on each page shows results based on 2004 air quality, and the bottom graph shows results based on 2002 air quality. Figures 4-9a and b show estimated percent of non-accidental mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standard, based on single-pollutant, single-city models across all locations for which such models were available. Tables 4-16, 4-17, and 4-18 show estimates of incidence, incidence per100,000 relevant population, and percent of total incidence, respectively, of nonaccidental mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour O 3 

# standards, based on both single-city and multi-city models, using air qualitydata for 2004. Tables 4-19, 4-20, and 4-21 show estimates of the same measures of nonaccidental mortality risk, using air quality data for 2002.
Using 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, estimates of non-accidental mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standards ranged from 0.3 per 100,000 relevant population in Atlanta (Bell et al., 2004), Houston (Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities), and Los Angeles (Bell et al., 2004) to 5.8 per 100,000 relevant population in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). The corresponding results based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations ranged from 0.3 per 100,000 relevant population in Houston (Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) and Los Angeles (Bell et al., 2004) to 7.9 per 100,000 relevant population in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). As was the case for the analysis of effects associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations, estimated O 3 

# -related (non-accidental) mortality reported by Schwartz (2004) for Chicago, Detroit, and Houston, based on both the single-city and the multi-city C-R functions, tend to be higher than other estimates in those locations in large part because Schwartz used the 1-hr maximum O 3 

# concentration, rather than the 24-hour average, as the exposure metric. The changes from 1-hr maximum O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standard to PRB 1-hr maximum O 3 

# concentrations were generally larger in the assessment locations than the corresponding changes using the 24- hr average metric.
As a percent of total incidence, estimated non-accidental mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standard, based on 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, ranged from 0.1 percent in several locations (Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, and St. Louis) to 1.5 percent in Chicago (Schwartz, 2004). The corresponding results based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations ranged from 0.1 percent in Houston and Los Angeles to 2 percent in Chicago. Although 7 of the 12 estimates from single-city single-pollutant models shown in Figures 4-9a and b were not statistically significant, all 12 were positive.
Figures 4-10a and b show estimated percent of cardiorespiratory mortality and cases per 100,000 relevant population related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standard, based on multi-city single-pollutant versus multi-pollutant

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-101 models from Huang et al. (2004) across all locations for which such models were available. Tables 4-22, 4-23, and 4-24 show estimates of incidence, incidence per 100,000 relevant population, and percent of total incidence, respectively, of cardiorespiratory mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour O 3 

# standards in all risk assessment locations covered in Huang et al. (2004), using air quality data for 2004. Tables 4-25, 4-26, and 4-27 show estimates of the same measures of cardiorespiratory mortality risk, using air quality data for 2002.
Using 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, estimates of O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standards ranged from0.2 per 100,000 relevant population in Houston (using both the single-city and the multicity C-R functions) to 1.0 per 100,000 relevant population in Philadelphia (using the single-city C-R function). The corresponding results based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations ranged from 0.2 per 100,000 relevant population in Houston to 2.1 per 100,000 relevant population in Cleveland.
As a percent of total incidence, using 2004 O 3 

# concentrations, estimated O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality ranged from 0.3 percent in Chicago (using the singlecity C-R function) to 0.8 percent in Los Angeles (using the multi-city C-R function) and Philadelphia (using the single-city C-R function). The corresponding results based on 2002 O 3 

# concentrations ranged from 0.3 percent in Houston to 1.6 percent in Cleveland.

All of the estimates of O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality based on Huang et al. (2004), from both single-pollutant and multi-pollutant models (see Figures 10a and b) and from both single-city and multi-city models (see Tables 4-22 through 4-27) were positive. Five of the single-city single-pollutant “shrinkage” estimates (for Atlanta,Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, and Houston) and the estimate from the multi-city multipollutant model with PM 10 

# were not statistically significant. All the rest of the estimates of O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality based on Huang et al. (2004) were statistically significant.
Figures 4-11a and b show estimated percent of non-accidental mortality and cases per 100,000 relevant population related to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8- hour O 3 

# standard, based on single-city versus multi-city models across all locations for which both types of model were available. The results followed the same patterns as were observed in the analysis of effects associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels, discussed in Section 4.2.1 above (see also Figures 4-5a and b). Similarly, the results seen in Figures 4-12a and b, for cardiorespiratory mortality, followed the same patterns as are evident in the corresponding analysis of “as is” O 3 

# concentrations (see Figures 4-5a and b).

The effect of O 3 

# lag structure on O 3 

# -related unscheduled hospital admissions in Detroit (Ito 2003), shown in Figures 4-13a and b, followed the same patterns as were evident in the analysis of risks associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations. Estimated pneumonia hospital admissions associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour O 3 

# standard increased monotonically with increasing lag, with the greatest

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-102 estimate predicted by a 3-day lag model. None of the estimates of O 3 

# -related unscheduled hospital admissions in Detroit were statistically significant.
Figures 4-14a and b and 4-15a and b show the estimated annual percent of nonaccidental mortality and cardiorespiratory mortality, respectively, associated with shortterm exposure to O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour daily maximum standard that fall within specified ranges. The pattern of results was similar to the pattern seen for “as is” O 3 

# concentrations. Using simulated O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour standard based on 2004 air quality data, all O 3 

# -related non-accidental mortality was associated with 24-hr average O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.06 ppm, and most of that was associated with 24-hr average O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.04 ppm. Using simulated O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current 8-hour standard based on 2002 air quality data, all O 3 

# -related non-accidental mortality was associated with 24-hr average O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.08 ppm, and the great majority was associated with 24-hr average O 3 

# concentrations less than 0.06 ppm. The results for cardiorespiratory mortality follow a similar pattern.
Comparisons of alternative 8-hour daily maximum standards to the current standard are shown in Figures 4-16a and b and 4-17a and b for non-accidental and cardiorespiratory mortality, respectively. At the most stringent standard shown (0.064 ppm 4 th 

# daily maximum), the aggregate O 3 

# -related non-accidental mortality is estimated to be 55 percent of what it would be at the current standard, using simulated O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour standards based on 2004 air quality data. Using 2002 air quality data, the corresponding result is 40 percent. The patterns for cardiorespiratory mortality are similar. The aggregate O 3 

# -related cardiorespiratory mortality at the most stringent standard shown is estimated to be about 57 percent of what it would be at the current standard, using simulated O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current and alternative 8-hour standards based on 2004 air quality data. Using 2002 air quality data, the corresponding result is about 42 percent.

4.2.2.2 Results for five locations for the current standard and two alternative standards, based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 air quality data

As an alternative to the original seven 8-hour daily maximum standards, we considered a smaller set of three 8-hour daily maximum standards, including the current standard (0.084 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum) and two alternative standards from the original set of seven (0.074 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum and 0.064 ppm. 4 th 

# daily maximum). Nonaccidental and cardiorespiratory mortality risk results for these alternative standards, as well as for a year of recent air quality, are shown for a subset of locations – Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York – using 2002 air quality data in Tables 4- 34 through 4-36 for non-accidental mortality and Tables 4-37 through 4-39 for cardiorespiratory mortality. Tables showing the corresponding results based on 2003 and 2004 air quality are given in Appendix H. The results are shown in terms of percent reductions in O 3 

# -related mortality when O 3 

# concentrations are changed from those that just meet the current standard to a recent year of air quality as well as to the two

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-103 alternative 8-hour standards in Figures 4-18a, b, and c, based on 2004, 2003, and 2002 air quality data respectively.
Figures 4-18a, b, and c show that, based on adjusting air quality data from all three years, the greatest reductions in mortality risk (relative to the mortality risks at the current standard) occur for standards which specify 0.064 ppm as the target concentration, and the next greatest risk reductions occur at standards which specify 0.074 as the target concentration. Based on adjusting 2004 air quality, mortality risk reductions (from risks at the current standard) at a standard of 0.064 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum ranged from 44% in New York to 70% in Los Angeles. The corresponding ranges of percent decreases in mortality risk were from 22% (in Atlanta) to 34% (in Los Angeles) for a standard of 0.074, 4 th 

# daily maximum. In all five locations, the percent decreases in mortality risk (from risk at the current standard) were higher at the two 0.064 ppm standard than at the 0.074 ppm standard. The same patterns are observed when just meeting standards is based on adjusting 2003 and 2002 air quality data.

## Table 4-34. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 7 6 4 (-37 - 54) (-30 - 43) (-24 - 35) (-19 - 27) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 14 11 9 (6 - 29) (5 - 23) (4 - 19) (3 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 69 55 44 34 (23 - 115) (18 - 91) (15 - 74) (11 - 57) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 505 427 361 294 (161 - 840) (136 - 712) (115 - 603) (93 - 493) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 191 161 136 111 (60 - 321) (51 - 271) (43 - 229) (35 - 187) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 18 13 7 (2 - 57) (1 - 34) (1 - 25) (0 - 13) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 9 6 3 (5 - 24) (3 - 15) (2 - 10) (1 - 5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 85 63 51 36 (8 - 161) (6 - 119) (5 - 97) (3 - 69) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 71 53 43 30 (22 - 119) (16 - 88) (13 - 72) (9 - 51) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 51 24 15 7 (-124 - 224) (-58 - 105) (-35 - 64) (-16 - 29) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 110 52 32 14 (37 - 184) (17 - 86) (11 - 53) (5 - 23) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 105 84 70 57 (35 - 174) (28 - 139) (23 - 116) (19 - 95) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta

Chicago Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2002 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-104 December 2006

## Table 4-35. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 (-2.5 - 3.6) (-2 - 2.9) (-1.6 - 2.4) (-1.3 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 9.4 7.9 6.7 5.5 (3 - 15.6) (2.5 - 13.2) (2.1 - 11.2) (1.7 - 9.2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.6 3 2.5 2.1 (1.1 - 6) (0.9 - 5) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.6 - 3.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 (0.1 - 1.7) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.5 1.8 1.5 1.1 (0.2 - 4.7) (0.2 - 3.5) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.1 1.5 1.3 0.9 (0.7 - 3.5) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 (-1.3 - 2.4) (-0.6 - 1.1) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.1 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1 - 0.6) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 2) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Atlanta

Chicago Location Study



### Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Lag Exposure Metric Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with 2002 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentration that Just

Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-105 December 2006

## Table 4-36. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 0.9%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.4% 2% 1.7% 1.4% (0.8% - 4%) (0.6% - 3.4%) (0.5% - 2.9%) (0.4% - 2.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% (0.1% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta

Chicago Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2002 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentration that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-106 December 2006

## Table 4-37. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4



### 11 9 7 6 (-4 - 25) (-3 - 20) (-2 - 17) (-2 - 13) 11 9 8 6 (4 - 18) (4 - 15) (3 - 12) (2 - 9) 32 26 21 16 (-29 - 93) (-23 - 73) (-19 - 60) (-14 - 46) 53 42 34 26 (20 - 86) (16 - 68) (13 - 55) (10 - 43) 10 6 5 2 (-1 - 22) (-1 - 13) (-1 - 10) (0 - 5) 11 6 5 2 (4 - 17) (2 - 10) (2 - 7) (1 - 4) 82 38 24 11 (1 - 162) (0 - 76) (0 - 47) (0 - 21) 95 45 27 12 (36 - 153) (17 - 72) (10 - 44) (5 - 20) 128 102 86 70 (41 - 213) (33 - 170) (27 - 143) (22 - 116) 94 75 63 51 (36 - 151) (29 - 120) (24 - 101) (19 - 82)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Study Location

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### Atlanta

New York Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location



### Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta

Chicago 19 U.S. Cities

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. 

### Chicago

19 U.S. Cities

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-107 December 2006

## Table 4-38. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 (-0.2 - 1.7) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.1 - 0.9) 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 (-0.5 - 1.7) (-0.4 - 1.4) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 0.9) 1 0.8 0.6 0.5 (0.4 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.1) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 (0 - 1.7) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.2) 1 0.5 0.3 0.1 (0.4 - 1.6) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.2) 1.4 1.1 1 0.8 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.2 - 1.3) 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.6 (0.4 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 0.9)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Study Location



### Chicago

19 U.S. Cities Atlanta

New York

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth. *All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### 19 U.S. Cities

19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location



### Houston Houston Atlanta

Chicago

New York Los Angeles Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-108 December 2006

## Table 4-39. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2002 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 1.1% 0.9% 0.7% 0.6% (-0.4% - 2.6%) (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.2% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) 1.2% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% (0.5% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1%) 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.6% - 1.8%) (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) 1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.2%) 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) 1.1% 0.5% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 2.2%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.3%) 1.3% 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 1.4% 1.1% 1% 0.8% (0.5% - 2.4%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.3%) 1.1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Study Location

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Atlanta

New York Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Risk Assessment Location



### Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta

Chicago 19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004). 

### Chicago

19 U.S. Cities

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities 19 U.S. Cities

New York Los Angeles Houston



## Abt Associates Inc. 4-109 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-110 Figure 4-18. Estimated Percent Reductions From the Current Standard to Two Alternative Standards in O 3 

## -Related Non-Accidental Mortality, Separately for Each Location (Based on Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities)*

Figure 4-18a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

-160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4 Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



## Atlanta: 9 (3 - 15); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Chicago: 33 (11 - 55); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Houston: 11 (4 - 18); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 67 (22 - 111); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) New York: 43 (15 - 72); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%)



## * An 8-hr average standard, denoted m/n is characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 – 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The 4th daily maximum standards, denoted m/4, require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each location in the box below each figure.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-111 Figure 4-18b. Based on 2003 Air Quality

-160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2003 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4 Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



## Atlanta: 9 (3 - 15); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) Chicago: 55 (18 - 91); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%) Houston: 9 (3 - 15); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 47 (16 - 78); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) New York: 54 (18 - 90); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-112 Figure 4-18c. Based on 2002 Air Quality

-160% -140% -120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4 Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



## Atlanta: 14 (5 - 23); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.5%) Chicago: 55 (18 - 91); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%) Houston: 9 (3 - 15); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 52 (17 - 86); 0.2% (0.1% - 0.3%) New York: 84 (28 - 139); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.4%)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-113 4.3 Sensitivity Analyses

Because of the uncertainty surrounding estimates of PRB, we ran two sets of sensitivity analyses addressing this concern. First, we considered the impact of altering the estimates of PRB on our estimates of non-accidental mortality risk. Estimates of the percent of total incidence of non-accidental mortality associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB, based on (1) the original PRB estimates, (2) lower PRB estimates (the original estimates minus 5 ppb in all locations except Atlanta; the original estimates minus 10 ppb in Atlanta), and (3) higher PRB estimates (the original estimates plus 5 ppb in all locations) are shown together in Tables 4-40 and 4-41, based on 2004 air quality data and 2002 air quality data, respectively. The corresponding results using incidence and incidence per 100,000 relevant population as the measures of mortality risk are given in Appendix I, in Tables I-1 through I-4.
Corresponding estimates of the percent of total incidence of non-accidental mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations that just meet the current (0.084 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum) 8-hour O 3 

# standard, and each of two alternative 8-hour O 3 

# standards (0.074 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum and 0.064 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum) based on each of the three alternative sets of PRB estimates (original, lower, and higher) are shown in Tables 4-42 through 4-47. Tables 4-42 and 4-43 show estimates for the current standard, based on adjusting 2004 and 2002 air quality data, respectively. Tables 4-44, and 4-45 are the corresponding tables for the 0.074 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard, and Tables 4-46, and 4-47 are the corresponding tables for the 0.064 ppm, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard. The corresponding results using incidence and incidence per 100,000 relevant population as the measures of mortality risk are given in Appendix I.
Finally, location-specific graphs showing the impact of the alternative PRB estimates on the estimated percent change from the current standard to alternative standards are given in Figures 4-19a and 4-19b, based on 2004 and 2002 air quality data, respectively.
In addition, we estimated mortality risk associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above 0 ppb. The results are shown in Tables 4-48 and 4-49, based on 2004 and 2002 air quality data, respectively.

### Table 4-40. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-1.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.2% - 1%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.9% 2.3% 1.4% (0.6% - 3.1%) (0.7% - 3.9%) (0.4% - 2.4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.2% (-0.2% - 0.9%) (-0.4% - 1.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 1.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.4% 1.7% 1% (-0.2% - 2.9%) (-0.3% - 3.6%) (-0.2% - 2.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 0.9% 0.6% (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.8% 0.2% (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 2.3%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.2% (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.2%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1% 1.2% 0.9% (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 1.6%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1% 0.7% (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.8% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.7% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 1% 1.6% 0.6% (0.6% - 1.4%) (1% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 0.8%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% (-0.9% - 1.4%) (-1.2% - 2%) (-0.5% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.6%) (-0.6% - 1.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Lag Exposure

Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-114 December 2006

### Table 4-41. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-1.6% - 2.2%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.7% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.4% 2.9% 1.9% (0.8% - 4%) (0.9% - 4.8%) (0.6% - 3.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1.1% 0.7% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8% 1.1% 0.6% (-0.5% - 2.1%) (-0.7% - 2.8%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.9% 0.4% (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.9% 2.3% 1.6% (-0.3% - 4.1%) (-0.4% - 4.8%) (-0.3% - 3.4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1% 1.2% 0.9% (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 2.1%) (0.3% - 1.5%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.7% 1.1% 0.5% (-0.7% - 2.1%) (-1% - 3.2%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1.1% 0.8% (0.1% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.9% 0.6% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.7% - 1.2%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.6% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.6% 2.2% 1.1% (1% - 2.2%) (1.4% - 3.1%) (0.7% - 1.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.5% 0.3% (-1.1% - 1.9%) (-1.5% - 2.4%) (-0.8% - 1.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (-0.5% - 1.2%) (-0.8% - 1.8%) (-0.3% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-115 December 2006

### Table 4-42. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-1.1% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.5% 2% 1% (0.5% - 2.5%) (0.6% - 3.3%) (0.3% - 1.7%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.1% (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.3% - 1.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.1% 1.5% 0.8% (-0.2% - 2.4%) (-0.2% - 3.1%) (-0.1% - 1.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.8% 0.4% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 0.8%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.9% 0.6% (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 0.9%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.8% 1.3% 0.3% (0.5% - 1%) (0.8% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.6% - 1%) (-1% - 1.6%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (-0.2% - 0.5%) (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Lag Exposure Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-116 December 2006

### Table 4-43. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.7% - 0.9%) (-1.4% - 2%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.6% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2% 2.5% 1.6% (0.6% - 3.4%) (0.8% - 4.2%) (0.5% - 2.6%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.9% 0.6% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% (-0.4% - 1.7%) (-0.6% - 2.4%) (-0.3% - 1.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.8% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7% 2% 1.4% (-0.3% - 3.6%) (-0.3% - 4.3%) (-0.2% - 2.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1.1% 0.7% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.2%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.9% 0.4% (-0.6% - 1.7%) (-0.9% - 2.7%) (-0.3% - 1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0% - 1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.4% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.3% 1.9% 0.9% (0.8% - 1.8%) (1.2% - 2.6%) (0.5% - 1.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% (-0.9% - 1.4%) (-1.2% - 2%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.7% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.6% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-117 December 2006

### Table 4-44. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-1% - 1.5%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.2% 1.6% 0.7% (0.4% - 2%) (0.5% - 2.8%) (0.2% - 1.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1.2% 0.6% (-0.1% - 2%) (-0.2% - 2.7%) (-0.1% - 1.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.5% 0.7% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.5% - 1.5%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 0.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.4% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 1.1% 0.2% (0.4% - 0.8%) (0.7% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.8% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.4% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-118 December 2006

### Table 4-45. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-1.2% - 1.8%) (-0.3% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.6% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7% 2.2% 1.3% (0.5% - 2.9%) (0.7% - 3.6%) (0.4% - 2.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6% 0.8% 0.4% (-0.4% - 1.5%) (-0.5% - 2.2%) (-0.2% - 1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.7% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.2% - 1.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.4% 1.8% 1.1% (-0.2% - 3%) (-0.3% - 3.7%) (-0.2% - 2.4%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 1% 0.6% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.8% 0.3% (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.8% - 2.4%) (-0.2% - 0.8%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 0.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.5% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.1% 1.7% 0.7% (0.7% - 1.5%) (1.1% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 0.9%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-1.1% - 1.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (-0.4% - 0.8%) (-0.6% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.4%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-119 December 2006

### Table 4-46. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.9% - 1.3%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.4% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 1.3% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.4% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 0.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 1% 0.4% (-0.1% - 1.5%) (-0.2% - 2.2%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.4% 0.6% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.4%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.4% 0% (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.5% 0.6% 0.3% (0% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.6%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.4% 0.5% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.1% 0% (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.9% 0.1% (0.3% - 0.6%) (0.6% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.7% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.2% 0% (-0.1% - 0.1%) (-0.3% - 0.6%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.1%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-120 December 2006

### Table 4-47. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-1.1% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.4% 1.9% 1% (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.6% - 3.1%) (0.3% - 1.6%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.7% 0.3% (-0.3% - 1.2%) (-0.5% - 1.9%) (-0.2% - 0.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.2% 1.5% 0.9% (-0.2% - 2.5%) (-0.2% - 3.2%) (-0.1% - 1.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 0.8%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.7% 0.2% (-0.3% - 1.1%) (-0.6% - 2%) (-0.2% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% (0% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.4%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0% 0.1% 0% (-0.1% - 0.1%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.2% 0% (0% - 0.1%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.2%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.9% 1.5% 0.5% (0.6% - 1.3%) (0.9% - 2%) (0.3% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.6% - 1%) (-1% - 1.6%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.6%) (-0.5% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-121 December 2006

### Table 4-48. Sensitivity Analysis: Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations Down to Policy Relevant Background (PRB) Versus 0 ppb: April - September, 2004*

Above PRB Above 0 ppb Above PRB Above 0 ppb Above PRB Above 0 ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 25 0.4 1.7 0.1% 0.5% (-26 - 38) (-110 - 156) (-1.8 - 2.6) (-7.4 - 10.5) (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-2.4% - 3.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 50 0.8 3.4 0.3% 1.1% (4 - 20) (17 - 83) (0.3 - 1.4) (1.1 - 5.6) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.4% - 1.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 27 1.0 3.9 0.3% 1.1% (2 - 12) (9 - 45) (0.3 - 1.7) (1.3 - 6.5) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 220 0.9 4.1 0.2% 1% (16 - 81) (74 - 365) (0.3 - 1.5) (1.4 - 6.8) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.4% - 1.7%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 394 877 7.3 16.3 1.9% 4.2% (125 - 658) (280 - 1456) (2.3 - 12.2) (5.2 - 27.1) (0.6% - 3.1%) (1.3% - 6.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 148 333 2.8 6.2 0.7% 1.6% (46 - 250) (104 - 559) (0.9 - 4.6) (1.9 - 10.4) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.5% - 2.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 27 116 1.9 8.3 0.4% 1.6% (-17 - 69) (-73 - 300) (-1.2 - 5) (-5.3 - 21.5) (-0.2% - 0.9%) (-1% - 4.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 74 1.2 5.3 0.2% 1% (6 - 28) (25 - 122) (0.4 - 2) (1.8 - 8.8) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.3% - 1.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 33 170 1.6 8.3 0.4% 1.8% (-11 - 76) (-55 - 390) (-0.5 - 3.7) (-2.7 - 18.9) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.6% - 4.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 87 0.8 4.2 0.2% 0.9% (6 - 28) (29 - 145) (0.3 - 1.4) (1.4 - 7) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.3% - 1.5%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 128 273 6.2 13.2 1.4% 2.9% (-21 - 274) (-45 - 578) (-1 - 13.3) (-2.2 - 28.1) (-0.2% - 2.9%) (-0.5% - 6.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 70 149 3.4 7.2 0.7% 1.6% (22 - 117) (47 - 249) (1.1 - 5.7) (2.3 - 12.1) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.5% - 2.6%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 40 207 2.0 10.1 0.4% 2.2% (-37 - 116) (-195 - 591) (-1.8 - 5.6) (-9.4 - 28.7) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-2.1% - 6.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 35 187 1.0 5.5 0.4% 2.1% (2 - 67) (12 - 359) (0.1 - 2) (0.3 - 10.5) (0% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 3.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 92 0.5 2.7 0.2% 1% (6 - 28) (31 - 153) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.9 - 4.5) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.3% - 1.7%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 93 202 2.7 6.0 1% 2.2% (9 - 176) (19 - 382) (0.3 - 5.2) (0.6 - 11.2) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.2% - 4.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 78 169 2.3 5.0 0.9% 1.9% (24 - 130) (53 - 284) (0.7 - 3.8) (1.6 - 8.3) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.6% - 3.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 62 165 0.6 1.7 0.2% 0.6% (-149 - 271) (-401 - 719) (-1.6 - 2.8) (-4.2 - 7.6) (-0.5% - 1%) (-1.5% - 2.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 133 355 1.4 3.7 0.5% 1.3% (45 - 221) (119 - 589) (0.5 - 2.3) (1.3 - 6.2) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.4% - 2.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 60 295 0.7 3.3 0.2% 0.9% (20 - 100) (99 - 489) (0.2 - 1.1) (1.1 - 5.5) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.3% - 1.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 85 1.5 5.6 0.3% 1.1% (8 - 38) (28 - 141) (0.5 - 2.5) (1.9 - 9.3) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.8%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 82 300 5.4 19.8 1% 3.7% (52 - 112) (189 - 409) (3.4 - 7.4) (12.5 - 27) (0.6% - 1.4%) (2.4% - 5.1%) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above PRB levels vs. 0 ppb**

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-122 December 2006Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above PRB levels vs. 0 ppb**

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 35 1.0 2.9 0.3% 0.8% (-36 - 59) (-109 - 175) (-3 - 4.8) (-8.9 - 14.3) (-0.9% - 1.4%) (-2.6% - 4.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 53 1.4 4.3 0.4% 1.3% (6 - 29) (18 - 87) (0.5 - 2.4) (1.4 - 7.1) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.4% - 2.1%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 21 1.0 6.2 0.2% 1.1% (-6 - 13) (-36 - 77) (-1.7 - 3.6) (-10.4 - 22.2) (-0.3% - 0.6%) (-1.8% - 3.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 19 0.9 5.5 0.2% 1% (1 - 5) (6 - 32) (0.3 - 1.5) (1.9 - 9.2) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.3% - 1.6%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 30 1.5 5.2 0.3% 1.1% (3 - 14) (10 - 49) (0.5 - 2.4) (1.7 - 8.6) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.8%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-123 December 2006

### Table 4-49. Sensitivity Analysis: Estimated Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations Down to Policy Relevant Background (PRB) Versus 0 ppb: April - September, 2002*

Above PRB Above 0 ppb Above PRB Above 0 ppb Above PRB Above 0 ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 28 0.6 1.9 0.2% 0.6% (-37 - 54) (-121 - 172) (-2.5 - 3.6) (-8.2 - 11.6) (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-2.6% - 3.7%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 55 1.2 3.7 0.4% 1.2% (6 - 29) (19 - 91) (0.4 - 1.9) (1.3 - 6.2) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.4% - 2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 31 1.5 4.5 0.4% 1.2% (3 - 17) (10 - 51) (0.5 - 2.5) (1.5 - 7.4) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.4% - 2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 69 240 1.3 4.5 0.3% 1.1% (23 - 115) (81 - 398) (0.4 - 2.1) (1.5 - 7.4) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 505 988 9.4 18.4 2.4% 4.7% (161 - 840) (317 - 1635) (3 - 15.6) (5.9 - 30.4) (0.8% - 4%) (1.5% - 7.8%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 191 376 3.6 7.0 0.9% 1.8% (60 - 321) (118 - 630) (1.1 - 6) (2.2 - 11.7) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.6% - 3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 61 152 4.3 10.9 0.8% 2% (-38 - 157) (-96 - 390) (-2.7 - 11.3) (-6.9 - 28) (-0.5% - 2.1%) (-1.3% - 5.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 38 96 2.8 6.9 0.5% 1.3% (13 - 64) (32 - 160) (0.9 - 4.6) (2.3 - 11.5) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.4% - 2.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 57 197 2.8 9.6 0.6% 2.1% (-18 - 131) (-64 - 450) (-0.9 - 6.3) (-3.1 - 21.8) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.7% - 4.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 101 1.4 4.9 0.3% 1.1% (10 - 48) (34 - 168) (0.5 - 2.3) (1.6 - 8.1) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.8%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 181 325 8.8 15.8 1.9% 3.5% (-30 - 385) (-54 - 688) (-1.4 - 18.7) (-2.6 - 33.4) (-0.3% - 4.1%) (-0.6% - 7.3%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 99 178 4.8 8.6 1% 1.9% (31 - 165) (56 - 298) (1.5 - 8) (2.7 - 14.4) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.6% - 3.2%) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 69 240 3.4 11.6 0.7% 2.5% (-64 - 198) (-226 - 680) (-3.1 - 9.6) (-11 - 33) (-0.7% - 2.1%) (-2.4% - 7.2%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 184 0.9 5.4 0.3% 2% (2 - 57) (12 - 353) (0.1 - 1.7) (0.3 - 10.4) (0% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 3.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 91 0.4 2.7 0.2% 1% (5 - 24) (31 - 151) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.9 - 4.4) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.3% - 1.7%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 85 196 2.5 5.7 0.9% 2.2% (8 - 161) (18 - 369) (0.2 - 4.7) (0.5 - 10.8) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 4.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 71 163 2.1 4.8 0.8% 1.8% (22 - 119) (51 - 274) (0.7 - 3.5) (1.5 - 8.1) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.6% - 3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 51 152 0.5 1.6 0.2% 0.6% (-124 - 224) (-371 - 665) (-1.3 - 2.4) (-3.9 - 7) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-1.4% - 2.4%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 110 329 1.2 3.5 0.4% 1.2% (37 - 184) (110 - 545) (0.4 - 1.9) (1.2 - 5.7) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.4% - 2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 105 349 1.2 3.9 0.3% 1.1% (35 - 174) (117 - 579) (0.4 - 2) (1.3 - 6.5) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.4% - 1.8%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 37 100 2.4 6.6 0.5% 1.2% (12 - 62) (34 - 166) (0.8 - 4.1) (2.2 - 11) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.4% - 2.1%) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 132 354 8.7 23.3 1.6% 4.4% (83 - 180) (224 - 481) (5.5 - 11.9) (14.7 - 31.7) (1% - 2.2%) (2.8% - 6%) Exposure Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above PRB levels vs. 0 ppb**

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-124 December 2006Exposure Metric Location Study Lag Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above PRB levels vs. 0 ppb**

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 16 39 1.3 3.2 0.4% 0.9% (-48 - 78) (-119 - 191) (-3.9 - 6.4) (-9.8 - 15.6) (-1.1% - 1.9%) (-2.8% - 4.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 57 1.9 4.7 0.6% 1.4% (8 - 39) (19 - 95) (0.6 - 3.2) (1.6 - 7.8) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.5% - 2.3%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 25 1.9 7.2 0.3% 1.2% (-11 - 23) (-42 - 90) (-3.1 - 6.7) (-12.1 - 25.8) (-0.5% - 1.2%) (-2.1% - 4.5%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 22 1.7 6.4 0.3% 1.1% (2 - 10) (8 - 37) (0.6 - 2.8) (2.2 - 10.6) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.4% - 1.9%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 37 2.6 6.5 0.6% 1.4% (5 - 25) (13 - 62) (0.9 - 4.4) (2.2 - 10.8) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.5% - 2.3%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis



### Abt Associates Inc. 4-125 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-126 Figure 4-19. Sensitivity Analysis of Estimated Percent Reduction in O 3 

## -Related Non-Accidental Mortality (Using Bell et al., 2004 -- 95 U.S. Cities) From the Current Standard to Alternative 8-hr Standards and a Recent Year of Air Quality, Using Base Case, Hi gher, and Lower PRB Estimates* Figure 4-19a. Based on 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations

Atlanta

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Boston

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Chicago

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Cleveland

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Detroit

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Houston

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0%

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-127 Los Angeles

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## New York

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Philadelphia

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Sacramento

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## St. Louis

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Washington, D.C.

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2004 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-128 Figure 4-19b. Based on 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations

Atlanta

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Boston

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Chicago

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Cleveland

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Detroit

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Houston

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-129 Los Angeles

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## New York

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## Philadelphia

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Sacramento

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates



## St. Louis

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates 

## Washington, D.C.

-250.0% -200.0% -150.0% -100.0% -50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

2002 air quality 0.084/4 0.074/4 0.064/4
Alternative 8-Hr StandardsPercent Change from Current Standard

Original PRB Estimates

Lower PRB Estimates Higher PRB Estimates

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-130 As would be expected, increasing PRB estimates decreased the estimates of mortality risk associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels, and decreasing PRB estimates increased these estimates. Measured as percent of total incidence, estimates of O 3 

# -related mortality changed by only a few tenths of a percent, which is not surprising since most base case estimates were themselves less than 1%. In Chicago, for example, the estimate of O 3 

# -related mortality changed from 0.2% to 0.4% of total incidence when 5 ppb was subtracted from PRB levels and to 0.1% when 5 ppb was added to PRB levels, based on Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004). The largest increase in mortality measured as percent of total incidence when PRB levels were reduced was 0.6% (from 1% to 1.6%), in Philadelphia, based on Moolgavkar et al. (1995). The largest decrease in mortality measured as a percent of total incidence when PRB levels were increased was 0.5% (from 1.9% to 1.4%), in Chicago, based on Schwartz (2004).
The results for estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels were similar. The largest increase in mortality measured as percent of total incidence when PRB levels were reduced was 0.6% (from 1.6% to 2.2%), in Philadelphia, based on Moolgavkar et al. (1995). The largest decrease in mortality measured as percent of total incidence when PRB levels were increased was 0.5% (from 1.6% to 1.1%) in Philadelphia, based on Moolgavkar et al. (1995) and 0.5% (from 2.4% to 1.9%) in Chicago, based on Schwartz (2004).
The impact of changing the assumed PRB levels was often substantial when measured as the percent change in estimated number of O 3 

# -related deaths, because O 3 

# - related mortality was generally low under the base case PRB assumptions. A change from an estimated 3 deaths to 4 deaths, for example, is a 33% increase in the estimated number of deaths but only one additional death. When PRB estimates were decreased, estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels increased from 18% in Houston (from 78 to 92), based on Schwartz – 14 U.S. Cities (2004), to 133% in Atlanta and St. Louis (from 6 to 14, based on Bell et al. (2004), and from 12 to 28, based on Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004), in Atlanta; and from 3 to 7, based on Bell et al. (2004), in St. Louis). When PRB estimates were increased, estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels decreased from 16% in Houston (from 93 to 78), based on Schwartz (2004), to 67% in St. Louis (from 3 to 1), based on Bell et al. (2004).
The results for estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels were similar. When PRB estimates were decreased, estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels increased from 17% in Detroit (from 181 to 212), based on Schwartz (2004), to 94% in Atlanta (from 17 to 33), based on Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004). When PRB estimates were increased, estimates of mortality incidence associated with 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels decreased from 17% in Detroit (from 181 to 150), based on Schwartz (2004), to 50% in St. Louis (from 6 to 3), based on Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004).

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-131 Because O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard are substantially lower than “as is” O 3 

# concentrations, a change in the assumed PRB levels had a greater impact on the estimates of mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard, when measured as percent change in the estimate. Similarly, changing the estimates of PRB tended to have progressively greater impacts on the estimates of mortality risk associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting progressively more stringent standards. For example, decreasing the estimates of PRB in Boston induced a 57% increase in the estimate of mortality incidence (from 7 to 11) associated with 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB levels, based on Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004). The same change in PRB estimates induced a 67% increase (from 6 to 10) for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard (0.084, 4 th 

# daily maximum), a 100% increase (from 4 to 8) for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.074, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard, and a 133% increase (from 3 to 7) for O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.064, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard.
When measured as percent of total incidence, however, these changes usually were not sufficient to be detectable after rounding to one decimal place. Using 2004 air quality, for example, there was no difference in estimated percent of total incidence (after rounding) when PRB levels were reduced by 5 ppb when considering

 mortality associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above PRB versus mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard above PRB in 70 percent of estimates (compare Tables 4-40 and 4-42);

 mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the current standard above PRB versus mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.074, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard in 68 percent of estimates (compare Tables 4-42 and 4-44);

 mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.074, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard above PRB versus mortality associated with O 3 

# concentrations just meeting the 0.064, 4 th 

# daily maximum standard in 79 percent of estimates (compare Tables 4-44 and 4-46). The corresponding percentages when using 2002 air quality data are 64 percent, 79 percent, and 64 percent, respectively.
Finally, our estimates of non-accidental mortality risk associated with “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above 0 ppb, rather than above estimated PRB levels, suggest that, on average across the days in the ozone season, the differences between PRB O 3 

# concentrations and 0 ppb are substantially greater than the differences between O 3 

# concentrations to which people are exposed (“as is” O 3 

# concentrations) and estimated PRB levels – i.e., the bulk of the ambient O 3 

# is PRB O 3 

# . The estimated incidence of nonaccidental mortality associated with 2004 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above 0 ppb versus above PRB levels were from 113% higher in Detroit (273 versus 128, using Schwartz (2004), and 149 versus 70, using Schwartz – 14 U.S. Cities (2004)) to 600% higher in St. Louis (21 versus 3, using Bell et al. (2004)). The estimated incidence of non-accidental mortality associated with 2002 “as is” O 3 

# concentrations above 0 ppb versus above PRB levels were from 80% higher in Detroit (325 versus 181, using Schwartz (2004), and 178 versus 99, using Schwartz – 14 U.S. Cities (2004)) to 550% higher in Houston (91 versus 14, using Bell et al. – 95 U.S. Cities (2004)). We note, however, that because the ranges

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 4-132 of O 3 

# concentrations over which O 3 

# -mortality concentration-response functions have been estimated do not go down to 0 ppb, there is substantially less information about the relationship between mortality and exposure to O 3 

# concentrations in the range between 0 ppb and PRB levels. There is therefore increased uncertainty about whether any mortality can be attributed to exposure to these very low O 3 

# concentrations above 0 ppb versus above PRB levels.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-1 5 REFERENCES

Abt Associates Inc. (2005). Particulate Matter Health Risk Assessment for Selected Urban Areas . Prepared for Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. June 2005. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_cr_td.html

. Adams, W.C. (2002). “Comparison of Chamber and Face-Mask 6.6-Hour Exposures to Ozone on Pulmonary Function and Symptoms Responses.” Inhalation Toxicology 14:745-764.
Adams, W.C. (2003). “Comparison of Chamber and Face Mask 6.6-Hour Exposure to 0.08 ppm Ozone via Square-Wave and Triangular Profiles on Pulmonary Responses.” Inhalation Toxicology 15: 265-281.
Adams, W.C. (2006). “Comparison of Chamber 6.6-h Exposures to 0.04-0.08 ppm Ozone via Square-Wave and Triangular Profiles on Pulmonary Responses.” Inhalation Toxicology 18: 127-136.
Bell, M.A. McDermott, S.L. Zeger, J.M. Samet, and F. Dominici (2004). “Ozone and short-term mortality in 95 US urban communities, 1987-2000.” JAMA 292(19):2372- 2378.
Bell, M.A., F. Dominici, and J.M. Samet (2005). “A Meta-Analysis of Time-Series Studies of Ozone and Mortality With Comparison to the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study.” Epidemiology 16(4): 436-445.
Bell, M,A. R.D. Peng, and F. Dominici (2006). “The Exposure-Response Curve for Ozone and Risk of Mortality and the Adequacy of Current Ozone Regulations.” Environmental Health Perspectives . Available online at: http://dx.doi.org/
DuMouchel, W. (1994). “Hierarchical Bayes Linear Models for Meta-Analysis.” Technical Report #27. September, 1994. National Institute of Statistical Sciences, P. O. Box 14162, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27709.

EPA (1996a). Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information - OAQPS Staff Paper . EPA/452/R-96-007. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_pr_sp.html

.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-2 EPA (1996b). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants

. EPA/600/P-93/004aF-cF. Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Rese arch Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm /recordisplay.cfm?deid=2831

. EPA (2002). Consolidated Human Activities Database Users Guide . The database and documentation are available elect ronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/chadnet1/.

EPA (2003). Total Risk Integrated Methodolo gy TRIM.Expo/Inhalation User's Document Volume I: Air Pollutants Exposure Mode l (APEX, version 3) User’s Guide. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/human_apex.html

. 

# EPA (2004). Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter . EPA 600/P-99/002bF, 2v. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_cr_cd.html

EPA (2005a). Plan for Review of the National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards for Ozone. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. March. Available electronically on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_pd.html

. EPA (2005b). Ozone Health Assessment Plan: Scope and Methods for Exposure Analysis and Risk Assessment , Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. April. Availabl e electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_pd.html

EPA (2005c). Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Tec hnical Information - OAQPS Staff Paper . EPA452/R-05-005a. Office of Air Qu ality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronica lly on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_cr_sp.html

. EPA (2006a). Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Other Related Photochemical Oxidants . National Center for Environmental As sessment, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=149923

. EPA (2006b). Review of National Ambient Air Q uality Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Info rmation - OAQPS Sta ff Paper (second draft)

. EPA-452/D-05-001. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standa rds, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electroni cally on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_sp.html

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-3 EPA (2007a). Review of National Ambient Air Q uality Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technica l Information – (O AQPS Staff Paper) . EPA452/R-07-007. Office of Air Qu ality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronica lly on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_sp.html

EPA (2007b). Ozone Population Exposure Analys is for Selected Urban Areas. EPA452/R-07-010. Office of Air Quality Pl anning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronica lly on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_td.html
Fiore, A.M., D.J. Jacob, I. Bey, R.M. Ya ntosca, B.D. Field, A. C. Fusco, and J.G. Wilkinson (2002a). “Background ozone over the United States in summer: Origin, trend, and contribution to pollution episodes.” J. Geophys. Res., 107(D15), 4275.

Fiore, A.M., D.J. Jacob, B.D. Field, D.G. Streets, S.D. Fe rnandes, and C. Jang (2002b). “Linking ozone pollutio n with climate change: The cas e for controlling methane.” Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(19), 1919.

Fiore, A.M., D.J. Jacob, H. Liu, R.M. Yantosca, T.D. Fairlie , and Q. Li (2003). “Variability in surface ozone background ove r the United States: Implications for air quality policy.” Journal Of Geophysical Research Vol. 108(D24), 4787.
Fitz-Simons, T., L. McCluney, and M. Rizzo (2005). OAQPS Staff Memorandum to Ozone NAAQS Review Docket (OAR-2005-1072). Subject: Analysis of 2004 Ozone Data for the Ozone NAAQS Review. November 7, 2005. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/st andards/ozone/s_o3_cr_td.html
Folinsbee, L.J., et al., 1988. “Pulmonary f unction and symptom responses after 6.6-hour exposure to 0.12 ppm ozone with moderate exercise.” Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association 38: 28-35.
Friedman, M.S., K.E. Powell, L. Hutwagner, L.M. Graham, and W.G. Teague (2001). “Impact of changes in transportation a nd commuting behaviors during the 1996 summer Olympic games in Atlanta on air quality and childhood asthma.” JAMA 285:897-905.
Fusco, A. C., and J. A. Logan (2003). “Analysis of 1970– 1995 tr ends in tropospheric ozone at Northern Hemisphere midlatitude s with the GEOSCHEM model.” J. Geophys. Res., 108(D15), 4449.

Gelman, A, Carlin, J. C., Ster n, H., and Rubin, D. B. (1995) . Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall, New York.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-4 Gent, J.F., E.W. Triche, T.R. Holford, K. Belanger, M.B. Bracken, W.S. Beckett, B.P. Leaderer (2003). “Association of low-level ozone and fine particles with respiratory symptoms in children with asthma.” JAMA 290(14):1859-1867.
Gilks, W. R., Richardson, S., and Spiegelhalter, D. J. (Eds.) (1996). Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
Gliner, J.A., S.M. Horvath, L.J. Folinsbee (1983). “Preexposure to low ozone concentrations does not diminish the pulmonary function response on exposure to higher ozone concentrations.” American Review of Respiratory Disease 127:51-55.
Graham, S. and T. McCurdy (2004). “Developing meaningful cohorts for human exposure models .” Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 14:23-43.
Gilliland, F.D., K. Berhane, E.B. Rappaport, D.C. Thomas, E. Avol, W.J. Gauderman, S.J. London, H.G. Margolis, R. McConnell, K.T. Islam and J.M. Peters (2001). “The effects of ambient air pollution on school absenteeism due to respiratory illnesses.” Epidemiology 12(1):43-54.
Henderson, R. (2006a). Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Ozone Review Panel’s Consultation on EPA’s First Draft Ozone Staff Paper, Risk Assessment, and Exposure Assessment Documents. February 16, 2006. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/sab/panels/casacorpanel.html
Henderson, R. (2006b). Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee’s (CASAC) Teleconference Meeting to Provide Additional Advice to the Agency Concerning Chapter 8 (Integrative Synthesis) of the Final Ozone Air Quality Criteria Document (AQCD). June 5, 2006. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/sab/panels/casacorpanel.html

Horstman, D.H., L.J. Folinsbee, P.J. Ives, S. Abdul-Salaam, and W.F. McDonnell (1990). “Ozone concentration and pulmonary response relationships for 6.6-hour exposures with five hours of moderate exercise to 0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 ppm.” American Review of Respiratory Disease 142:1158-1163.
Huang, Y., F. Dominici, M.L. Bell (2004). “Bayesian hierarchical distributed lag models for summer ozone exposure and cardio-respiratory mortality.” John Hopkins University, Department of Biostatistics Working Paper . 46.
Ito, K. (2003). Associations of particulate matter components with daily mortality and morbidity in Detroit, Michigan. In: “Revised Analyses of Time-Series Studies of Air Pollution and Health,” Health Effects Institute Special Report, May.
Jaffe, D.H., Singer, M.E., and Rimm, A.A. (2003). “Air pollution and emergency department visits for asthma among Ohio Medicaid recipients, 1991-1996.” Environmental Research 91:21-28.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-5 Johnson, T., Capel, J., and McCoy, M. (1996a). Estimation of Ozone Exposures Experienced by Urban Residents Using a Probabilistic Version of NEM and 1990 Population Data . Prepared by International Technology Air Quality Services for Office of Air Quallity Planning and Standards, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_pr_td.html

. Johnson, T., Capel, J., McCoy, M., and Warnasch, J. (1996b). Estimation of Ozone Exposures Experienced by Outdoor Children in Nine Urban Areas Using a Probabilistic Version of NEM . Prepared by International Technology Air Quality Services for Office of Air Quallity Planning and Standards, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available electronically on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_pr_td.html

. Johnson, T. (1997). “Sensitivity of Exposure Estimates to Air Quality Adjustment Procedure,” Letter to Harvey Richmond, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Kann, L., S.A. Kinchen, B.I. Williams, J.G. Ross, R. Lowry, and J.A. Grunbaum (2000). “Youth risk behavior surveillance--United States, 1999.” Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report 49(SS05):1-96.
Linn, W., Y. Szlachcis, H.J. Gong, P. Kinney, K. Berhane (2000). “Air pollution and daily hospital admissions in metropolitan Los Angeles.” Environmental Health Perspective 108:427-434.
McCurdy, T. (2000). “Conceptual basis for multi-route intake dose modeling using an energy expenditure approach.” J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 10:1-12.
McCurdy, T., Glen, G., Smith, L., Lakkadi, Y. (2000). “The National Exposure Research Laboratory's Consolidated Human Activity Database.” J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol . 10:566-578.
McDonnell, W.F., R.S. Chapman, M.W. Leigh, G.L. Strope, and A.M. Collier (1985a). “Respiratory responses of vigorously exercising children to 0.12 ppm ozone exposure. American Review of Respiratory Disease 132: 875-879.

McDonnell, W.F., D.H. Horstman, S. Abdul-Salaam, and D.E. House (1985b). “Reproducibility of individual responses to ozone exposure.” American Review of Respiratory Disease 131:36-40.

McDonnell, W.F., H.R. Kehrl, S. Abdul-Salaam, P.J. Ives, L.J. Folinsbee, R.B. Devlin, J.J. O’Neil, D.H. Horstman (1991). “Respiratory response of humans exposed to low levels of ozone for 6.6 hours.” American Review of Respiratory Disease 147:804-810.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-6 Moolgavkar, S. H.; Luebeck, E. G.; Hall, T. A.; Anderson, E. L. (1995). “Air pollution and daily mortality in Philadelphia.” Epidemiology 6: 476-484.
Morgan and Henrion (1990). Uncertainty: A Guide To Dealing with Uncertainty in Qualitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Mortimer, K.M., L.M. Neas, D.W. Dockery, S. Redline, and I.B. Tager (2002). “The effects on air pollution on inner-city children with asthma.” European Respiratory Journal . 19:699-705.
Peel, J.L., P.E. Tolbert, M. Klein, K.B. Metzger, W.D. Flanders, K. Todd, J.M. Mulholland, P.B. Ryan, and H. Frumkin, (2005). “Ambient air pollution and respiratory emergency department visits.” Epidemiology 16(2):164-174.
Pope, C. A., R. T. Burnett, M. J. Thun, E. E. Calle, D. Krewski, K. Ito, and G. D. Thurston. 2002. Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term Exposure to Fine Particulate Air Pollution. Journal of the American Medical Association, vol 287, no 9: 287:1132-1141.
Post, E., D. Hoaglin, L. Deck, and K. Larntz (2001). “An Empirical Bayes approach to estimating the relation of mortality to exposure to particulate matter,” Risk Analysis 21(5): 837-842
Richmond H., T. Palma, J. Langstaff, T. McCurdy, G. Glenn, and L. Smith (2002). “Further refinements and testing of APEX (3.0): EPA's population exposure model for criteria and air toxic inhalation exposures.” Poster presentation. Joint meeting of the International Society of Exposure Analysis and International Society of Environmental Epidemiology, August 11-15, 2002, Vancouver, Canada.

Rizzo, M. (2005). OAQPS Staff Memorandum to Ozone NAAQS Review Docket (OAR-2005-1072). Subject: Evaluation of a quadratic approach for adjusting distributions of hourly ozone concentrations to meet air quality standards. November 7. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_cr_td.html

. Rizzo, M. (2006). OAQPS Staff Memorandum to Ozone NAAQS Review Docket (OAR-2005-1072). Subject: A Comparison between Different Rollback Methodologies Applied to Ambient Ozone Concentrations. May 31. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_cr_td.html

. Schwartz, J. (2000). “The distributed lag between air pollution and daily deaths.” Epidemiology 11(3):320-326.
Schwartz, J. (2004). “How sensitive is the association between ozone and daily deaths to control for temperature?” Am. J. Resp. Crit. Care Med.

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 5-7 Schwartz, J., C. Spix, G. Touloumi, L. Bacharova, T. Barumamdzadeh, A. le Tertre, T. Piekarksi, A. Ponce de Leon, A. Ponka, G. Rossi, M. Saez, J.P. Schouten (1996). “Methodological issues in studies of air pollution and daily counts of deaths or hospital admissions.” J. Epid. and Comm. Health 50(Suppl 1):S3-S11.
Spiegelhalter, D., Thomas, A., Best, N. and Gilks, W. (1996). Bugs .5 Bayesian inference using Gibbs sampling. Manual, version ii. MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health. Cambridge, U.K.
Thurston, G.D., K. Ito, P.L. Kinney, M. Lippmann (1992). “A multi-year study of air pollution and respiratory hospital admission in three New York State metropolitan areas: Results for 1988 and 1989 summers.” J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol . 2(4):429- 450.
Thurston, G.D. and Ito, K. (2001). “Epidemiological studies of acute ozone exposures and mortality.” J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol . 11:286.
Tolbert, P.E., J.A. Mulholland, D.L. MacIntosh, F. Xu, et al. (2000). “Air quality and Pediatric Emergency Room Visits for Asthma in Atlanta, GA, USA.” American Journal of Epidemiology 151(8):798-810.

Whitfield, R., Biller, W., Jusko, M., and Keisler, J. (1996). A Probabilistic Assessment of Health Risks Associated with Short- and Long-Term Exposure to Tropospheric Ozone

. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.

Whitfield, R. (1997). A Probabilistic Assessment of Health Risks Associated with Shortterm Exposure to Tropospheric Ozone: A Supplement . Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.

# Ozone Health Risk Assessment for

Selected Urban Areas: Appendices

July 2007

Prepared for Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC
Prepared by Ellen Post Andreas Maier Hardee Mahoney

Work funded through Contract No. 68-D-03-002 Work Assignments 3-39 and 4-56

Harvey Richmond, Work Assignment Manager Nancy Riley, Project Officer

# Abt Associates Inc. i December 2006 

# Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: AIR QUALITY.............................................................................................
APPENDIX B: INFORMATION ON CONCENTRATION-RESPONSE FUNCTIONS
B.1 T ABLES OF 

# S TUDY 

# -S PECIFIC 

# I NFORMATION 

# ................................................................. B-1 B.2 C ONCENTRATION 

# -R ESPONSE 

# F UNCTIONS AND 

# H EALTH 

# I MPACT 

# F UNCTIONS 

# ............... B-8 B.2.1 Log-linear............................................................................................................ B-8 B.2.2 Linear .................................................................................................................. B-8 B.2.3 Logistic ............................................................................................................... B-9 B.3 T HE 

# C ALCULATION OF 

# “S HRINKAGE 

# ” E STIMATES FROM THE 

# L OCATION 

# -S PECIFIC 

# E STIMATES 

# R EPORTED IN 

# H UANG ET AL 

# . (2004) ................................................. B-11
APPENDIX C: ADDITIONAL LUNG FUNCTION RESULTS.......................................
C.1 L UNG 

# F UNCTION 

# R ESPONSE 

# A MONG 

# A CTIVE 

# C HILDREN 

# A SSOCIATED WITH 

# E XPOSURE

TO 

# "A S 

# I S 

# " O 3 

# C ONCENTRATIONS 

# O VER 

# B ACKGROUND 

# O 3 

# C ONCENTRATIONS 

# ..... C-1 C.2 L UNG 

# F UNCTION 

# R ESPONSE 

# A MONG 

# A CTIVE 

# C HILDREN 

# A SSOCIATED WITH 

# E XPOSURE

TO 

# O 3 

# C ONCENTRATIONS 

# T HAT 

# J UST 

# M EET THE 

# C URRENT AND 

# A LTERNATIVE 

# D AILY 

# M AXIMUM 

# 8-H OUR 

# S TANDARDS 

# ........................................................................... C-5 C.3 S ENSITIVITY 

# A NALYSIS 

# : I MPACT OF 

# A LTERNATIVE 

# E STIMATES OF 

# E XPOSURE 

# -R ESPONSE 

# F UNCTION ON 

# L UNG 

# F UNCTION 

# R ESPONSE 

# E STIMATES 

# ....................................... C-25
APPENDIX D: ESTIMATED HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH “AS IS” O 3 

# CONCENTRATIONS: APRIL – SEPTEMBER.................................................................
D.1 F IGURES 

# ....................................................................................................................... D-1 D.2 T ABLES 

# ........................................................................................................................ D-8
APPENDIX E: ESTIMATED HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH O 3 

# CONCENTRATIONS THAT JUST MEET THE CURRENT 8-HOUR DAILY MAXIMUM STANDARD: APRIL – SEPTEMBER ..........................................................
E.1 F IGURES 

# ........................................................................................................................E-1 E.2 T ABLES 

# .........................................................................................................................E-8
APPENDIX F: CALCULATION OF RISK ABOVE POLICY RELEVANT BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................................
APPENDIX G: EXPLANATION OF HOW A DISTRIBUTED LAG MODEL CAN BE USED IN THE RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................
APPENDIX H: ADDITIONAL RESULTS FOR FIVE LOCATIONS FOR THE CURRENT STANDARD AND TWO ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS, BASED ON 2002, 2003, AND 2004 AIR QUALITY DATA.....................................................................
APPENDIX I: ADDITIONAL PRB SENSITIVITY ANALYSES....................................

# Abt Associates Inc. ii December 2006 

# List of Tables

Table A-1. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Atlanta, GA ................................... A-1 Table A-2. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Boston, MA ................................... A-1 Table A-3. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Chicago, IL..................................... A-2 Table A-4. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Cleveland, OH................................ A-3 Table A-5. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Detroit, MI...................................... A-3 Table A-6. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Houston, TX................................... A-4 Table A-7. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Los Angeles, CA ............................ A-5 Table A-8. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: New York, NY ............................... A-6 Table A-9. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Philadelphia, PA............................. A-6 Table A-10. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Sacramento, CA ........................... A-7 Table A-11. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: St. Louis, MO ............................... A-8 Table A-12. Monitor-Specific O 3 

# Air Quality Information: Washington, D.C.......................... A-8 Table A-13. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2004 ...................................................................... A-9 Table A-14. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2003 ...................................................................... A-9 Table A-15. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2002 .................................................................... A-10 Table B-1. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Atlanta, GA ...................................... B-1 Table B-2. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Boston, MA...................................... B-1 Table B-3. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Chicago, IL....................................... B-2 Table B-4. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Cleveland, OH.................................. B-2 Table B-5. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Detroit, MI........................................ B-3 Table B-6. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Houston, TX..................................... B-4 Table B-7. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Los Angeles, CA .............................. B-5 Table B-8. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in New York, NY ................................. B-6 Table B-9. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Philadelphia, PA............................... B-6 Table B-10. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Sacramento, CA ............................. B-7 Table B-11. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in St. Louis, MO................................. B-7 Table B-12. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

# Studies in Washington, D.C............................ B-7 Table B-13. Notation ............................................................................................................... B-12 Table C-1. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations.............................................. C-1 Table C-2. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations.............................................. C-2 Table C-3. Number and Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................... C-3 Table C-4. Number and Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated

# Abt Associates Inc. iii December 2006

with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations Over Background O 3 

# Concentrations, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................... C-4 Table C-5. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................... C-5 Table C-6. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................... C-7 Table C-7. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................... C-9 Table C-8. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................. C-11 Table C-9. Number of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-13 Table C-10. Number of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-15 Table C-11. Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-17 Table C-12. Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exercise Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-19 Table C-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with

# Abt Associates Inc. iv December 2006

Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-25 Table C-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=15%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-26 Table C-15. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-27 Table C-16. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV 1 

# >=10%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O 3 

# Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................... C-28 Table D-1. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Atlanta, GA, April – September, 2004 ............................................................................................. D-8 Table D-2. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Atlanta, GA, April – September, 2002 ............................................................................................. D-9 Table D-3. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Boston, MA, April – September, 2004........................................................................................... D-10 Table D-4. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Boston, MA, April – September, 2002........................................................................................... D-11 Table D-5. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Chicago, IL, April – September, 2004 ............................................................................................. D-12 Table D-6. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Chicago, IL, April – September, 2002 ............................................................................................. D-13 Table D-7. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Cleveland, OH, April – September, 2004 ........................................................................................... D-14 Table D-8. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Cleveland, OH, April – September, 2002 ........................................................................................... D-15 Table D-9. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Detroit, MI, April – September, 2004 ............................................................................................ D-16 Table D-10. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Detroit, MI, April – September, 2002 ............................................................................................ D-17 Table D-11. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Houston, TX, April – September, 2004............................................................................................ D-18

# Abt Associates Inc. v December 2006

Table D-12. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Houston, TX, April – September, 2002............................................................................................ D-19 Table D-13. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Los Angeles, CA, April – September, 2004 ............................................................................ D-20 Table D-14. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Los Angeles, CA, April – September, 2002 ............................................................................ D-21 Table D-15. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Philadelphia, PA, April – September, 2004...................................................................... D-22 Table D-16. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Philadelphia, PA, April – September, 2002...................................................................... D-23 Table D-17. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Sacramento, CA, April – September, 2004....................................................................... D-24 Table D-18. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Sacramento, CA, April – September, 2002....................................................................... D-25 Table D-19. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: St. Louis, MO, April – September, 2004........................................................................................... D-26 Table D-20. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: St. Louis, MO, April – September, 2002 ............................................................................... D-27 Table D-21. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Washington, D.C., April – September, 2004 .................................................................... D-28 Table D-22. Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: Washington, D.C., April – September, 2002 .................................................................... D-29 Table E-1. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................E-8 Table E-2. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................................E-9 Table E-3. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-10 Table E-4. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-11 Table E-5. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ..............................................................................................................E-12 Table E-6. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-13

# Abt Associates Inc. vi December 2006

Table E-7. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-14 Table E-8. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-15 Table E-9. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-16 Table E-10. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-17 Table E-11. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-18 Table E-12. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-19 Table E-13. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-20 Table E-14. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ..............................................................................................................E-21 Table E-15. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-22 Table E-16. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-23 Table E-17. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ..............................................................................................................E-24 Table E-18. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-25

# Abt Associates Inc. vii December 2006

Table E-19. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-26 Table E-20. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-27 Table E-21. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-28 Table E-22. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-29 Table E-23. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-30 Table E-24. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-31 Table E-25. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-32 Table E-26. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ..............................................................................................................E-34 Table E-27. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-36 Table E-28. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-38 Table E-29. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ..............................................................................................................E-40 Table E-30. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-42

# Abt Associates Inc. viii December 2006

Table E-31. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-44 Table E-32. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-45 Table E-33. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-46 Table E-34. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-47 Table E-35. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-48 Table E-36. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-49 Table E-37. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-50 Table E-38. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-51 Table E-39. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-52 Table E-40. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-53 Table E-41. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-54 Table E-42. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-55

# Abt Associates Inc. ix December 2006

Table E-43. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-56 Table E-44. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-57 Table E-45. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-58 Table E-46. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-59 Table E-47. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-60 Table E-48. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-61 Table E-49. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-62 Table E-50. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-63 Table E-51. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-64 Table E-52. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-65 Table E-53. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-66 Table E-54. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-67

# Abt Associates Inc. x December 2006

Table E-55. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-68 Table E-56. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-69 Table E-57. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-70 Table E-58. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................E-71 Table E-59. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations .....................................................................................................E-72 Table E-60. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-73 Table E-61. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...............................................E-74 Table E-62. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ....................................................................................E-75 Table E-63. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-76 Table E-64. Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...............................................E-77 Table E-65. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ....................................................................................E-78 Table E-66. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

# Concentrations ...................................................................................................................E-79

# Abt Associates Inc. xi December 2006

Table H-1. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations ... H-1 Table H-2. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based Adjusting on 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................. H-2 Table H-3. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations ... H-3 Table H-4. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ... H-4 Table H-5. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based Adjusting on 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................................................................. H-5 Table H-6. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations ... H-6 Table H-7. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations ................................................ H-7 Table H-8. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8- Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................... H-8 Table H-9. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8- Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................... H-9 Table H-10. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations...................................... H-10 Table H-11. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8- Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................. H-11 Table H-12. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8- Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

# Concentrations .................................................................................................................. H-12 Table I-1. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2004 ...................................................I-1

# Abt Associates Inc. xii December 2006

Table I-2. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2002 ...................................................I-2 Table I-3. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2004.......................................................................................................................................I-3 Table I-4. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with "As Is" O 3 

# Concentrations: April - September, 2002.......................................................................................................................................I-4 Table I-5. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004....................................................................................I-5 Table I-6. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002....................................................................................I-6 Table I-7. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004 ...........................................................................I-7 Table I-8. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002 ...........................................................................I-8 Table I-9. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004 ...........................................................................I-9 Table I-10. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002 .........................................................................I-10 Table I-11. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004..............................I-11 Table I-12. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002..............................I-12 Table I-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000

# Abt Associates Inc. xiii December 2006

Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2004 ...........................I-13 Table I-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2002 ...........................I-14 Table I-15. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004 ............................I-15 Table I-16. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002 ............................I-16

# Abt Associates Inc. xiv December 2006 

# List of Figures

Figure C-1. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numbers (Across All Locations) of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Among Active School Age Children when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definitions of Response.................................................................................................... C-21 Figure C-2. Percent Reductions of Occurrences of Decrement in FEV 1 

# >15% Among Active School Age Children when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separately for Each Location............................................................................ C-22 Figure C-3. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numbers (Across All Locations) of Active School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Occurrence of Lung Function Response when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definitions of Response.......................................................................................... C-23 Figure C-4. Percent Reductions in Numbers of Active School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

# >15% when O 3 

# Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separately for Each Location......................................................... C-24 Figure D-1. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background: SinglePollutant, Single-City Models (April – September)............................................................ D-1 Figure D-2. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi-Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

# , PM 10 

# , SO 2 

# ] ............................... D-2 Figure D-3. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar)...................... D-3 Figure D-4. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) ............................................................................................................. D-4 Figure D-5. Estimated Annual Cases of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models]................................................................................................................................ D-5 Figure D-6. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality Per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges............................................................................. D-6

# Abt Associates Inc. xv December 2006

Figure D-7. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

# Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges ................................................................... D-7 Figure E-1. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met: Single-Pollutant, Single-City Models (April – September) ...........................................................................................................................E-1 Figure E-2. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When theCurrent 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. MultiPollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

# , PM 10 

# , SO 2 

# ]...........................................................................................................E-2 Figure E-3. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar)...................................................................................E-3 Figure E-4. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004)................................E-4 Figure E-5. Estimated Annual Cases of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] ..........................................................E-5 Figure E-6. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24- Hour O 3 

# Ranges ...................................................................................................................E-6 Figure E-7. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

# Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

# Ranges ..............................................................................................................E-7

# Appendix A: Air Quality

## Table A-1. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Atlanta, GA

2002 2003 2004 1305700011 0.089 1306700031 0.100 0.084 0.073 0.085 1307700021 0.099 0.077 0.083 0.086 1308500012 0.088 0.077 0.068 0.077 1308900021 0.095 0.080 0.084 0.086 1308930011 0.090 0.091 0.088 0.089 1309700041 0.098 0.085 0.080 0.087 1311300011 0.088 0.077 0.084 0.083 1312100551 0.100 0.091 0.089 0.093 1313500021 0.089 0.088 0.092 0.089 1315100021 0.099 0.082 0.085 0.088 1322300031 0.099 0.083 0.073 0.085 1324700011 0.099 0.078 0.087 0.088

Average: 0.095 0.083 0.082 0.093 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period.

Table A-2. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Boston, MA

2002 2003 2004 2500900051 0.088 2500920061 0.100 0.079 0.081 0.086 2500940041 0.094 0.080 0.077 0.083 2501711021 0.096 0.073 0.070 0.079 2502130031 0.107 0.088 0.078 0.091 2502500411 0.102 0.078 0.079 0.086 2502500421 0.074 0.074 0.064 0.07 2502700151 0.091 0.080 0.074 0.081

Average: 0.094 0.079 0.075 0.091 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Design Value*: AIRS Monitor ID Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific Values (ppm)

AIRS Monitor ID Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific Values (ppm) Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-1 December 2006

## Table A-3. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Chicago, IL

2002 2003 2004 1703100011 0.094 0.077 0.065 0.078 1703100321 0.096 0.080 0.067 0.081 1703100422 0.103 1703100501 0.084 0.069 1703100641 0.085 0.067 0.054 0.068 1703100721 0.085 0.075 0.060 0.073 1703100761 0.068 1703110032 0.092 0.071 0.067 0.076 1703116011 0.081 0.075 0.067 0.074 1703140021 0.084 0.070 0.059 0.071 1703140071 0.093 0.073 0.064 0.076 1703142011 0.087 0.080 0.067 0.078 1703142012 0.067 0.051 1703170021 0.091 0.082 0.071 0.081 1703180031 0.074 1704360011 0.084 0.066 0.065 0.071 1708900051 0.082 0.076 0.069 0.075 1709710021 0.090 0.074 0.068 0.077 1709710071 0.100 0.078 0.071 0.083 1709730011 0.087 1711100011 0.090 0.079 0.068 0.079 1719710081 0.086 0.077 0.063 0.075 1719710111 0.087 0.073 0.068 0.076 1808900221 0.094 0.076 0.064 0.078 1808900241 0.086 0.081 1808900301 0.064 1808920081 0.101 0.081 0.067 0.083 1809100051 0.107 0.082 0.070 0.086 1809100101 0.100 0.084 1812700202 0.097 0.079 1812700241 0.101 0.077 0.069 0.082 1812700261 0.100 0.082 0.072 0.084 5505900021 0.110 0.085 5505900191 0.116 0.088 0.078 0.094 5505900221 0.096 0.088

Average: 0.092 0.077 0.066 0.094 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-2 December 2006

## Table A-4. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Cleveland, OH

2002 2003 2004 3900710011 0.103 0.099 0.081 0.094 3903500341 0.090 0.076 0.057 0.074 3903500641 0.090 0.079 0.063 0.077 3903550021 0.098 0.089 0.077 0.088 3905500041 0.115 0.097 0.075 0.095 3908500031 0.104 0.092 0.079 0.091 3908530021 0.088 0.080 0.076 0.081 3909300171 0.099 0.085 0.074 0.086 3910300031 0.091 0.086 0.077 0.084 3913310011 0.097 0.091 0.081 0.089 3915300201 0.103 0.089 0.077 0.089

Average: 0.098 0.088 0.074 0.095 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period.

Table A-5. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Detroit, MI

2002 2003 2004 2604900211 0.088 0.087 0.075 0.083 2604920011 0.089 0.091 0.077 0.085 2609900091 0.095 0.102 0.081 0.092 2609910031 0.092 0.101 0.071 0.088 2612500012 0.093 0.090 0.075 0.086 2614700051 0.100 0.086 0.074 0.086 2616100081 0.091 0.091 0.071 0.084 2616300012 0.088 0.085 0.065 0.079 2616300161 0.092 0.084 0.066 0.08 2616300192 0.083 0.098 0.066 0.082

Average: 0.091 0.092 0.072 0.092 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Design Value*: Design Value*: Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

AIRS Monitor ID Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific Values (ppm)



# Abt Associates Inc. A-3 December 2006

## Table A-6. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Houston, TX

2002 2003 2004 4803910032 0.095 4803910041 0.092 0.097 0.103 0.097 4803910161 0.081 4816700141 0.093 0.092 0.088 0.091 4816710022 0.083 0.082 4820100242 0.096 0.095 0.096 0.095 4820100263 0.088 0.098 0.085 0.09 4820100292 0.098 0.096 0.090 0.094 4820100461 0.078 0.093 0.084 0.085 4820100472 0.072 0.082 0.083 0.079 4820100512 0.101 0.103 0.095 0.099 4820100551 0.094 0.107 0.104 0.101 4820100621 0.095 0.094 0.097 0.095 4820100661 0.084 0.081 0.097 0.087 4820100701 0.088 0.100 0.078 0.088 4820100751 0.078 0.096 0.093 0.089 4820110151 0.108 0.093 4820110342 0.093 0.102 0.091 0.095 4820110353 0.092 0.105 0.092 0.096 4820110391 0.095 0.113 0.097 0.101 4820110411 0.090 4820110501 0.094 0.092 0.097 0.094 4833900781 0.082 0.094 0.080 0.085

Average: 0.090 0.097 0.091 0.101 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-4 December 2006

## Table A-7. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Los Angeles, CA

2002 2003 2004 0603700021 0.097 0.104 0.092 0.097 0603700161 0.111 0.123 0.095 0.109 0603701131 0.073 0.083 0.076 0.077 0603710021 0.091 0.096 0.089 0.092 0603711031 0.077 0.082 0.078 0.079 0603712011 0.111 0.119 0.101 0.11 0603713011 0.049 0.057 0.065 0.057 0603716011 0.074 0.082 0.079 0.078 0603717011 0.099 0.109 0.095 0.101 0603720051 0.095 0.101 0.093 0.096 0603740021 0.059 0.063 0.070 0.064 0603750011 0.064 0.070 0603750051 0.085 0603760121 0.131 0.137 0.107 0.125 0603790331 0.102 0.103 0.095 0.1 0605900071 0.069 0.080 0.088 0.079 0605910031 0.066 0.079 0.076 0.073 0605920221 0.081 0.095 0.085 0.087 0605950011 0.071 0.080 0.075 0.075 0606500121 0.113 0.127 0.112 0.117 0606520021 0.097 0.100 0.094 0.097 0606550011 0.109 0.105 0.099 0.104 0606560011 0.107 0.116 0.095 0.106 0606580011 0.109 0.120 0.111 0.113 0606590011 0.104 0.112 0.100 0.105 0606590031 0.060 0607100011 0.092 0.088 0.082 0.087 0607100051 0.131 0.130 0.122 0.127 0607100121 0.115 0.103 0.097 0.105 0607100171 0.087 0.084 0.087 0.086 0607103061 0.106 0.104 0.085 0.098 0607110042 0.105 0.114 0.102 0.107 0607112341 0.089 0.087 0.082 0.086 0607120021 0.114 0.132 0.111 0.119 0607140011 0.113 0.110 0.099 0.107 0607140031 0.117 0.137 0.119 0.124 0607190021 0.101 0.111 0.102 0.104 0607190041 0.105 0.123 0.112 0.113 0611100051 0.076 0611100071 0.080 0.087 0.086 0.084 0611100091 0.087 0.093 0.086 0.088 0611110041 0.097 0.093 0.092 0.094 0611120021 0.092 0.093 0.092 0.092 0611120031 0.064 0.074 0.069 0.069 0611130011 0.064 0.069 0.065 0.066

Average: 0.093 0.099 0.091 0.127 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm ) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues (pp m ) AIRS Monitor ID

Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-5 December 2006

## Table A-8. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: New York, NY

2002 2003 2004 3600500831 0.096 0.079 0.074 0.083 3600501101 0.089 0.082 0.069 0.08 3602700071 0.111 0.081 0.076 0.089 3607150011 0.082 0.087 0.078 0.082 3607900051 0.102 0.082 0.082 0.088 3608100981 0.082 0.072 0.064 0.072 3608101241 0.089 0.086 0.075 0.083 3608500671 0.099 0.086 0.083 0.089 3610300021 0.108 0.094 0.081 0.094 3610300041 0.090 0.082 3610300092 0.103 0.102 0.079 0.094 3611110051 0.084 0.082 0.076 0.08 3611920041 0.102 0.091 0.078 0.09

Average: 0.095 0.085 0.076 0.094 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period.

Table A-9. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Philadelphia, PA

2002 2003 2004 4201700121 0.111 0.087 0.082 0.093 4202900501 0.104 0.085 4202901001 0.112 0.085 0.085 0.094 4204500021 0.106 0.080 0.081 0.089 4209100131 0.101 0.085 0.083 0.089 4210100041 0.082 0.069 0.054 0.068 4210100141 0.098 0.083 0.077 0.086 4210100241 0.110 0.082 0.091 0.094 4210101361 0.094 0.070 0.073 0.079

Average: 0.102 0.081 0.078 0.094 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Design Value*: Design Value*: Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

AIRS Monitor ID Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific Values (ppm)



# Abt Associates Inc. A-6 December 2006

## Table A-10. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Sacramento, CA

2002 2003 2004 0601700101 0.098 0.096 0.089 0.094 0601700111 0.067 0.065 0601700121 0.077 0.075 0.073 0.075 0601700201 0.111 0.106 0.089 0.102 0605700051 0.099 0.098 0.093 0.096 0605700071 0.093 0.090 0.085 0.089 0605710011 0.065 0606100021 0.101 0.094 0.092 0.095 0606100041 0.101 0.089 0.087 0.092 0606100061 0.095 0.085 0.082 0.087 0606100071 0.068 0606130011 0.097 0606700021 0.095 0.086 0.076 0.085 0606700061 0.105 0.097 0.083 0.095 0606700101 0.083 0.076 0.067 0.075 0606700111 0.069 0.087 0.077 0.077 0606700121 0.104 0.098 0.087 0.096 0606700131 0.079 0.075 0.067 0.073 0606750031 0.097 0.097 0.089 0.094 0611300041 0.076 0.077 0.071 0.074 0611310031 0.088 0.082 0.069 0.079

Average: 0.090 0.086 0.081 0.102 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-7 December 2006

## Table A-11. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: St. Louis, MO

2002 2003 2004 1708310011 0.100 0.083 0.073 0.085 1711700021 0.085 0.077 0.068 0.076 1711900081 0.094 0.089 0.074 0.085 1711910091 0.090 0.088 0.078 0.085 1711920072 0.090 0.082 0.068 0.08 1711930071 0.084 0.083 0.073 0.08 1716300102 0.093 0.079 0.073 0.081 2909900121 0.093 0.082 0.070 0.081 2918310021 0.099 0.091 0.077 0.089 2918310041 0.098 0.090 0.076 0.088 2918900041 0.098 0.088 0.070 0.085 2918900061 0.094 0.086 0.067 0.082 2918930011 0.094 0.082 0.067 0.081 2918950011 0.095 0.088 0.068 0.083 2918970031 0.093 0.088 0.069 0.083 2951000071 0.090 0.084 2951000721 0.081 0.071 0.058 0.07 2951000861 0.098 0.090 0.072 0.086

Average: 0.093 0.085 0.071 0.089 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period.

Table A-12. Monitor-Specific O 3 

## Air Quality Information: Washington, D.C.

2002 2003 2004 1100100251 0.097 0.079 0.080 0.085 1100100411 0.102 0.082 0.070 0.084 1100100431 0.106 0.081 0.081 0.089

Average: 0.102 0.081 0.077 0.089 *The design value is the maximum of the monitor-specific averages of the annual fourth daily maximum 8-hour average over the 3 year period. Design Value*: Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific V alues ( ppm ) AIRS Monitor ID

AIRS Monitor ID Fourth Daily Maximum 8-Hour Average (ppm) A verage of the 3 Year-Specific Values (ppm) Design Value*:



# Abt Associates Inc. A-8 December 2006Table A-13. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2004Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean MaximumAtlanta 0.0091 0.0279 0.0504 0.0170 0.0578 0.1267 0.0146 0.0499 0.1103Boston 1* 0.0060 0.0276 0.0571 0.0185 0.0433 0.1060 0.0128 0.0379 0.0904Boston 2* 0.0114 0.0310 0.0603 0.0218 0.0450 0.0956 0.0194 0.0411 0.0842Chicago 0.0110 0.0270 0.0453 0.0152 0.0432 0.0758 0.0119 0.0389 0.0679Cleveland 0.0080 0.0257 0.0445 0.0123 0.0404 0.0743 0.0090 0.0360 0.0676Detroit 0.0074 0.0239 0.0459 0.0140 0.0430 0.0793 0.0094 0.0375 0.0730Houston 0.0075 0.0262 0.0572 0.0155 0.0510 0.1243 0.0137 0.0443 0.1082Los Angeles 1** 0.0204 0.0338 0.0491 0.0351 0.0634 0.1005 0.0319 0.0555 0.0867Los Angeles 2** 0.0249 0.0398 0.0568 0.0410 0.0656 0.0992 0.0387 0.0597 0.0888New York 1*** 0.0055 0.0242 0.0494 0.0128 0.0449 0.0920 0.0085 0.0378 0.0811New York 2*** 0.0052 0.0241 0.0491 0.0115 0.0447 0.0883 0.0076 0.0378 0.0806Philadelphia 0.0037 0.0272 0.0486 0.0090 0.0492 0.0915 0.0057 0.0426 0.0775Sacramento 0.0164 0.0323 0.0462 0.0307 0.0593 0.0953 0.0241 0.0520 0.0806St. Louis 0.0078 0.0248 0.0425 0.0175 0.0468 0.0890 0.0114 0.0409 0.0688Washington, D.C. 0.0055 0.0283 0.0526 0.0140 0.0521 0.1020 0.0103 0.0450 0.0916*"Boston 1" denotes Suffolk County; "Boston 2" denotes Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties.**"Los Angeles 1" denotes Los Angeles County; "Los Angeles 2" denotes Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties.***"New York 1" denotes the 5 boroughs of New York City -- Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Bronx, and Staten Island. "New York 2" denotes the 5boroughs plus Westchester County.Table A-14. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2003Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean MaximumAtlanta 0.0035 0.0265 0.0513 0.0083 0.0574 0.1133 0.0042 0.0492 0.1003Boston 1* 0.0106 0.0305 0.0693 0.0190 0.0469 0.1110 0.0143 0.0407 0.0955Boston 2* 0.0104 0.0339 0.0693 0.0190 0.0482 0.1089 0.0145 0.0439 0.0958Chicago 0.0084 0.0287 0.0554 0.0158 0.0458 0.0819 0.0111 0.0410 0.0793Cleveland 0.0073 0.0298 0.0676 0.0143 0.0483 0.1013 0.0102 0.0427 0.0919Detroit 0.0074 0.0279 0.0550 0.0163 0.0503 0.1010 0.0150 0.0442 0.0945Houston 0.0065 0.0270 0.0612 0.0181 0.0534 0.1161 0.0119 0.0455 0.1008Los Angeles 1** 0.0155 0.0326 0.0537 0.0274 0.0650 0.1099 0.0245 0.0557 0.0952Los Angeles 2** 0.0266 0.0396 0.0612 0.0390 0.0670 0.1044 0.0361 0.0605 0.0954New York 1*** 0.0054 0.0251 0.0598 0.0146 0.0458 0.1078 0.0095 0.0386 0.0991New York 2*** 0.0061 0.0259 0.0593 0.0140 0.0462 0.1057 0.0088 0.0395 0.0985Philadelphia 0.0052 0.0285 0.0725 0.0155 0.0495 0.1074 0.0085 0.0430 0.0988Sacramento 0.0217 0.0352 0.0554 0.0343 0.0640 0.1069 0.0319 0.0563 0.0950St. Louis 0.0050 0.0285 0.0534 0.0117 0.0519 0.1200 0.0093 0.0462 0.1064Washington, D.C. 0.0053 0.0276 0.0661 0.0110 0.0516 0.1153 0.0078 0.0441 0.1092*"Boston 1" denotes Suffolk County; "Boston 2" denotes Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties.**"Los Angeles 1" denotes Los Angeles County; "Los Angeles 2" denotes Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties.***"New York 1" denotes the 5 boroughs of New York City -- Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Bronx, and Staten Island. "New York 2" denotes the 5boroughs plus Westchester County.Urban Area24-Hour Average (ppm)1-Hour Maximum (ppm)8-Hour Maximum (ppm)Urban Area24-Hour Average (ppm)1-Hour Maximum (ppm)8-Hour Maximum (ppm)Abt Associates Inc.A-9December 2006Table A-15. Composite Monitor Statistics: 2002Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean Maximum Minimum Mean MaximumAtlanta 0.0102 0.0308 0.0559 0.0193 0.0623 0.1307 0.0157 0.0540 0.1166Boston 1* 0.0133 0.0314 0.0783 0.0210 0.0503 0.1185 0.0178 0.0434 0.1128Boston 2* 0.0132 0.0359 0.0852 0.0213 0.0526 0.1213 0.0169 0.0479 0.1162Chicago 0.0101 0.0295 0.0545 0.0206 0.0488 0.0986 0.0137 0.0437 0.0899Cleveland 0.0103 0.0338 0.0685 0.0177 0.0548 0.1070 0.0138 0.0488 0.1044Detroit 0.0085 0.0277 0.0572 0.0170 0.0516 0.0987 0.0151 0.0450 0.0923Houston 0.0089 0.0258 0.0568 0.0163 0.0492 0.1167 0.0131 0.0427 0.1017Los Angeles 1** 0.0158 0.0313 0.0492 0.0283 0.0613 0.1009 0.0252 0.0525 0.0842Los Angeles 2** 0.0192 0.0385 0.0586 0.0292 0.0652 0.0967 0.0247 0.0587 0.0881New York 1*** 0.0062 0.0280 0.0565 0.0130 0.0529 0.1294 0.0088 0.0448 0.0999New York 2*** 0.0075 0.0286 0.0576 0.0133 0.0537 0.1333 0.0088 0.0458 0.1032Philadelphia 0.0069 0.0322 0.0619 0.0133 0.0573 0.1235 0.0091 0.0501 0.0999Sacramento 0.0182 0.0353 0.0604 0.0242 0.0647 0.1090 0.0212 0.0564 0.0954St. Louis 0.0058 0.0289 0.0585 0.0157 0.0556 0.1127 0.0087 0.0484 0.1000Washington, D.C. 0.0095 0.0357 0.0708 0.0193 0.0627 0.1430 0.0164 0.0548 0.1210*"Boston 1" denotes Suffolk County; "Boston 2" denotes Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties.**"Los Angeles 1" denotes Los Angeles County; "Los Angeles 2" denotes Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties.***"New York 1" denotes the 5 boroughs of New York City -- Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Bronx, and Staten Island. "New York 2" denotes the 5boroughs plus Westchester County.Urban Area24-Hour Average (ppm)1-Hour Maximum (ppm)8-Hour Maximum (ppm)Abt Associates Inc.A-10December 2006

# Appendix B: Information on Concentration-Response Functions

### B.1 Tables of Study-Specific Information

Table B-1. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Atlanta, GA

min. max. Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 71 0.00020 -0.00084 0.00123 Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 71 0.00120 -0.00039 0.00279 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available."



### Table B-2. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Boston, MA

min. max. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- chest tightness --- 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none 27 126 0.00462 0.00000 0.00784 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- chest tightness --- 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic PM2.5 27 126 0.00771 0.00331 0.01220 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- chest tightness --- 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. logistic PM2.5 27 126 0.00701 0.00262 0.01153 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- chest tightness --- 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. logistic none 21 100 0.00570 0.00172 0.00965 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- shortness of breath --- 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none 27 126 0.00398 0.00040 0.00743 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- shortness of breath --- 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. logistic none 21 100 0.00525 0.00098 0.00952 Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms -- wheeze --- 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic PM2.5 21 100 0.00600 0.00209 0.01002
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. Observed Concentrations** (ppb) O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric ICD-9 Codes Model

Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric ICD-9 Codes Model Observed Concentrations** (ppb) O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound



### Abt Associates Inc. B-1 December 2006

### Table B-3. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Chicago, IL

min. max.

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Schwartz (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00099 0.00031 0.00166
Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00037 0.00012 0.00062 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 65 0.00075 -0.00067 0.00218 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available."



### Table B-4. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Cleveland, OH

min. max. Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 2 75 0.00061 -0.00038 0.00161 Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 2 75 0.00148 -0.00004 0.00299 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117 Schwartz et al. (1996) Hospital admissions, respiratory illness 460-519 65+ avg of 1-day and 2-day lags 1 hr max. log-linear none NA NA 0.00169 0.00039 0.00291
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available." O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Model Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag



### Abt Associates Inc. B-2 December 2006

### Table B-5. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Detroit, MI

min. max.

Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 2 75 0.00076 -0.00024 0.00177 Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Schwartz (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00068 -0.00011 0.00148 Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00037 0.00012 0.00062 Ito (2003) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. none NA 55 0.00093 -0.00085 0.00271 Ito (2003) Mortality, respiratory 460-519 all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA 55 0.00359 -0.00276 0.00993 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 2 75 0.00135 -0.00015 0.00286 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117 Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia 480-486 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation)** none NA 55 -0.00218 -0.00621 0.00186
Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia 480-486 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 -0.00054 -0.00459 0.00352

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia 480-486 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 0.00066 -0.00342 0.00473

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia 480-486 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 0.00190 -0.00216 0.00595

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD 490-496 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 -0.00191 -0.00667 0.00286

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD 490-496 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 0.00187 -0.00293 0.00667

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD 490-496 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 -0.00027 -0.00513 0.00459

Ito (2003) Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD 490-496 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear (GAM str. estimation) none NA 55 0.00011 -0.00475 0.00497

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb.

NA denotes "not available." Health Effects*

Study Ages Lag Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Model Other

Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric O 3 Coefficient

***"GAM str. estimation" denotes that estimation of the log-linear C-R function used a generalized additive model with a stringent convergence criterion. This study also estimated log-linear C-R functions using generalized linear models (GLM). Lower Bound Upper

Bound ICD-9 Codes



### Abt Associates Inc. B-3 December 2006

### Table B-6. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Houston, TX

min. max.

Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 1 76 0.00079 0.00005 0.00154 Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Schwartz (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00044 0.00004 0.00084 Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental < 800 all 0-day lag 1 hr max. logistic none NA NA 0.00037 0.00012 0.00062 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 1 76 0.00122 -0.00016 0.00261 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available." Health Effects*

Study Ages Lag O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Model



### Abt Associates Inc. B-4 December 2006

### Table B-7. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Los Angeles, CA

min. max.

Bell et al. (2004)*** Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 68 0.00018 -0.00043 0.00079
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Huang et al. (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 68 0.00107 0.00001 0.00213 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117 Linn et al. (2000)  Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- 75-101** *** 30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 1 70 0.00110 -0.00047 0.00267

Linn et al. (2000)  Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- 75-101** *** 30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 1 70 0.00060 -0.00077 0.00197

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.  Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. ** ***Linn et al. (2000) used DRG codes instead of ICD codes. O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Model Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study Ages Lag



### Abt Associates Inc. B-5 December 2006

### Table B-8. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in New York, NY

min. max.

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065 Huang et al. (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none -2 81 0.00170 0.00054 0.00286 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117 Thurston et al. (1992)  Hospital admissions (unscheduled), respiratory illness 466, 480-486, 490, 491, 492, 493 all 3-day lag 1 hr max. linear none NA 206 1.370E-08 3.312E-09 2.409E-08 Thurston et al. (1992)** ** Hospital admissions (unscheduled), asthma 493 all 1-day lag 1 hr max. linear none NA 206 1.170E-08 2.488E-09 2.091E-08 *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. ***New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City plus Westchester County. ****New York in this study is defined as the five boroughs of New York City. NA denotes "not available." 

### Table B-9. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Philadelphia, PA

min. max. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 1 159 0.00140 0.00086 0.00191Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear TSP, SO2 1 159 0.00139 0.00066 0.00212 Huang et al. (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none -3 84 0.00151 0.00007 0.00296 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00124 0.00047 0.00201 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear PM10 NA NA 0.00074 -0.00033 0.00171 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear NO2 NA NA 0.00060 0.00011 0.00109 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear SO2 NA NA 0.00051 0.00001 0.00102 Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory 390-448; 490-496; 487; 480-486; 507. all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. log-linear CO NA NA 0.00069 0.00020 0.00117
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available." Health Effects* O 3 Coefficient

Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric ICD-9 Codes Lower Bound Upper Bound Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Model Other

Pollutants in Model

O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag



### Abt Associates Inc. B-6 December 2006

### Table B-10. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Sacramento, CA

min. max.

Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 71 0.00026 -0.00079 0.00131
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available."



### Table B-11. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in St. Louis, MO

min. max.Bell et al. (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none 0 118 0.00044 -0.00072 0.00159
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available."



### Table B-12. Study-Specific Information for O 3 

### Studies in Washington, D.C.

min. max. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, nonaccidental < 800 all distributed lag 24 hr avg. log-linear none NA NA 0.00039 0.00013 0.00065
*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Rounded to the nearest ppb. NA denotes "not available." Health Effects*

Study Ages Lag O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound ICD-9 Codes Observed Concentrations** (ppb) Model Other

Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

Exposure Metric O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound

Model Other

Pollutants in Model Observed

Concentrations** (ppb) Health Effects* Study Ages Lag ICD-9 Codes

Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric ICD-9 Codes Model Observed Concentrations** (ppb) O 3 Coefficient Lower Bound Upper Bound



### Abt Associates Inc. B-7 December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. B-8 December 2006

B.2 Concentration-Response Functions and Health Impact Functions

Notation:

c c c c



# xxx conditions

control underlevelsOx conditions

baseline underlevelsOx yyy conditions

control under Incidence y conditions

baseline under Incidence y

     

0 3 30 0 0



# B.2.1 Log-linear

The log-linear concentration-response function is: x 

# Bey  

# 
The derivation of the corresponding health impact function is as follows:



#   

#    

x x x xx x x

x
x x x x

c x

x



# eyy eBey eBey

Be Be Bey BeBey Bey Bey Bey

c c c c

 





#          

             

 

   

      



# 1 1 1 1

0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0 0



# B.2.2 Linear

The linear concentration-response function is: xy    


# The derivation of the corresponding health impact function is as follows:

# Abt Associates Inc. B-9 December 2006

xxxy xxyyy xy xy x y

c c

c c c



#      

      

)( 0 0 0 0 0



# B.2.3 Logistic

The logistic concentration-response function is:

x x x



# ee e y 

 

 

#          

  1 1 1

The derivation of the corresponding health impact function is as follows:

x

x x x

x

x x x x

x x



# e e e ratioodds e

e

e e e odds e

e y y odds e y

c  

   

 



#          

      



 

    

       





   



  



   

 

0 

# 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

x

c c x c c



# e y y
y y e

y y y y







#         

 

         

        







0 0 0 0



# 11 1 1



#   x

c c 

# e

y y yy 



#         

  

0 0 

# 1 1

# Abt Associates Inc. B-10 December 2006



#  
 

  

      

       
 

       

          



         

       



       

          

         

 

 

        

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0



# 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

yey yy yey

y yyy yey y y eyy ey y e

y y e y y

y e y y e y y y e y y e y y yy

x x

c x c x x

c x x

c x x

c x x

cc

 

        

# Abt Associates Inc. B-11 December 2006

B.3 The Calculation of “Shrinkage” Estimates from the Location-Specific Estimates Reported in Huang et al. (2004)

“Shrinkage” estimates were calculated from the location-specific estimates reported in Table 1 of Huang et al. (2004), using the method described in DuMouchel (1994). Both Huang et al. (2004) and DuMouchel (1994) consider a Bayesian hierarchical model. Although they use different notation, the models are the same. The notation comparison is given in Table B-13 below.

Given a posterior distribution for  ,  (  | y), a shrinkage estimate for the ith location is calculated as:

 dy yE i i i 

# )|()(]|[ * * 

#  



# where )/()]([)(],|[)( 222* * * i i i i 

# s y yE 

  


# ,

where 

#   

i ii 

# ywyE )(],|[)( * 

#  ,

where 

# 

  

#   j j

i i 

# s

s w 122

122 

# )(/)()(

 



# .

A shrinkage estimate for the ith location is thus defined to be the expected value of the ith location-specific parameter, given all the location-specific estimates (see Table 1 for notation explanations). The posterior variance of the true ith location-specific parameter, given all the location-specific estimates, is given by:

  dy yVyV i i i i i 

# )|(}])([],|[{]|[ 2* * ** 

#   

# 

,

where )/()(/)]/([],|[ 2222 1 22 2222 i i j j i i i 

# sss ssyV    



#    



# . A 95 percent credible interval around the ith shrinkage estimate was calculated as 

# )(*96.1

** * i i 

#   

.

# Abt Associates Inc. B-12 December 2006

Table B-13. Notation 

# Huang et al. (2004) DuMouchel (1994) Location indicator c i parameter being estimated for location c (or i)  c 

#  i 

# Estimate of parameter for location c (or i)*   c 

## y i 

# variance in the overall distribution of true  s.  2 

#  2 

# variance of the estimate of  c 

# or (  i 

# )** v c 

## s i 2 

# The mean of the overall distribution of true  s  

The model:

),(~ ˆ )2(&)1( )2( ),(~ )1( ),(~ ˆ

2

2 

#   

  c c c cc c



# vN N vN

),(~)4(&)3(),2(),1( ),(~)3()2( )4( ),0(~ )3( ),0(~ )2( )1(

22 2 2 2

i

i i i i i i i ii i



# sNy

N and sN N y



     



      

*Given in Table 1 of Huang et al. (2004) **Estimated by taking the square of the location-specific standard error, reported in Huang et al. (2004) for each location.

# APPENDIX C: Additional Lung Function Results

## C.1 Lung Function Response Among Active Children Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O3 Concentrations Over Background O3 Concentrations

Table C-1. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3



## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 384 1% 91 0.2% 13 0% (133 - 689) (0.3% - 1.7%) (13 - 219) (0% - 0.6%) (1 - 56) (0% - 0.1%) 237 0.8% 53 0.2% 6 0% (68 - 437) (0.2% - 1.5%) (6 - 137) (0% - 0.5%) (1 - 33) (0% - 0.1%) 383 0.7% 81 0.1% 8 0% (92 - 713) (0.2% - 1.3%) (3 - 221) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 51) (0% - 0.1%) 143 0.8% 32 0.2% 4 0% (41 - 263) (0.2% - 1.4%) (3 - 82) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 20) (0% - 0.1%) 248 0.8% 54 0.2% 6 0% (67 - 459) (0.2% - 1.4%) (4 - 143) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 34) (0% - 0.1%) 386 0.6% 106 0.2% 20 0% (179 - 638) (0.3% - 1%) (27 - 217) (0% - 0.4%) (5 - 64) (0% - 0.1%) 2725 1.3% 735 0.3% 133 0.1% (1259 - 4587) (0.6% - 2.2%) (190 - 1532) (0.1% - 0.7%) (27 - 443) (0% - 0.2%) 1112 0.9% 255 0.2% 33 0% (349 - 2012) (0.3% - 1.7%) (30 - 636) (0% - 0.5%) (3 - 157) (0% - 0.1%) 415 1.1% 99 0.3% 13 0% (149 - 735) (0.4% - 1.9%) (14 - 235) (0% - 0.6%) (1 - 60) (0% - 0.2%) 143 0.8% 33 0.2% 4 0% (52 - 252) (0.3% - 1.4%) (4 - 80) (0% - 0.5%) (0 - 20) (0% - 0.1%) 157 0.8% 34 0.2% 4 0% (46 - 286) (0.2% - 1.4%) (2 - 89) (0% - 0.4%) (0 - 21) (0% - 0.1%) 493 1% 119 0.2% 18 0% (176 - 878) (0.3% - 1.7%) (20 - 282) (0% - 0.6%) (3 - 73) (0% - 0.1%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. C-1 December 2006

## Table C-2. Estimated Number and Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations Over Background O 3 

## Concentrations Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent Number (1000s) Percent


### 471 1.2% 128 0.3% 24 0.1% (213 - 801) (0.5% - 2%) (36 - 268) (0.1% - 0.7%) (6 - 78) (0% - 0.2%) 442 1.5% 129 0.4% 30 0.1% (206 - 739) (0.7% - 2.5%) (45 - 258) (0.2% - 0.9%) (11 - 82) (0% - 0.3%) 799 1.5% 230 0.4% 48 0.1% (387 - 1327) (0.7% - 2.5%) (77 - 457) (0.1% - 0.9%) (14 - 140) (0% - 0.3%) 324 1.9% 101 0.6% 25 0.1% (171 - 523) (1% - 3%) (41 - 188) (0.2% - 1.1%) (9 - 63) (0.1% - 0.4%) 505 1.7% 148 0.5% 32 0.1% (251 - 834) (0.8% - 2.8%) (52 - 289) (0.2% - 1%) (9 - 89) (0% - 0.3%) 335 0.6% 94 0.2% 19 0% (159 - 548) (0.3% - 0.9%) (27 - 188) (0% - 0.3%) (5 - 57) (0% - 0.1%) 2473 1.1% 678 0.3% 131 0.1% (1134 - 4144) (0.5% - 1.9%) (187 - 1401) (0.1% - 0.6%) (34 - 415) (0% - 0.2%) 2258 1.9% 679 0.6% 158 0.1% (1157 - 3691) (1% - 3.1%) (253 - 1300) (0.2% - 1.1%) (52 - 421) (0% - 0.4%) 822 2.1% 260 0.7% 66 0.2% (447 - 1315) (1.1% - 3.3%) (106 - 476) (0.3% - 1.2%) (24 - 163) (0.1% - 0.4%) 204 1.2% 55 0.3% 10 0.1% (92 - 345) (0.5% - 2%) (14 - 115) (0.1% - 0.7%) (2 - 33) (0% - 0.2%) 304 1.6% 91 0.5% 20 0.1% (155 - 496) (0.8% - 2.5%) (33 - 174) (0.2% - 0.9%) (6 - 55) (0% - 0.3%) 895 1.8% 268 0.5% 62 0.1% (456 - 1468) (0.9% - 2.9%) (98 - 516) (0.2% - 1%) (21 - 167) (0% - 0.3%) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### Cleveland Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago Response = Decrease in FEV 1 Greater Than or Equal to:

10% 15% 20%



### Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York



## Abt Associates Inc. C-2 December 2006Table C-3. Number and Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least OneLung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O3Concentrations Over Background O3Concentrations, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: 2004O3Concentrations*Number (1000s)PercentNumber (1000s)PercentNumber (1000s)Percent439.5%163.5%40.9%(32 - 62)(7% - 13.8%)(9 - 24)(1.9% - 5.3%)(1 - 9)(0.3% - 2%)316.5%102.2%20.5%(22 - 48)(4.5% - 10%)(4 - 17)(0.9% - 3.6%)(0 - 6)(0.1% - 1.2%)434.9%121.4%20.2%(28 - 70)(3.1% - 7.9%)(3 - 23)(0.3% - 2.6%)(0 - 7)(0% - 0.8%)166.4%52.1%10.4%(11 - 25)(4.4% - 9.9%)(2 - 9)(0.8% - 3.4%)(0 - 3)(0.1% - 1.1%)316.1%101.9%20.4%(21 - 48)(4.2% - 9.6%)(4 - 16)(0.7% - 3.3%)(0 - 5)(0% - 1.1%)5912.1%255.2%91.8%(47 - 80)(9.6% - 16.4%)(16 - 36)(3.4% - 7.3%)(4 - 16)(0.8% - 3.3%)22714%1036.4%372.3%(191 - 296) (11.8% - 18.3%)(71 - 140)(4.4% - 8.6%)(17 - 65)(1.1% - 4%)1407.6%482.6%120.6%(99 - 210)(5.4% - 11.5%)(23 - 77)(1.2% - 4.2%)(3 - 28)(0.2% - 1.5%)478.8%173.2%40.8%(34 - 69)(6.4% - 13%)(9 - 26)(1.7% - 4.9%)(1 - 10)(0.2% - 1.8%)127.8%42.9%10.7%(9 - 17)(6.2% - 11.5%)(2 - 6)(1.5% - 4.3%)(0 - 2)(0.1% - 1.6%)176%51.8%10.3%(11 - 27)(4% - 9.6%)(2 - 9)(0.6% - 3.2%)(0 - 3)(0% - 1%)659.6%253.7%71.1%(49 - 94)(7.2% - 13.7%)(14 - 38)(2.1% - 5.5%)(3 - 15)(0.4% - 2.2%)*Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.ClevelandLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1Greater Than or Equal to:10%15%20%DetroitHoustonLos AngelesPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkAbt Associates Inc.C-3December 2006Table C-4. Number and Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least OneLung Function Response Associated with Exposure to "As Is" O3Concentrations Over Background O3Concentrations, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: 2002O3Concentrations*Number (1000s)PercentNumber (1000s)PercentNumber (1000s)Percent6213.8%276%92.1%(49 - 82)(11% - 18.3%)(18 - 37)(4% - 8.4%)(4 - 17)(1% - 3.8%)7315.4%357.4%153.1%(59 - 93)(12.4% - 19.7%)(24 - 47)(5.1% - 10%)(8 - 25)(1.7% - 5.2%)12714.9%586.8%212.5%(102 - 164)(12% - 19.3%)(39 - 79)(4.6% - 9.3%)(11 - 38)(1.2% - 4.4%)4618.9%239.4%104%(38 - 57)(15.6% - 23.2%)(16 - 30)(6.7% - 12.4%)(6 - 17)(2.3% - 6.8%)7515.7%347.2%132.6%(61 - 96)(12.7% - 20%)(23 - 47)(4.9% - 9.7%)(6 - 22)(1.3% - 4.6%)5812.2%255.3%91.9%(46 - 78)(9.7% - 16.4%)(17 - 35)(3.5% - 7.4%)(4 - 16)(0.9% - 3.4%)23014.1%1086.6%412.5%(193 - 296) (11.9% - 18.2%)(74 - 144)(4.5% - 8.8%)(21 - 71)(1.3% - 4.4%)31917.6%1548.5%643.5%(261 - 401) (14.4% - 22.2%) (109 - 206)(6% - 11.4%)(35 - 107)(1.9% - 5.9%)10720.1%5510.3%244.6%(89 - 131)(16.7% - 24.6%)(39 - 72)(7.4% - 13.5%)(14 - 40)(2.6% - 7.5%)2013.5%96.2%32.2%(17 - 26)(11.4% - 17.4%)(6 - 13)(4.2% - 8.3%)(2 - 6)(1% - 3.9%)4416.6%217.8%83%(36 - 56)(13.5% - 20.9%)(15 - 28)(5.4% - 10.5%)(4 - 14)(1.6% - 5.2%)12418.2%618.9%263.8%(102 - 155)(15% - 22.8%)(43 - 81)(6.3% - 11.9%)(14 - 43)(2.1% - 6.3%)*Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 1000. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.ClevelandLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1Greater Than or Equal to:10%15%20%DetroitHoustonLos AngelesPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkAbt Associates Inc.C-4December 2006

### C.2 Lung Function Response Among Active Children Associated with Exposure to O3 Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards

Table C-5. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

### Concentrations That Just Meet

the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

### Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4  0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4** ** 0.064/4

288 283 257 227 213 211 188 154 (79 - 533) (77 - 524) (63 - 480) (49 - 430) (42 - 406) (41 - 402) (32 - 362) (19 - 302) 177 160 158 152 132 122 117 95 (38 - 337) (30 - 308) (29 - 305) (27 - 294) (19 - 260) (15 - 242) (13 - 232) (7 - 194) 267 249 235 211 191 179 163 126 (41 - 514) (35 - 482) (30 - 457) (22 - 414) (17 - 379) (14 - 357) (10 - 328) (3 - 259) 98 90 87 75 72 67 63 50 (19 - 186) (16 - 173) (14 - 167) (10 - 146) (9 - 141) (7 - 132) (6 - 125) (3 - 102) 187 171 166 161 138 127 121 97 (37 - 356) (31 - 329) (29 - 321) (26 - 311) (18 - 271) (14 - 252) (12 - 240) (6 - 196) 216 194 186 151 144 130 116 66 (79 - 366) (67 - 330) (63 - 317) (46 - 257) (43 - 246) (37 - 220) (32 - 196) (18 - 102) 915 874 795 592 567 521 414 204 (196 - 1694) (180 - 1623) (149 - 1485) (89 - 1119) (82 - 1074) (71 - 988) (48 - 788) (14 - 383) 674 638 601 492 504 482 445 350 (122 - 1289) (107 - 1228) (91 - 1163) (51 - 973) (55 - 995) (47 - 955) (37 - 890) (16 - 714) 279 258 248 212 206 193 181 147 (70 - 516) (60 - 481) (55 - 464) (38 - 403) (36 - 393) (30 - 370) (26 - 349) (14 - 290) 79 74 69 58 55 52 46 34 (18 - 146) (16 - 138) (14 - 129) (10 - 109) (9 - 104) (8 - 100) (6 - 89) (3 - 67) 128 118 112 95 90 84 78 60 (32 - 237) (27 - 220) (24 - 209) (17 - 180) (15 - 173) (13 - 161) (11 - 150) (5 - 119) 340 306 304 268 253 230 222 180 (88 - 632) (71 - 576) (70 - 571) (53 - 512) (46 - 485) (37 - 446) (34 - 432) (19 - 357)

63 62 54 47 43 43 37 30 (4 - 166) (4 - 163) (2 - 149) (1 - 133) (1 - 125) (1 - 123) (0 - 111) (0 - 92) 37 33 32 30 26 24 22 18 (2 - 104) (1 - 94) (1 - 93) (1 - 90) (0 - 79) (0 - 73) (0 - 70) (0 - 58) 53 49 46 41 37 34 31 23 (0 - 158) (0 - 148) (0 - 140) (0 - 126) (0 - 115) (0 - 108) (0 - 99) (0 - 78) 20 18 17 15 14 13 12 9 (0 - 57) (0 - 53) (0 - 51) (0 - 44) (0 - 43) (0 - 40) (0 - 38) (0 - 31) 38 35 33 32 27 24 23 18 (1 - 109) (1 - 101) (0 - 98) (0 - 95) (0 - 82) (0 - 76) (0 - 73) (0 - 59) 51 45 43 34 33 29 26 15 (5 - 119) (4 - 107) (3 - 103) (1 - 83) (1 - 80) (1 - 72) (1 - 64) (0 - 35) Houston Boston

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%

Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland Location

Atlanta

Boston

Chicago



### Abt Associates Inc. C-5 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4  0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4** ** 0.064/4 Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location

189 180 161 118 113 103 82 41 (3 - 528) (2 - 506) (1 - 462) (0 - 347) (0 - 333) (0 - 307) (0 - 244) (0 - 120) 136 128 119 94 97 92 84 65 (3 - 396) (2 - 376) (1 - 356) (0 - 296) (0 - 303) (0 - 290) (0 - 269) (0 - 214) 60 54 52 43 42 38 36 28 (2 - 160) (1 - 149) (1 - 144) (0 - 124) (0 - 121) (0 - 114) (0 - 107) (0 - 88) 16 15 14 12 11 10 9 7 (0 - 45) (0 - 43) (0 - 40) (0 - 34) (0 - 32) (0 - 31) (0 - 27) (0 - 20) 27 24 23 19 18 17 15 12 (1 - 73) (0 - 68) (0 - 65) (0 - 56) (0 - 53) (0 - 50) (0 - 46) (0 - 36) 73 65 64 55 51 46 44 34 (5 - 197) (3 - 178) (3 - 177) (1 - 157) (1 - 149) (1 - 136) (0 - 132) (0 - 108)

7 7 6 4 4 4 3 2 (0 - 39) (0 - 38) (0 - 34) (0 - 30) (0 - 28) (0 - 27) (0 - 24) (0 - 19) 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 (0 - 23) (0 - 21) (0 - 21) (0 - 20) (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 (0 - 34) (0 - 32) (0 - 30) (0 - 27) (0 - 24) (0 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 16) 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 (0 - 13) (0 - 12) (0 - 11) (0 - 9) (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 6) 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 (0 - 24) (0 - 22) (0 - 21) (0 - 21) (0 - 17) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 2 (0 - 31) (0 - 28) (0 - 26) (0 - 21) (0 - 20) (0 - 18) (0 - 16) (0 - 9) 18 17 14 10 9 9 7 3 (0 - 120) (0 - 114) (0 - 103) (0 - 76) (0 - 73) (0 - 67) (0 - 53) (0 - 26) 12 11 10 7 8 7 6 5 (0 - 87) (0 - 82) (0 - 77) (0 - 62) (0 - 64) (0 - 61) (0 - 56) (0 - 43) 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 (0 - 37) (0 - 34) (0 - 33) (0 - 27) (0 - 27) (0 - 25) (0 - 23) (0 - 19) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 (0 - 10) (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 4) 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) (0 - 12) (0 - 11) (0 - 10) (0 - 8) 8 7 6 5 5 4 4 3 (0 - 46) (0 - 41) (0 - 40) (0 - 35) (0 - 33) (0 - 30) (0 - 28) (0 - 23) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles

New York Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20% Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia



### Abt Associates Inc. C-6 December 2006

## Table C-6. Estimated Number of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O 3 

## Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, for Location-Specific O 3 

## Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

## Concentrations*

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4



### 354 349 315 283 264 263 232 191 (135 - 624) (132 - 617) (111 - 564) (91 - 511) (81 - 482) (80 - 480) (63 - 429) (42 - 358) 336 304 301 287 253 234 224 185 (133 - 587) (111 - 539) (109 - 534) (100 - 514) (78 - 461) (67 - 431) (62 - 416) (40 - 352) 580 543 514 467 427 405 375 304 (235 - 1009) (210 - 952) (191 - 909) (161 - 836) (137 - 772) (124 - 737) (107 - 688) (68 - 569) 226 206 201 175 168 154 147 121 (99 - 387) (84 - 358) (81 - 351) (63 - 311) (59 - 301) (50 - 279) (46 - 269) (31 - 226) 385 349 341 332 282 258 247 201 (166 - 664) (141 - 610) (135 - 598) (129 - 585) (96 - 508) (82 - 470) (75 - 452) (49 - 376) 183 164 157 126 120 109 95 49 (70 - 306) (60 - 275) (57 - 263) (42 - 211) (39 - 201) (34 - 180) (30 - 155) (16 - 68) 818 792 696 483 477 450 334 141 (186 - 1505) (176 - 1459) (142 - 1288) (81 - 899) (80 - 886) (73 - 837) (48 - 616) (18 - 241) 1386 1310 1244 1025 1054 1004 937 757 (529 - 2443) (478 - 2326) (434 - 2225) (299 - 1876) (316 - 1922) (286 - 1842) (247 - 1733) (156 - 1430) 567 523 508 443 427 398 379 314 (256 - 962) (224 - 898) (214 - 875) (168 - 778) (158 - 754) (139 - 710) (127 - 680) (87 - 575) 121 114 107 92 89 84 77 61 (40 - 217) (36 - 205) (32 - 194) (24 - 170) (23 - 164) (20 - 156) (17 - 145) (11 - 117) 251 233 222 194 183 171 159 128 (118 - 422) (105 - 396) (97 - 380) (78 - 338) (71 - 321) (63 - 303) (56 - 284) (37 - 234) 632 568 564 505 475 434 421 348 (266 - 1092) (223 - 998) (220 - 992) (181 - 900) (162 - 854) (137 - 789) (129 - 769) (88 - 649)

87 85 74 64 59 59 50 39 (16 - 200) (15 - 198) (10 - 179) (7 - 161) (5 - 151) (5 - 150) (2 - 133) (0 - 111) 87 76 75 70 58 52 50 39 (22 - 194) (16 - 175) (15 - 173) (13 - 165) (8 - 145) (6 - 135) (5 - 130) (2 - 108) 148 135 125 110 97 91 82 63 (32 - 328) (25 - 307) (21 - 291) (14 - 265) (10 - 243) (8 - 231) (5 - 214) (1 - 176) 60 53 51 42 40 35 33 26 (16 - 128) (12 - 117) (11 - 114) (7 - 99) (6 - 95) (4 - 88) (3 - 84) (1 - 70) 101 88 85 82 65 58 55 42 (25 - 218) (18 - 197) (17 - 193) (15 - 188) (8 - 160) (5 - 147) (4 - 141) (1 - 116) 45 39 37 29 28 25 22 12 (6 - 101) (4 - 90) (3 - 86) (2 - 69) (1 - 66) (1 - 59) (1 - 52) (0 - 25) 172 166 144 98 97 91 68 30 (4 - 471) (4 - 456) (3 - 403) (1 - 281) (1 - 277) (1 - 262) (0 - 194) (0 - 80) Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10% Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%



### Atlanta Sacramento

St. Louis

Washington, DC New York Detroit

Houston Location



### Atlanta

Boston
Chicago

Los Angeles

Philadelphia Cleveland

Boston
Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Los Angeles



## Abt Associates Inc. C-7 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Number of Occurrences (in 1000s) of Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location



### 339 314 292 226 234 220 201 155 (59 - 784) (48 - 741) (38 - 705) (16 - 586) (18 - 601) (14 - 574) (9 - 538) (2 - 441) 153 136 130 107 102 93 87 68 (40 - 320) (31 - 295) (28 - 286) (17 - 249) (15 - 240) (11 - 225) (9 - 214) (3 - 179) 28 25 24 20 19 18 16 12 (3 - 69) (2 - 65) (2 - 61) (1 - 53) (1 - 51) (0 - 48) (0 - 45) (0 - 36) 70 63 59 48 45 41 37 28 (21 - 142) (17 - 132) (15 - 125) (10 - 109) (8 - 103) (6 - 97) (5 - 90) (1 - 73) 164 141 140 120 110 98 94 74 (38 - 358) (27 - 322) (26 - 319) (18 - 286) (14 - 270) (9 - 247) (8 - 240) (2 - 201)

13 12 10 8 7 7 5 4 (2 - 53) (1 - 52) (1 - 45) (0 - 40) (0 - 36) (0 - 36) (0 - 31) (0 - 25) 16 12 12 11 8 6 6 4 (4 - 54) (2 - 47) (2 - 46) (2 - 43) (1 - 36) (0 - 32) (0 - 31) (0 - 24) 23 20 17 14 12 11 9 6 (3 - 89) (2 - 81) (2 - 75) (1 - 67) (0 - 60) (0 - 56) (0 - 51) (0 - 40) 11 8 8 6 5 4 4 3 (2 - 36) (1 - 31) (1 - 30) (0 - 25) (0 - 24) (0 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 16) 17 13 13 12 8 7 6 4 (3 - 60) (1 - 52) (1 - 51) (1 - 49) (0 - 40) (0 - 36) (0 - 34) (0 - 27) 6 5 5 3 3 3 2 1 (1 - 27) (0 - 24) (0 - 22) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 13) (0 - 7) 17 16 14 9 8 8 6 3 (0 - 108) (0 - 105) (0 - 91) (0 - 63) (0 - 62) (0 - 58) (0 - 43) (0 - 19) 50 43 38 25 27 24 21 14 (6 - 205) (4 - 190) (2 - 178) (0 - 140) (1 - 145) (0 - 136) (0 - 126) (0 - 99) 27 22 21 15 14 12 11 7 (6 - 92) (4 - 81) (3 - 78) (1 - 65) (1 - 62) (1 - 56) (0 - 53) (0 - 42) 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 17) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) (0 - 12) (0 - 11) (0 - 10) (0 - 8) 13 11 10 7 6 5 5 3 (3 - 42) (2 - 37) (2 - 35) (1 - 29) (0 - 27) (0 - 25) (0 - 23) (0 - 17) 28 21 21 16 14 12 11 7 (5 - 99) (3 - 85) (3 - 84) (1 - 73) (1 - 67) (0 - 60) (0 - 58) (0 - 46) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of occurrences. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. 

### St. Louis

Washington, DC Los Angeles

New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston Washington, DC

Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%



### Atlanta

Boston New York

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St. Louis

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



## Abt Associates Inc. C-8 December 2006Table C-7. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meetthe Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/40.7%0.7%0.6%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%(0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%)0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%(0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%)0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%(0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%)0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.3%(0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%)0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%(0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%)0.4%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%)0.6%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%(0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%)0.7%0.7%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%(0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%)0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%(0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0.6%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.3%(0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%)0.7%0.6%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%(0.2% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%)0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O3Standards**DetroitHoustonLos AngelesLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaBostonClevelandPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesAbt Associates Inc.C-9December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O3Standards**Location0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)*Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.New YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphia***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).SacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCAbt Associates Inc.C-10December 2006Table C-8. Estimated Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meetthe Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards Among Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/40.9%0.9%0.8%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.6%0.5%(0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 0.9%)1.1%1%1%1%0.9%0.8%0.8%0.6%(0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%)1.1%1%1%0.9%0.8%0.8%0.7%0.6%(0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.1%)1.3%1.2%1.2%1%1%0.9%0.9%0.7%(0.6% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.3%)1.3%1.2%1.1%1.1%0.9%0.9%0.8%0.7%(0.5% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.2%)0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%)0.4%0.4%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%)1.2%1.1%1.1%0.9%0.9%0.9%0.8%0.6%(0.5% - 2.1%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.2%)1.4%1.3%1.3%1.1%1.1%1%1%0.8%(0.6% - 2.4%) (0.6% - 2.3%) (0.5% - 2.2%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.2% - 1.4%)0.7%0.7%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.4%(0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%)1.3%1.2%1.1%1%0.9%0.9%0.8%0.7%(0.6% - 2.2%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.5% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.2%)1.2%1.1%1.1%1%0.9%0.9%0.8%0.7%(0.5% - 2.1%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.7%) (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.3%)0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%)0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%)0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%)0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O3Standards**DetroitHoustonLos AngelesLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaBostonClevelandPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesAbt Associates Inc.C-11December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Percent of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O3Standards**Location0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0.4%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%(0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%)0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.4%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0.3%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%) (0% - 0%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)0.1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%(0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%)*Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of occurrences. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).New YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaAbt Associates Inc.C-12December 2006Table C-9. Number of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function ResponseAssociated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/43029262220201713(21 - 47) (20 - 46) (17 - 41) (14 - 35) (13 - 33) (12 - 32) (10 - 27) (7 - 21)221919181413129(14 - 35) (11 - 30) (11 - 30) (10 - 29) (8 - 23) (7 - 21) (6 - 20) (4 - 15)2826242119171511(16 - 46) (14 - 42) (13 - 39) (11 - 34) (9 - 30) (8 - 28) (6 - 25) (3 - 18)109 9 7 7 6 6 4(6 - 16) (5 - 15) (5 - 14) (4 - 11) (4 - 11) (3 - 10)(3 - 9)(2 - 7)221919181413129(13 - 35) (12 - 31) (11 - 30) (10 - 29) (8 - 23) (7 - 21) (6 - 19) (4 - 14)3228272221191813(23 - 48) (20 - 44) (19 - 42) (15 - 35) (14 - 34) (12 - 31) (11 - 28) (7 - 20)5854473533312612(43 - 91) (40 - 85) (35 - 73) (25 - 52) (24 - 51) (23 - 47) (19 - 39) (8 - 19)7267624648454130(44 - 117) (39 - 108) (35 - 99) (24 - 74) (25 - 77) (23 - 72) (19 - 65) (11 - 49)2926252019181612(19 - 46) (17 - 42) (16 - 40) (12 - 33) (11 - 32) (10 - 29) (9 - 26) (6 - 20)65544332(4 - 9)(4 - 8)(4 - 8)(3 - 6)(3 - 5)(2 - 5)(2 - 4)(1 - 3)13 12 129 9 8 7 6(9 - 22) (8 - 20) (7 - 19) (5 - 15) (5 - 14) (5 - 13) (4 - 12)(3 - 9)4136352927242317(27 - 63) (23 - 56) (23 - 56) (18 - 47) (16 - 44) (14 - 39) (13 - 37) (9 - 27)109 8 6 6 5 4 3(4 - 16) (3 - 16) (2 - 14) (1 - 11) (1 - 11) (1 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 7)65554332(1 - 11) (1 - 10) (1 - 10)(1 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)76654432(0 - 15) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) (0 - 11) (0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 6)32222111(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)65553332(1 - 11) (1 - 10) (0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 7)(0 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)119 8 6 6 5 5 3(4 - 17) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (1 - 12) (1 - 11) (1 - 10)(1 - 9)(0 - 7)16 15 128 8 8 6 3(2 - 29) (2 - 27) (1 - 24) (0 - 17) (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 13)(0 - 6)Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Number of Active Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meetthe Current and Alternative O3Standards**Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkDetroitHoustonLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoLos AngelesPhiladelphiaClevelandBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesAbt Associates Inc.C-13December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Number of Active Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meetthe Current and Alternative O3Standards**Location19171611111097(2 - 38) (2 - 35) (1 - 32) (0 - 24) (0 - 25) (0 - 24) (0 - 21) (0 - 16)87755443(2 - 15) (1 - 14) (1 - 13) (0 - 10) (0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 6)21111110(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)43322221(1 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)13 11 108 7 6 6 4(4 - 22) (3 - 19) (3 - 19) (1 - 15) (1 - 14) (1 - 13) (0 - 12)(0 - 9)22111110(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)11110000(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)11110000(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)00000000(0 - 2)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)11110000(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)22211110(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)32211110(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 7)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 2)32211111(0 - 11) (0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 6)(0 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 6)(0 - 4)11111100(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)00000000(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 0)(0 - 0)(0 - 0)11000000(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)32211110(0 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)*Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000.St. LouisWashington, DCLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%AtlantaBostonNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. Louis***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Abt Associates Inc.C-14December 2006Table C-10. Number of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function ResponseAssociated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/44443383330302520(33 - 63) (32 - 62) (27 - 56) (23 - 50) (21 - 47) (21 - 47) (17 - 41) (12 - 32)5245454234312922(40 - 71) (34 - 64) (34 - 63) (31 - 60) (24 - 52) (21 - 47) (20 - 45) (14 - 35)8780746558544936(66 - 123) (60 - 116) (54 - 109) (46 - 99) (40 - 91) (37 - 85) (32 - 78) (22 - 59)3026262120181713(24 - 41) (20 - 37) (19 - 36) (16 - 32) (15 - 30) (12 - 27) (11 - 26) (8 - 21)5548474536323123(42 - 76) (36 - 69) (35 - 68) (34 - 66) (25 - 56) (22 - 51) (21 - 48) (14 - 37)3228272221191812(23 - 48) (20 - 44) (19 - 42) (15 - 35) (14 - 34) (13 - 31) (11 - 28) (7 - 20)5957493434332614(44 - 92) (42 - 89) (37 - 76) (25 - 53) (25 - 52) (24 - 50) (19 - 40) (9 - 21)17215914811311811010075(128 - 250) (116 - 236) (106 - 223) (77 - 179) (80 - 185) (74 - 175) (65 - 161) (46 - 123)6963604947434030(55 - 93) (48 - 86) (46 - 84) (36 - 72) (34 - 69) (31 - 65) (28 - 62) (20 - 49)11 109 7 7 6 6 4(8 - 16) (7 - 15) (7 - 14) (5 - 11) (5 - 11) (5 - 10)(4 - 9)(3 - 6)3633312624222015(29 - 48) (26 - 45) (24 - 43) (19 - 37) (18 - 35) (16 - 33) (14 - 31) (10 - 24)8170706055494636(63 - 112) (53 - 100) (52 - 100) (44 - 89) (40 - 83) (34 - 76) (32 - 73) (23 - 58)17161311101085(10 - 25) (9 - 24) (7 - 21) (5 - 18) (4 - 16) (4 - 16) (2 - 13) (0 - 10)22181816121096(13 - 31) (10 - 26) (10 - 26) (9 - 24) (6 - 19) (4 - 17) (4 - 16) (1 - 11)3430272219171510(20 - 50) (17 - 45) (14 - 41) (10 - 35) (8 - 31) (6 - 29) (4 - 26) (1 - 19)13 10 108 7 6 5 4(8 - 18) (6 - 15) (6 - 15) (4 - 12) (4 - 11) (3 - 10)(2 - 9)(1 - 7)22181817121096(13 - 32) (11 - 27) (10 - 26) (9 - 25) (6 - 20) (4 - 17) (3 - 16) (1 - 12)119 8 6 6 5 5 3(5 - 17) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (1 - 11) (1 - 11) (1 - 10)(1 - 9)(0 - 6)17 16 149 9 8 6 3(3 - 30) (3 - 29) (2 - 25) (1 - 17) (1 - 17) (1 - 16) (0 - 13)(0 - 7)HoustonLos AngelesBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Number of Active Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meetthe Current and Alternative O3Standards**Response = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkDetroitHoustonLos AngelesPhiladelphiaClevelandLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoAbt Associates Inc.C-15December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Number of Active Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meetthe Current and Alternative O3Standards**Location6457513537342920(36 - 97) (30 - 89) (25 - 81) (12 - 60) (14 - 63) (11 - 58) (7 - 52) (2 - 39)292524181715139(19 - 41) (16 - 36) (15 - 35) (10 - 27) (9 - 26) (7 - 23) (6 - 22) (2 - 16)43322221(2 - 6)(1 - 5)(1 - 5)(1 - 4)(1 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)16 14 12 109 8 7 4(10 - 22) (9 - 19) (8 - 18) (6 - 15) (5 - 13) (4 - 12) (3 - 11)(1 - 8)3327272219161510(21 - 48) (16 - 40) (15 - 40) (11 - 33) (9 - 30) (7 - 26) (6 - 25) (2 - 19)44322211(1 - 10)(1 - 9)(1 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)75553221(3 - 14) (2 - 11) (2 - 11)(2 - 9)(1 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 3)98654331(3 - 19) (2 - 17) (1 - 15) (1 - 12) (0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 6)43322111(2 - 7)(1 - 6)(1 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)65442221(2 - 12) (1 - 10) (1 - 10)(1 - 9)(0 - 7)(0 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)22211110(1 - 6)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 3)(0 - 2)33211110(0 - 10)(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 2)17 14 127 7 6 5 3(5 - 37) (3 - 32) (2 - 28) (0 - 20) (1 - 21) (0 - 19) (0 - 16) (0 - 12)108 7 4 4 3 3 2(4 - 18) (3 - 15) (2 - 14) (1 - 10)(1 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 7)(0 - 5)11100000(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 2)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)(0 - 1)54422211(2 - 9)(2 - 8)(1 - 7)(1 - 5)(0 - 5)(0 - 4)(0 - 4)(0 - 2)107 7 5 4 3 3 2(4 - 20) (2 - 15) (2 - 15) (1 - 12) (1 - 11)(0 - 9)(0 - 8)(0 - 6)*Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000.***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).PhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkAtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%New YorkPhiladelphiaAbt Associates Inc.C-16December 2006Table C-11. Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function ResponseAssociated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/46.7%6.5%5.7%4.9%4.5%4.4%3.8%2.9%(4.6% - 10.4%) (4.5% - 10.2%) (3.8% - 9.1%) (3.1% - 7.9%) (2.8% - 7.3%) (2.8% - 7.2%) (2.2% - 6.1%) (1.6% - 4.6%)4.5%3.9%3.9%3.7%3%2.7%2.5%1.9%(2.8% - 7.2%) (2.4% - 6.4%) (2.3% - 6.3%) (2.2% - 5.9%) (1.7% - 4.9%) (1.4% - 4.4%) (1.3% - 4.1%) (0.8% - 3.1%)3.2%3%2.7%2.4%2.1%2%1.8%1.2%(1.8% - 5.2%) (1.6% - 4.8%) (1.5% - 4.4%) (1.2% - 3.8%) (1% - 3.4%) (0.9% - 3.2%) (0.7% - 2.8%) (0.3% - 2.1%)4%3.6%3.4%2.8%2.6%2.4%2.2%1.7%(2.4% - 6.5%) (2.1% - 5.8%) (2% - 5.6%) (1.5% - 4.4%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (1.2% - 3.9%) (1.1% - 3.6%) (0.7% - 2.7%)4.3%3.9%3.7%3.5%2.9%2.6%2.4%1.8%(2.7% - 7%) (2.3% - 6.3%) (2.2% - 6%) (2.1% - 5.7%) (1.6% - 4.6%) (1.3% - 4.1%) (1.2% - 3.9%) (0.8% - 2.9%)6.5%5.8%5.6%4.6%4.4%4%3.6%2.6%(4.6% - 9.9%) (4.1% - 9%) (3.8% - 8.7%) (3% - 7.3%) (2.9% - 7%) (2.5% - 6.3%) (2.3% - 5.8%) (1.5% - 4.2%)3.6%3.3%2.9%2.1%2.1%1.9%1.6%0.8%(2.6% - 5.6%) (2.5% - 5.2%) (2.1% - 4.5%) (1.6% - 3.2%) (1.5% - 3.1%) (1.4% - 2.9%) (1.1% - 2.4%) (0.5% - 1.2%)3.9%3.6%3.4%2.5%2.6%2.5%2.2%1.6%(2.4% - 6.4%) (2.1% - 5.9%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (1.3% - 4%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (1.2% - 3.9%) (1.1% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 2.7%)5.4%4.9%4.6%3.8%3.6%3.3%3%2.3%(3.5% - 8.6%) (3.1% - 7.9%) (2.9% - 7.5%) (2.2% - 6.1%) (2.1% - 5.9%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (1.7% - 4.9%) (1.2% - 3.7%)3.7%3.5%3.1%2.5%2.3%2.1%1.8%1.3%(2.8% - 5.9%) (2.6% - 5.5%) (2.4% - 5%) (1.9% - 3.8%) (1.8% - 3.6%) (1.6% - 3.3%) (1.4% - 2.7%) (1% - 1.9%)4.8%4.4%4.1%3.4%3.2%2.9%2.7%2.1%(3.1% - 7.8%) (2.7% - 7.2%) (2.5% - 6.7%) (2% - 5.5%) (1.8% - 5.2%) (1.6% - 4.7%) (1.4% - 4.2%) (1% - 3.3%)5.9%5.2%5.1%4.3%4%3.5%3.4%2.5%(4% - 9.2%) (3.4% - 8.2%) (3.3% - 8.1%) (2.6% - 6.9%) (2.4% - 6.4%) (2.1% - 5.7%) (1.9% - 5.4%) (1.3% - 4%)2.2%2.1%1.7%1.4%1.2%1.2%1%0.7%(0.8% - 3.6%) (0.8% - 3.5%) (0.5% - 3%) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.5%)1.3%1.1%1%1%0.7%0.7%0.6%0.4%(0.3% - 2.4%) (0.2% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1%)0.8%0.7%0.7%0.6%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.3%(0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%)1.1%0.9%0.9%0.7%0.6%0.6%0.5%0.4%(0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%)1.2%1%1%0.9%0.7%0.6%0.6%0.4%(0.2% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1%)2.2%1.8%1.7%1.3%1.2%1.1%1%0.6%(0.9% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 3.1%) (0.5% - 3%) (0.3% - 2.4%) (0.2% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.4%)ChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaBostonClevelandPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkPercent of Active Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet theCurrent and Alternative O3Standards**DetroitHoustonLos AngelesLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Abt Associates Inc.C-17December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Percent of Active Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet theCurrent and Alternative O3Standards**Location1%0.9%0.8%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.2%(0.1% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.4%)1%0.9%0.8%0.6%0.6%0.6%0.5%0.4%(0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%)1.6%1.4%1.3%1%0.9%0.8%0.7%0.5%(0.4% - 2.8%) (0.3% - 2.5%) (0.2% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2%) (0% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.2%)1.1%1%0.9%0.6%0.6%0.5%0.4%0.3%(0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.6%)1.3%1.2%1.1%0.8%0.8%0.7%0.6%0.5%(0.2% - 2.5%) (0.1% - 2.3%) (0.1% - 2.1%) (0% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.1%)1.9%1.5%1.5%1.2%1.1%0.9%0.8%0.6%(0.6% - 3.2%) (0.4% - 2.8%) (0.4% - 2.7%) (0.2% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.8%) (0% - 1.3%)0.4%0.4%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%(0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%)0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%)0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%0%(0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%)0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.5%0.4%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%(0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%)0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%0%(0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%)0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.3%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%)0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%)0.4%0.3%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%(0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%)*Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Percents in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.SacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitSt. LouisWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%AtlantaLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramento***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Abt Associates Inc.C-18December 2006Table C-12. Percent of Active Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function ResponseAssociated with Exposure to O3Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, forLocation-SpecificO3Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002O3Concentrations*0.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/49.8%9.7%8.4%7.3%6.8%6.7%5.7%4.4%(7.4% - 14.2%) (7.2% - 14%) (6.1% - 12.6%) (5.2% - 11.3%) (4.7% - 10.5%) (4.6% - 10.5%) (3.7% - 9.1%) (2.7% - 7.2%)10.9%9.6%9.4%8.8%7.3%6.5%6.1%4.5%(8.4% - 15%) (7.2% - 13.5%) (7.1% - 13.3%) (6.5% - 12.7%) (5.1% - 10.9%) (4.5% - 9.9%) (4.2% - 9.5%) (2.8% - 7.3%)10.2%9.4%8.7%7.6%6.8%6.3%5.7%4.3%(7.7% - 14.5%) (7% - 13.6%) (6.4% - 12.8%) (5.4% - 11.6%) (4.7% - 10.6%) (4.3% - 10%) (3.8% - 9.2%) (2.6% - 7%)12.3%10.8%10.5%8.8%8.4%7.3%6.8%5.3%(9.6% - 16.7%) (8.3% - 15.2%) (8% - 14.8%) (6.4% - 13%) (6% - 12.5%) (5.1% - 11.2%) (4.7% - 10.7%) (3.5% - 8.6%)11.4%10.1%9.8%9.4%7.5%6.7%6.4%4.8%(8.8% - 15.8%) (7.6% - 14.4%) (7.3% - 14.1%) (7% - 13.8%) (5.3% - 11.6%) (4.6% - 10.6%) (4.3% - 10.1%) (3% - 7.8%)6.7%5.9%5.7%4.6%4.4%4.1%3.7%2.6%(4.8% - 10.1%) (4.2% - 9.2%) (3.9% - 8.8%) (3.1% - 7.3%) (2.9% - 7%) (2.7% - 6.5%) (2.4% - 5.9%) (1.5% - 4.2%)3.6%3.5%3%2.1%2.1%2%1.6%0.8%(2.7% - 5.6%) (2.6% - 5.4%) (2.2% - 4.7%) (1.5% - 3.2%) (1.5% - 3.2%) (1.5% - 3.1%) (1.2% - 2.4%) (0.6% - 1.3%)9.5%8.8%8.2%6.3%6.5%6.1%5.5%4.2%(7.1% - 13.8%) (6.4% - 13%) (5.9% - 12.3%) (4.2% - 9.9%) (4.4% - 10.2%) (4.1% - 9.7%) (3.6% - 8.9%) (2.5% - 6.8%)13%11.7%11.3%9.3%8.8%8%7.5%5.7%(10.3% - 17.5%) (9.1% - 16.2%) (8.7% - 15.7%) (6.8% - 13.6%) (6.4% - 13.1%) (5.7% - 12.2%) (5.3% - 11.6%) (3.8% - 9.2%)7%6.3%5.9%4.8%4.5%4.2%3.7%2.7%(5.5% - 10.4%) (4.9% - 9.6%) (4.5% - 9%) (3.6% - 7.5%) (3.4% - 7.1%) (3.2% - 6.7%) (2.8% - 5.9%) (2% - 4.2%)13.4%12.3%11.5%9.6%9%8.2%7.5%5.6%(10.7% - 17.8%) (9.6% - 16.6%) (8.9% - 15.9%) (7.2% - 13.9%) (6.7% - 13.2%) (5.9% - 12.3%) (5.3% - 11.5%) (3.7% - 9%)11.9%10.3%10.2%8.8%8.1%7.2%6.8%5.2%(9.2% - 16.4%) (7.8% - 14.7%) (7.7% - 14.6%) (6.5% - 13.1%) (5.8% - 12.2%) (5% - 11.1%) (4.7% - 10.7%) (3.4% - 8.5%)3.7%3.6%3%2.4%2.2%2.2%1.7%1.2%(2.1% - 5.6%) (2.1% - 5.5%) (1.5% - 4.6%) (1.1% - 4%) (0.8% - 3.6%) (0.8% - 3.6%) (0.4% - 3%) (0.1% - 2.3%)4.6%3.8%3.7%3.4%2.5%2.1%2%1.3%(2.8% - 6.5%) (2.2% - 5.6%) (2.1% - 5.5%) (1.9% - 5.1%) (1.2% - 4%) (0.9% - 3.5%) (0.8% - 3.3%) (0.3% - 2.4%)4%3.5%3.1%2.6%2.2%2%1.7%1.1%(2.3% - 5.8%) (2% - 5.3%) (1.6% - 4.8%) (1.2% - 4.2%) (0.9% - 3.7%) (0.7% - 3.4%) (0.5% - 3%) (0.1% - 2.2%)5.1%4.2%4%3.2%2.9%2.4%2.2%1.6%(3.3% - 7.3%) (2.6% - 6.2%) (2.4% - 6%) (1.7% - 4.9%) (1.5% - 4.6%) (1.1% - 3.9%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.4% - 2.8%)4.5%3.8%3.7%3.5%2.5%2.1%2%1.3%(2.8% - 6.6%) (2.2% - 5.7%) (2.1% - 5.5%) (2% - 5.3%) (1.2% - 4.1%) (0.9% - 3.6%) (0.7% - 3.4%) (0.2% - 2.5%)2.3%1.9%1.8%1.3%1.3%1.1%1%0.6%(1% - 3.6%) (0.7% - 3.2%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.3% - 2.4%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.2% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.4%)ChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 15%AtlantaBostonClevelandPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCNew YorkPercent of Active Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet theCurrent and Alternative O3Standards**DetroitHoustonLos AngelesLocationAtlantaBostonChicagoResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 10%Abt Associates Inc.C-19December 20060.084/4***0.084/30.080/40.074/50.074/40.074/30.070/40.064/4Percent of Active Children Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O3Concentrations that Just Meet theCurrent and Alternative O3Standards**Location1%1%0.8%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.2%(0.2% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.4%)3.5%3.2%2.8%1.9%2.1%1.9%1.6%1.1%(2% - 5.4%) (1.7% - 4.9%) (1.4% - 4.5%) (0.7% - 3.3%) (0.8% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.4% - 2.9%) (0.1% - 2.2%)5.5%4.8%4.5%3.4%3.1%2.7%2.5%1.7%(3.6% - 7.8%) (3% - 6.8%) (2.7% - 6.5%) (1.8% - 5.2%) (1.6% - 4.9%) (1.3% - 4.4%) (1.1% - 4.1%) (0.4% - 3%)2.5%2.2%2%1.5%1.4%1.2%1.1%0.7%(1.2% - 3.8%) (1% - 3.4%) (0.8% - 3.1%) (0.4% - 2.5%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.2% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.3%)5.8%5.1%4.6%3.6%3.3%2.9%2.5%1.7%(3.8% - 8.1%) (3.2% - 7.2%) (2.9% - 6.7%) (2.1% - 5.4%) (1.8% - 5%) (1.5% - 4.5%) (1.2% - 4.1%) (0.5% - 2.9%)4.9%4%3.9%3.2%2.8%2.4%2.2%1.5%(3% - 7%) (2.3% - 5.9%) (2.3% - 5.8%) (1.7% - 4.9%) (1.4% - 4.4%) (1% - 3.9%) (0.8% - 3.6%) (0.3% - 2.7%)1%1%0.7%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.2%(0.3% - 2.1%) (0.3% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%)1.5%1.1%1.1%1%0.6%0.5%0.4%0.2%(0.7% - 2.9%) (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 2.2%) (0.3% - 2%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.7%)1.1%0.9%0.7%0.6%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.2%(0.3% - 2.3%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.7%)1.6%1.2%1.1%0.7%0.7%0.5%0.4%0.3%(0.6% - 3%) (0.4% - 2.4%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%)1.3%1%0.9%0.9%0.5%0.4%0.4%0.2%(0.4% - 2.6%) (0.3% - 2.1%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.9%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%)0.5%0.4%0.4%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%)0.2%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0%(0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%)0.9%0.8%0.6%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.3%0.2%(0.3% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.6%)1.8%1.4%1.3%0.8%0.7%0.6%0.5%0.3%(0.8% - 3.3%) (0.5% - 2.8%) (0.4% - 2.6%) (0.2% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.7%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 0.9%)0.6%0.5%0.4%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.1%(0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%)1.9%1.6%1.3%0.9%0.8%0.6%0.5%0.3%(0.8% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.5% - 2.7%) (0.2% - 2%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.6%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0% - 0.9%)1.5%1.1%1.1%0.8%0.6%0.5%0.4%0.2%(0.6% - 2.9%) (0.3% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 2.2%) (0.2% - 1.8%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.8%)*Percents are median (0.5 fractile) percents of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertaintysurrounding the O3coefficient.**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hraverage. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).SacramentoSt. LouisWashington, DCHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitSt. LouisWashington, DCResponse = Decrease in FEV1 Greater Than or Equal to 20%AtlantaLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoAbt Associates Inc.C-20December 2006

# Abt Associates Inc. C-21 December 2006

Figure C-1. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numbers (Across All Locations) of Occurrences of Lung Function Response Among Active School Age Children when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definitions of Response* Figure C-1a. Based on 2004 Data

-250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## Figure C-1b. Based on 2002 Data

-250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2002 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality.

# Abt Associates Inc. C-22 December 2006

Figure C-2. Percent Reductions of Occurrences of Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 15% Among Active School Age Children when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separately for Each Location* Figure C-2a. Based on 2004 Data

-120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 63 (4 - 166); 0.2% (0% - 0.4%) Boston: 37 (2 - 104); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Chicago: 53 (0 - 158); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Cleveland: 20 (0 - 57); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Detroit: 38 (1 - 109); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Houston: 51 (5 - 119); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 189 (3 - 528); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) New York: 136 (3 - 396); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) Philadelphia: 60 (2 - 160); 0.2% (0% - 0.4%) Sacramento: 16 (0 - 45); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) St. Louis: 27 (1 - 73); 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) Washington, DC: 73 (5 - 197); 0.1% (0% - 0.4%)



## Figure C-2b. Based on 2002 Data

-120% -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2002 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 159 (27 - 376); 0.2% (0% - 0.4%) Boston: 186 (45 - 419); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Chicago: 298 (58 - 684); 0.2% (0% - 0.5%) Cleveland: 132 (33 - 290); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) Detroit: 205 (47 - 457); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Houston: 90 (11 - 208); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) Los Angeles: 342 (10 - 952); 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) New York: 679 (112 - 1607); 0.2% (0% - 0.6%) Philadelphia: 296 (75 - 636); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) Sacramento: 67 (6 - 171); 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) St. Louis: 133 (37 - 280); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) Washington, DC: 307 (68 - 690); 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%)


## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The percent changes from the current standard (0.084/4) to a recent year of air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in magnitude (-289% in 2004 and –294% in 2002). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each location in the box below each figure.

# Abt Associates Inc. C-23 December 2006

Figure C-3. Percent Reductions in Aggregate Numbers (Across All Locations) of Active School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Occurrence of Lung Function Response when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, for Each of the Three Definitions of Response*

Figure C-3a. Based on 2004 Data

-400% -350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## Figure C-3b. Based on 2002 Data

-400% -350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change from Current Standard



### Response: Change in FEV1>=10% Response: Change in FEV1>=15% Response: Change in FEV1>=20%



## * The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality.

# Abt Associates Inc. C-24 December 2006

Figure C-4. Percent Reductions in Numbers of Active School Age Children Experiencing at Least One Decrement in FEV 1 

## > 15% when O 3 

## Concentrations are Reduced from Those Just Meeting the Current Standard to Those that Would Just Meet Each Alternative Standard, Separately for Each Location* Figure C-4a. Based on 2004 Data

-150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 10 (4 - 16); 2.2% (0.8% - 3.6%) Boston: 6 (1 - 11); 1.3% (0.3% - 2.4%) Chicago: 7 (0 - 15); 0.8% (0% - 1.7%) Cleveland: 3 (0 - 5); 1.1% (0.1% - 2.1%) Detroit: 6 (1 - 11); 1.2% (0.2% - 2.3%) Houston: 11 (4 - 17); 2.2% (0.9% - 3.5%) Los Angeles: 16 (2 - 29); 1% (0.1% - 1.8%) New York: 19 (2 - 38); 1% (0.1% - 2.1%) Philadelphia: 8 (2 - 15); 1.6% (0.4% - 2.8%) Sacramento: 2 (0 - 3); 1.1% (0.1% - 1.9%) St. Louis: 4 (1 - 7); 1.3% (0.2% - 2.5%) Washington, DC: 13 (4 - 22); 1.9% (0.6% - 3.2%)



## Figure C-4b. Based on 2002 Data

-150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

2004 air

quality 0.084/4 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4

Alternative StandardPercent Change



### Atlanta: 17 (10 - 25); 3.7% (2.1% - 5.6%) Boston: 22 (13 - 31); 4.6% (2.8% - 6.5%) Chicago: 34 (20 - 50); 4% (2.3% - 5.8%) Cleveland: 13 (8 - 18); 5.1% (3.3% - 7.3%) Detroit: 22 (13 - 32); 4.5% (2.8% - 6.6%) Houston: 11 (5 - 17); 2.3% (1% - 3.6%) Los Angeles: 17 (3 - 30); 1% (0.2% - 1.8%) New York: 64 (36 - 97); 3.5% (2% - 5.4%) Philadelphia: 29 (19 - 41); 5.5% (3.6% - 7.8%) Sacramento: 4 (2 - 6); 2.5% (1.2% - 3.8%) St. Louis: 16 (10 - 22); 5.8% (3.8% - 8.1%) Washington, DC: 33 (21 - 48); 4.9% (3% - 7%)


## ** The 8-hr average standards shown in these figures, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. The figure also compares the current standard to a recent year of air quality. The percent changes from the current standard (0.084/4) to a recent year of air quality were omitted for Los Angeles because they were so large in magnitude (-544% in 2004 and –537% in 2002). The incidence (and 95% credible interval) and percent of total incidence (and 95% credible interval) when O 3 

## concentrations just meet the current standard are shown for each location in the box below each figure.

### C.3 Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Lung Function Response Estimates

Table C-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion

Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O3 Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O3 Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O3 Concentrations*

90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split

34 34 35 20 20 18 12 11 8 6 6 2 (19 - 51) (19 - 51) (20 - 52) (8 - 34) (8 - 34) (9 - 34) (2 - 22) (2 - 22) (2 - 22) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) 27 26 19 15 14 6 9 8 2 5 5 1 (6 - 49) (6 - 49) (6 - 49) (1 - 31) (1 - 31) (1 - 31) (0 - 21) (0 - 21) (0 - 20) (0 - 13) (0 - 13) (0 - 12) 57 57 59 23 23 21 13 13 9 7 6 2 (37 - 79) (37 - 80) (38 - 81) (10 - 37) (10 - 38) (10 - 38) (3 - 24) (3 - 24) (3 - 24) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) 220 223 236 34 32 21 17 16 6 6 6 1 (149 - 298) (150 - 300) (155 - 307) (5 - 62) (5 - 62) (5 - 61) (1 - 36) (1 - 36) (1 - 35) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) 112 113 108 43 42 26 25 24 8 14 13 2 (55 - 176) (56 - 178) (58 - 181) (6 - 84) (7 - 85) (7 - 83) (0 - 56) (0 - 56) (0 - 54) (0 - 35) (0 - 35) (0 - 34) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. Atlanta Location

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards, Using ExposureResponse Functions that are Different Combinations of Logistic and Linear (Hockeystick)**

"as is" 0.084/4*** 0.064/4 0.074/4

Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles

New York



### Abt Associates Inc. C-25 December 2006

### Table C-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of All Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=15%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O3 Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O3 Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O3 Concentrations*

90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split

59 60 62 36 37 38 21 21 19 11 10 6 (40 - 81) (40 - 82) (41 - 83) (21 - 54) (21 - 54) (22 - 56) (8 - 34) (9 - 34) (9 - 35) (1 - 21) (1 - 21) (1 - 21) 123 125 131 71 72 74 40 39 35 20 19 11 (83 - 169) (83 - 170) (86 - 173) (41 - 106) (41 - 107) (42 - 110) (15 - 66) (16 - 67) (16 - 68) (2 - 40) (2 - 40) (2 - 39) 58 58 60 24 24 22 13 13 9 7 6 3 (38 - 80) (38 - 81) (39 - 82) (11 - 38) (11 - 39) (11 - 39) (3 - 24) (3 - 24) (3 - 24) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) 220 223 231 35.00 34 24 18 17 8 7 6 2 (150 - 297) (151 - 299) (154 - 303) (7 - 62) (8 - 62) (8 - 61) (1 - 35) (1 - 35) (1 - 34) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) 346 350 361 142 145 146 81 80 70 43 41 23 (244 - 462) (245 - 463) (252 - 469) (79 - 216) (81 - 218) (83 - 224) (29 - 138) (30 - 139) (30 - 140) (3 - 86) (3 - 86) (4 - 84) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Location Number of All Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards, Using ExposureResponse Functions that are Different Combinations of Logistic and Linear (Hockeystick)**

"as is" 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4

New York Atlanta

Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles



### Abt Associates Inc. C-26 December 2006

### Table C-15. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O3 Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O3 Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2004 O3 Concentrations*

90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split

12 12 16 8 8 12 5 6 8 3 4 5 (9 - 17) (9 - 17) (9 - 18) (6 - 12) (6 - 13) (6 - 13) (3 - 9) (3 - 9) (3 - 10) (2 - 5) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) 14 14 21 9 9 13 6 6 8 3 3 3 (9 - 22) (9 - 23) (9 - 24) (5 - 14) (5 - 15) (5 - 16) (3 - 9) (3 - 10) (3 - 10) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) 17 17 22 9 9 13 6 6 9 4 4 5 (14 - 23) (14 - 23) (14 - 24) (6 - 14) (6 - 14) (7 - 15) (4 - 10) (4 - 10) (4 - 10) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) 62 64 79 16.00 17 26 9 10 15 4 4 6 (52 - 81) (52 - 82) (53 - 85) (11 - 25) (11 - 26) (12 - 28) (6 - 14) (6 - 15) (7 - 16) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) 51 53 71 26 27 39 17 18 24 11 11 12 (37 - 76) (37 - 78) (38 - 82) (16 - 42) (16 - 43) (16 - 46) (9 - 28) (9 - 29) (9 - 30) (4 - 17) (4 - 18) (4 - 18) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Number of Asthmatic Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards, Using Exposure-Response Functions that are Different Combinations of Logistic and Linear (Hockeystick)**

"as is" 0.084/4*** 0.064/4 0.074/4 Location

Atlanta

Chicago

New York Houston

Los Angeles



### Abt Associates Inc. C-27 December 2006

### Table C-16. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Exposure-Response Function on Number of Asthmatic Children (Ages 5-18) Engaged in Moderate Exertion Estimated to Experience At Least One Lung Function Response (Decrease in FEV1>=10%) Associated with Exposure to a Recent Year of Air Quality and with Exposure to O3 Concentrations That Just Meet the Current and Alternative Daily Maximum 8-Hour Standards, for Location-Specific O3 Seasons: Based on Adjusting 2002 O3 Concentrations*

90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split 90%/10% Split 80%/20% Split 50%/50% Split

18 18 22 13 13 17 9 9 12 5 6 8 (14 - 23) (14 - 23) (15 - 24) (10 - 18) (10 - 18) (10 - 19) (6 - 13) (6 - 13) (6 - 14) (3 - 9) (3 - 9) (3 - 10) 40 41 49 27 28 37 18 19 27 11 12 18 (32 - 53) (33 - 54) (33 - 55) (20 - 39) (21 - 40) (21 - 42) (12 - 29) (12 - 29) (13 - 31) (7 - 19) (7 - 19) (7 - 21) 17 17 21 9 9 13 6 6 9 4 4 5 (13 - 23) (13 - 23) (14 - 24) (6 - 14) (7 - 14) (7 - 15) (4 - 9) (4 - 10) (4 - 10) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) 61 62 76 16 16 26 9 10 15 4 4 6 (51 - 79) (51 - 80) (52 - 83) (11 - 24) (11 - 25) (12 - 27) (6 - 14) (6 - 14) (6 - 16) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) (2 - 6) 118 120 136 63 65 85 43 44 63 27 28 41 (97 - 147) (97 - 149) (99 - 152) (47 - 91) (47 - 93) (49 - 97) (29 - 67) (29 - 69) (30 - 72) (16 - 44) (16 - 45) (17 - 48) *Numbers are median (0.5 fractile) numbers of children. Numbers in parentheses below the median are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest 1000. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Location Number of Asthmatic Children (in 1000s) Estimated to Experience at Least One Lung Function Response Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards, Using Exposure-Response Functions that are Different Combinations of Logistic and Linear (Hockeystick)**

"as is" 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4

New York Atlanta

Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles



### Abt Associates Inc. C-26 December 2006

# Appendix D: Estimated Health Risks Associated with “As Is” O 3 

# Concentrations: April

– September

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-1 D.1 Figures Figure D-1. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background: Single-Pollutant, Single-City Models (April – September) Figure D-1a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-1b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar etal., 1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

-4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-2 Figure D-2. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi-Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

## , PM 10 

## , SO 2 

## ] Figure D-2a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-2b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases oer 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases oer 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-3 Figure D-3. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) Figure D-3a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-3b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-4 Figure D-4. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004)

Figure D-4a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-4b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-5 Figure D-5. Estimated Annual Cases of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] Figure D-5a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-5b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -60.0 -50.0 -40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95%CI)



### -60.0 -50.0 -40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95%CI)

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-6 Figure D-6. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality Per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

## Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure D-6a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-6b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, D.C.Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, D.C.Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone<0.03 ppm

# Abt Associates December 2006 D-7 Figure D-7. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to “As Is” O 3 

## Above Background for the Period April – September (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure D-7a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure D-7b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone <0.03 ppm

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone <0.0 ppm

### D.2 Tables

Table D-1. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Atlanta, GA, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 6 0.4 0.1% (-26 - 38) (-1.8 - 2.6) (-0.6% - 0.8%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 12 0.8 0.3% (4 - 20) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.1% - 0.4%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 8 0.5 0.8% (-3 - 18) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.3% - 1.8%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 8 0.5 0.8% (3 - 13) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.3% - 1.3%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 4 0.3 0.5% (1 - 8) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 4 0.3 0.4% (1 - 7) (0 - 0.5) (0.1% - 0.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 5 0.3 0.5% (-2 - 11) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.2% - 1.2%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 3 0.2 0.3% (0 - 7) (0 - 0.4) (0% - 0.7%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental



### Abt Associates Inc. D-8 December 2006

## Table D-2. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

## Concentrations: Atlanta, GA, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence


### all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 9 0.6 0.2% (-37 - 54) (-2.5 - 3.6) (-0.8% - 1.2%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 17 1.2 0.4% (6 - 29) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1% - 0.6%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 11 0.7 1.1% (-4 - 25) (-0.2 - 1.7) (-0.4% - 2.6%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 11 0.8 1.2% (4 - 18) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.5% - 1.9%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 6 0.4 0.7% (2 - 11) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.2% - 1.1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 6 0.4 0.6% (1 - 10) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1% - 1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 7 0.5 0.7% (-3 - 16) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.3% - 1.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 5 0.3 0.5% (0 - 9) (0 - 0.6) (0% - 1%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Mortality, non-accidental



## Abt Associates Inc. D-9 December 2006

### Table D-3. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Boston, MA, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 7 1.0 0.3% (2 - 12) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.1% - 0.5%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 5300 20700 9.4% (800 - 9200) (3300 - 36300) (1.5% - 16.5%) 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 8400 33100 15.1% (3800 - 12400) (14900 - 49100) (6.8% - 22.3%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 7700 30400 13.8% (3000 - 11800) (11800 - 46800) (5.4% - 21.3%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 5400 21400 9.7% (1700 - 8700) (6900 - 34500) (3.1% - 15.7%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 5700 22500 8.2% (700 - 10200) (2700 - 40200) (1% - 14.7%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 6300 24700 9% (1200 - 10800) (4800 - 42500) (1.8% - 15.5%) 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 15400 60800 11.9% (5500 - 24200) (21800 - 95600) (4.3% - 18.7%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences of respiratory symptom-days are rounded to the nearest 100. Incidences of mortality per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth; incidences of respiratory symptom-days per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest 100. All percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-10 December 2006

### Table D-4. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Boston, MA, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 10 1.5 0.4% (3 - 17) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1% - 0.7%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 6900 27200 12.4% (1100 - 11800) (4500 - 46600) (2% - 21.2%) 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 10800 42700 19.5% (5000 - 15700) (19700 - 62100) (9% - 28.3%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 10000 39400 17.9% (4000 - 15000) (15700 - 59400) (7.1% - 27%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 7200 28400 12.9% (2400 - 11400) (9300 - 44900) (4.2% - 20.5%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 7500 29500 10.8% (900 - 13200) (3700 - 52000) (1.3% - 19%) 0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 8300 32800 11.9% (1700 - 14000) (6600 - 55300) (2.4% - 20.2%) 0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 20100 79200 15.5% (7400 - 31000) (29000 - 122300) (5.7% - 23.9%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences of respiratory symptom-days are rounded to the nearest 100. Incidences of mortality per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth; incidences of respiratory symptom-days per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest 100. All percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-11 December 2006

### Table D-5. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Chicago, IL, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 49 0.9 0.2% (16 - 81) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.1% - 0.4%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 394 7.3 1.9% (125 - 658) (2.3 - 12.2) (0.6% - 3.1%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 148 2.8 0.7% (46 - 250) (0.9 - 4.6) (0.2% - 1.2%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 23 0.4 0.4% (-21 - 66) (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.4% - 1.3%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 38 0.7 0.7% (14 - 61) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.3% - 1.2%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 21 0.4 0.4% (6 - 36) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1% - 0.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 18 0.3 0.4% (3 - 33) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 22 0.4 0.4% (-9 - 53) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2% - 1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 15 0.3 0.3% (0 - 31) (0 - 0.6) (0% - 0.6%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. (2004) Schwartz (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-12 December 2006

### Table D-6. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Chicago, IL, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 69 1.3 0.3% (23 - 115) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 505 9.4 2.4% (161 - 840) (3 - 15.6) (0.8% - 4%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 191 3.6 0.9% (60 - 321) (1.1 - 6) (0.3% - 1.5%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 32 0.6 0.6% (-29 - 93) (-0.5 - 1.7) (-0.6% - 1.8%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 53 1.0 1% (20 - 86) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.4% - 1.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 30 0.6 0.6% (9 - 50) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2% - 1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 26 0.5 0.5% (5 - 47) (0.1 - 0.9) (0.1% - 0.9%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 32 0.6 0.6% (-12 - 75) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2% - 1.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 22 0.4 0.4% (0 - 44) (0 - 0.8) (0% - 0.9%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. (2004) Schwartz (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental



### Abt Associates Inc. D-13 December 2006

### Table D-7. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Cleveland, OH, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 27 1.9 0.4% (-17 - 69) (-1.2 - 5) (-0.2% - 0.9%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 17 1.2 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.4 - 2) (0.1% - 0.4%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 16 1.2 0.9% (0 - 32) (0 - 2.3) (0% - 1.7%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 14 1.0 0.7% (5 - 22) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.3% - 1.2%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 8 0.5 0.4% (2 - 13) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1% - 0.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 7 0.5 0.4% (1 - 12) (0.1 - 0.9) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 8 0.6 0.4% (-3 - 19) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2% - 1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 6 0.4 0.3% (0 - 11) (0 - 0.8) (0% - 0.6%) 65+ 1 hr max. none 59 27.0 1.5% (15 - 102) (6.9 - 46.8) (0.4% - 2.6%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz et al. (1996) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions, respiratory illness avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-14 December 2006

### Table D-8. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Cleveland, OH, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 61 4.3 0.8% (-38 - 157) (-2.7 - 11.3) (-0.5% - 2.1%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 38 2.8 0.5% (13 - 64) (0.9 - 4.6) (0.2% - 0.9%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 36 2.6 2% (-1 - 72) (-0.1 - 5.2) (0% - 3.9%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 31 2.2 1.6% (12 - 49) (0.8 - 3.5) (0.6% - 2.6%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 17 1.2 0.9% (5 - 29) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3% - 1.6%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 15 1.1 0.8% (3 - 27) (0.2 - 1.9) (0.1% - 1.4%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 18 1.3 1% (-7 - 43) (-0.5 - 3.1) (-0.4% - 2.3%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 13 0.9 0.7% (0 - 25) (0 - 1.8) (0% - 1.3%) 65+ 1 hr max. none 106 48.9 2.7% (27 - 182) (12.6 - 84.1) (0.7% - 4.6%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions, respiratory illness avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz et al. (1996) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-15 December 2006

### Table D-9. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Detroit, MI, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 33 1.6 0.4% (-11 - 76) (-0.5 - 3.7) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 17 0.8 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 128 6.2 1.4% (-21 - 274) (-1 - 13.3) (-0.2% - 2.9%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 70 3.4 0.7% (22 - 117) (1.1 - 5.7) (0.2% - 1.2%) Ito (2003) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 40 2.0 0.4% (-37 - 116) (-1.8 - 5.6) (-0.4% - 1.2%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 15 0.7 0.6% (-2 - 31) (-0.1 - 1.5) (-0.1% - 1.3%) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 14 0.7 0.6% (5 - 22) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2% - 0.9%) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 8 0.4 0.3% (2 - 13) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 7 0.3 0.3% (1 - 12) (0.1 - 0.6) (0% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 8 0.4 0.3% (-3 - 19) (-0.2 - 0.9) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 6 0.3 0.2% (0 - 11) (0 - 0.5) (0% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 13 0.6 1.6% (-10 - 34) (-0.5 - 1.6) (-1.3% - 4.3%) Ito (2003) 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none -26 -10.5 -1% (-77 - 22) (-30.8 - 8.8) (-3% - 0.9%) Ito (2003) 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none -6 -2.6 -0.2% (-56 - 41) (-22.6 - 16.5) (-2.2% - 1.6%) Ito (2003) 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. none 8 3.1 0.3% (-42 - 55) (-16.7 - 22.1) (-1.6% - 2.1%) Ito (2003) 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. none 22 9.0 0.9% (-26 - 68) (-10.5 - 27.5) (-1% - 2.7%) Ito (2003) 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none -18 -7.1 -0.9% (-64 - 26) (-25.6 - 10.4) (-3.2% - 1.3%) Ito (2003) 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none 17 6.8 0.9% (-27 - 59) (-11 - 23.7) (-1.4% - 3%) Ito (2003) 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. none -3 -1.0 -0.1% (-48 - 41) (-19.5 - 16.5) (-2.4% - 2.1%) Ito (2003) 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. none 1 0.4 0.1% (-45 - 44) (-18 - 17.8) (-2.3% - 2.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Ito (2003)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Mortality, respiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. D-16 December 2006

### Table D-10. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Detroit, MI, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 57 2.8 0.6% (-18 - 131) (-0.9 - 6.3) (-0.2% - 1.4%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 29 1.4 0.3% (10 - 48) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1% - 0.5%) Schwartz (2004) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 181 8.8 1.9% (-30 - 385) (-1.4 - 18.7) (-0.3% - 4.1%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 99 4.8 1% (31 - 165) (1.5 - 8) (0.3% - 1.8%) Ito (2003) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 69 3.4 0.7% (-64 - 198) (-3.1 - 9.6) (-0.7% - 2.1%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 26 1.2 1.1% (-3 - 54) (-0.1 - 2.6) (-0.1% - 2.2%) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 24 1.1 1% (9 - 38) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4% - 1.6%) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 13 0.6 0.5% (4 - 22) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2% - 0.9%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 11 0.6 0.5% (2 - 21) (0.1 - 1) (0.1% - 0.9%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 14 0.7 0.6% (-5 - 33) (-0.3 - 1.6) (-0.2% - 1.4%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 10 0.5 0.4% (0 - 19) (0 - 0.9) (0% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 22 1.0 2.8% (-18 - 57) (-0.9 - 2.7) (-2.3% - 7.2%) Ito (2003) 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none -45 -18.3 -1.8% (-135 - 37) (-54.3 - 15.1) (-5.2% - 1.5%) Ito (2003) 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none -11 -4.4 -0.4% (-98 - 70) (-39.5 - 28.1) (-3.8% - 2.7%) Ito (2003) 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. none 13 5.4 0.5% (-72 - 93) (-29.1 - 37.4) (-2.8% - 3.6%) Ito (2003) 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. none 38 15.3 1.5% (-45 - 116) (-18.2 - 46.5) (-1.8% - 4.5%) Ito (2003) 65+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none -31 -12.3 -1.5% (-112 - 44) (-45.1 - 17.7) (-5.6% - 2.2%) Ito (2003) 65+ 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none 29 11.7 1.5% (-48 - 99) (-19.1 - 39.9) (-2.4% - 5%) Ito (2003) 65+ 2-day lag 24 hr avg. none -4 -1.7 -0.2% (-85 - 69) (-34.2 - 27.9) (-4.3% - 3.5%) Ito (2003) 65+ 3-day lag 24 hr avg. none 2 0.7 0.1% (-78 - 75) (-31.5 - 30.2) (-3.9% - 3.8%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Ito (2003)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Mortality, respiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), COPD Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pneumonia Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-17 December 2006

### Table D-11. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Houston, TX, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 35 1.0 0.4% (2 - 67) (0.1 - 2) (0% - 0.7%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 17 0.5 0.2% (6 - 28) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 93 2.7 1% (9 - 176) (0.3 - 5.2) (0.1% - 1.9%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 78 2.3 0.9% (24 - 130) (0.7 - 3.8) (0.3% - 1.4%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 12 0.4 0.6% (-2 - 26) (0 - 0.8) (-0.1% - 1.2%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 13 0.4 0.6% (5 - 20) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2% - 1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 7 0.2 0.3% (2 - 12) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 6 0.2 0.3% (1 - 11) (0 - 0.3) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 7 0.2 0.4% (-3 - 18) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 5 0.2 0.2% (0 - 10) (0 - 0.3) (0% - 0.5%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-18 December 2006

### Table D-12. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Houston, TX, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 29 0.9 0.3% (2 - 57) (0.1 - 1.7) (0% - 0.6%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 14 0.4 0.2% (5 - 24) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 85 2.5 0.9% (8 - 161) (0.2 - 4.7) (0.1% - 1.8%) all 0-day lag 1 hr max. none 71 2.1 0.8% (22 - 119) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.2% - 1.3%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 10 0.3 0.5% (-1 - 22) (0 - 0.6) (-0.1% - 1%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 11 0.3 0.5% (4 - 17) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.2% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 6 0.2 0.3% (2 - 10) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 5 0.2 0.2% (1 - 9) (0 - 0.3) (0% - 0.4%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 6 0.2 0.3% (-2 - 15) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1% - 0.7%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 4 0.1 0.2% (0 - 9) (0 - 0.3) (0% - 0.4%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-19 December 2006

### Table D-13. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004)*** all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 62 0.6 0.2% (-149 - 271) (-1.6 - 2.8) (-0.5% - 1%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 133 1.4 0.5% (45 - 221) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.2% - 0.8%) Huang et al. (2004)*** all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 99 1.0 1.3% (1 - 195) (0 - 2.1) (0% - 2.6%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 115 1.2 1.6% (44 - 185) (0.5 - 1.9) (0.6% - 2.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 64 0.7 0.9% (19 - 108) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.3% - 1.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 56 0.6 0.8% (10 - 101) (0.1 - 1.1) (0.1% - 1.4%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 68 0.7 0.9% (-26 - 161) (-0.3 - 1.7) (-0.4% - 2.2%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 47 0.5 0.6% (0 - 94) (0 - 1) (0% - 1.3%) Linn et al. (2000)  30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 75 0.9 1.7% (-32 - 179) (-0.4 - 2.1) (-0.7% - 4.1%) Linn et al. (2000)** ** 30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 46 0.5 1.2% (-60 - 148) (-0.7 - 1.8) (-1.6% - 4%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient.  Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- summer

** Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, non-accidental

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- spring Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)***

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***



### Abt Associates Inc. D-20 December 2006

### Table D-14. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000 Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004)*** all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 51 0.5 0.2% (-124 - 224) (-1.3 - 2.4) (-0.5% - 0.8%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 110 1.2 0.4% (37 - 184) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1% - 0.7%) Huang et al. (2004)*** all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 82 0.9 1.1% (1 - 162) (0 - 1.7) (0% - 2.2%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 95 1.0 1.3% (36 - 153) (0.4 - 1.6) (0.5% - 2.1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 53 0.6 0.7% (16 - 90) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2% - 1.2%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 46 0.5 0.6% (8 - 84) (0.1 - 0.9) (0.1% - 1.1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 57 0.6 0.8% (-22 - 134) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.3% - 1.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 39 0.4 0.5% (0 - 78) (0 - 0.8) (0% - 1.1%) Linn et al. (2000)  30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 68 0.8 1.6% (-29 - 162) (-0.3 - 1.9) (-0.7% - 3.7%) Linn et al. (2000)** ** 30+ 0-day lag 24 hr avg. none 44 0.5 1.2% (-58 - 143) (-0.7 - 1.7) (-1.6% - 3.9%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)***

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)*** Mortality, non-accidental

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- spring Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, non-accidental

 Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- summer

** Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-21 December 2006

### Table D-15. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 23 1.5 0.3% (8 - 38) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none 82 5.4 1% (52 - 112) (3.4 - 7.4) (0.6% - 1.4%) all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 82 5.4 1% (39 - 124) (2.6 - 8.2) (0.5% - 1.5%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 20 1.3 1.1% (1 - 39) (0.1 - 2.6) (0.1% - 2.1%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 17 1.1 0.9% (6 - 27) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3% - 1.5%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 9 0.6 0.5% (3 - 16) (0.2 - 1) (0.1% - 0.9%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 8 0.5 0.4% (1 - 15) (0.1 - 1) (0.1% - 0.8%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 10 0.7 0.5% (-4 - 24) (-0.3 - 1.6) (-0.2% - 1.3%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 7 0.5 0.4% (0 - 14) (0 - 0.9) (0% - 0.7%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)
Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)
Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-22 December 2006

### Table D-16. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 37 2.4 0.5% (12 - 62) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.2% - 0.8%) all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. none 132 8.7 1.6% (83 - 180) (5.5 - 11.9) (1% - 2.2%) all 1-day lag 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 131 8.6 1.6% (63 - 198) (4.1 - 13.1) (0.8% - 2.5%) Huang et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 33 2.2 1.8% (2 - 63) (0.1 - 4.1) (0.1% - 3.4%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 27 1.8 1.5% (10 - 43) (0.7 - 2.8) (0.6% - 2.3%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. CO 15 1.0 0.8% (4 - 25) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.2% - 1.4%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. NO2 13 0.9 0.7% (2 - 24) (0.2 - 1.6) (0.1% - 1.3%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. PM10 16 1.1 0.9% (-6 - 38) (-0.4 - 2.5) (-0.3% - 2.1%) all 0-day lag 24 hr avg. SO2 11 0.7 0.6% (0 - 22) (0 - 1.5) (0% - 1.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, non-accidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)
Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-23 December 2006

### Table D-17. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Sacramento, CA, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 12 1.0 0.3% (-36 - 59) (-3 - 4.8) (-0.9% - 1.4%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 18 1.4 0.4% (6 - 29) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1% - 0.7%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Abt Associates Inc. D-24 December 2006

### Table D-18. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Sacramento, CA, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence 

### Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 16 1.3 0.4% (-48 - 78) (-3.9 - 6.4) (-1.1% - 1.9%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 23 1.9 0.6% (8 - 39) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.2% - 0.9%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental
Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-25 December 2006

### Table D-19. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: St. Louis, MO, April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 3 1.0 0.2% (-6 - 13) (-1.7 - 3.6) (-0.3% - 0.6%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 3 0.9 0.2% (1 - 5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.1% - 0.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental Mortality, non-accidental
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-26 December 2006

### Table D-20. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: St. Louis, MO, April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence Bell et al. (2004) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 6 1.9 0.3% (-11 - 23) (-3.1 - 6.7) (-0.5% - 1.2%) all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 6 1.7 0.3% (2 - 10) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.1% - 0.5%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, non-accidental Mortality, non-accidental
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. D-27 December 2006

### Table D-21. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Washington, D.C., April - September, 2004

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 8 1.5 0.3% (3 - 14) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1% - 0.5%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-28 December 2006

### Table D-22. Estimated Health Risks Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: Washington, D.C., April - September, 2002

Incidence Incidence per 100,000

Relevant Population Percent of Total Incidence
all distributed lag 24 hr avg. none 15 2.6 0.6% (5 - 25) (0.9 - 4.4) (0.2% - 0.9%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Mortality, non-accidental

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Health Effects Associated with O 3 Above Policy Relevant Background Levels** Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. D-29 December 2006

# Appendix E: Estimated Health Risks Associated with O 3 

# Concentrations That Just

Meet the Current 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standard: April – September

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-1 E.1 Figures Figure E-1. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met: Single-Pollutant, Single-City Models (April – September) Figure E-1a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-1b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

-4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Schwartz, 2004Detroit: Ito, 2003Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Philadelphia: Moolgavkar et al.,1995Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95%CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-2 Figure E-2. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-Pollutant vs. Multi-Pollutant Models [Huang et al. (2004), additional pollutants, from left to right: none, CO, NO 2 

## , PM 10 

## , SO 2 

## ] Figure E-2a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-2b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -0.2 0.3 0.8 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.8 3.3

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases oer 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -0.2 0.3 0.8 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.8 3.3

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases oer 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-3 Figure E-3. Estimated Annual Cases of (Non-Accidental) Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) Figure E-3a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-3b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Huang et al., 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0Atlanta: Bell et al., 2004Chicago: Schwartz, 2004Cleveland: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Bell et al., 2004Detroit: Huang et al., 2004Houston: Bell et al., 2004Houston: Schwartz, 2004Los Angeles: Bell et al., 2004Sacramento: Bell et al., 2004St Louis: Bell et al., 2004Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-4 Figure E-4. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Single-City Model (left bar) vs. Multi-City Model (right bar) – Based on Huang et al. (2004) Figure E-4a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-4b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -0.6 0.4 1.4 2.4 3.4 4.4 5.4 6.4

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)



### -0.6 0.4 1.4 2.4 3.4 4.4 5.4 6.4

Atlanta Chicago Cleveland Detroit Houston Los Angeles New York PhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-5 Figure E-5. Estimated Annual Cases of (Unscheduled) Hospital Admissions for Pneumonia in Detroit per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Background When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (April – September): Different Lag Models – Based on Ito (2003) [bars from left to right are 0-day, 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day lag models] Figure E-5a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-5b. Based on 2002 Air Quality -50.0 -40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95%CI)



### -50.0 -40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

0-day 1-day 2-day 3-dayCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95%CI)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-6 Figure E-6. Estimated Annual Cases of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Bell et al., 2004 – 95 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure E-6a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-6b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, D.C.Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone <0.03 ppm

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00AtlantaBostonChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaSacramentoSt. LouisWashington, D.C.Cases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone <0.03 ppm

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 E-7 Figure E-7. Estimated Annual Cases of Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with Short-Term Exposure to O 3 

## Above Policy Relevant Background for the Period April – September When the Current 8-Hour Standard is Just Met (Based on Huang et al., 2004 – 19 U.S. Cities) – Total and Contribution of 24-Hour O 3 

## Ranges Figure E-7a. Based on 2004 Air Quality

Figure E-7b. Based on 2002 Air Quality 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm
Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm
Attributable to ozone <0.03 ppm



### 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00AtlantaChicagoClevelandDetroitHoustonLosAngelesNew YorkPhiladelphiaCases per 100,000 Relevant Population (and 95% CI) 

### Attributable to 0.06 ppm<=ozone<0.07 ppm Attributable to 0.05 ppm<=ozone<0.06 ppm Attributable to 0.04 ppm<=ozone<0.05 ppm Attributable to 0.03 ppm<=ozone<0.04 ppm Attributable to ozone <0.03 ppm

### E.2 Tables

Table E-1. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily

Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations
0.080/4 0.070/4

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4  0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4** ** 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 (-20 - 29) (-20 - 29) (-18 - 26) (-16 - 23) (-15 - 22) (-15 - 22) (-13 - 19) (-11 - 16) all 24 hr avg. none 9 9 8 7 7 7 6 5 (3 - 15) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) all 24 hr avg. none 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 (-2 - 14) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 11) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 9) (-1 - 7) all 24 hr avg. none 6 6 6 5 5 5 4 3 (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (2 - 7) (1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. CO 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (1 - 5) (1 - 4) (1 - 4) (1 - 4) (1 - 3) all 24 hr avg. NO2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 (1 - 5) (1 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) all 24 hr avg. PM10 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 (-1 - 9) (-1 - 9) (-1 - 8) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 6) (-1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. SO2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric



### Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*



### Bell et al. (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model



### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Study Ages



### Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 8 December 2006

### Table E-2. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (-1.3 - 1.9) (-1.3 - 1.9) (-1.2 - 1.8) (-1.1 - 1.6) (-1 - 1.5) (-1 - 1.5) (-0.9 - 1.3) (-0.7 - 1.1) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient.



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model



### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Study Ages



### Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric



### Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*



### Bell et al. (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth. 

### distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 9 December 2006

### Table E-3. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Study Ages

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 10 December 2006

### Table E-4. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 4 (-30 - 43) (-30 - 43) (-28 - 40) (-26 - 38) (-24 - 35) (-24 - 35) (-22 - 32) (-19 - 27) all 24 hr avg. none 14 14 13 12 11 11 10 9 (5 - 23) (5 - 23) (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 19) (3 - 17) (3 - 14) all 24 hr avg. none 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 6 (-3 - 20) (-3 - 20) (-3 - 19) (-3 - 18) (-2 - 17) (-2 - 17) (-2 - 15) (-2 - 13) all 24 hr avg. none 9 9 9 8 8 8 7 6 (4 - 15) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 9) all 24 hr avg. CO 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 (2 - 9) (1 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. NO2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (0 - 5) all 24 hr avg. PM10 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 (-2 - 13) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 11) (-2 - 11) (-2 - 11) (-2 - 10) (-1 - 8) all 24 hr avg. SO2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lagMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. (2004) Other Pollutants in Model

distributed lag Study Ages

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number. Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. E -11 December 2006

### Table E-5. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-2 - 2.9) (-2 - 2.9) (-1.9 - 2.7) (-1.8 - 2.5) (-1.6 - 2.4) (-1.7 - 2.4) (-1.5 - 2.2) (-1.3 - 1.8) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2 - 1.4) (-0.2 - 1.3) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Study Ages

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -12 December 2006

### Table E-6. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Atlanta, GA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.7% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.7%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.3% - 2.1%) (-0.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.2% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.2%) (-0.2% - 1.2%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Study Ages

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al.

(2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Lag Exposure

Metric

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Abt Associates Inc. E -13 December 2006

### Table E-7. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 4500 4200 4200 4100 3800 3600 3500 3100
(700 - 7900) (700 - 7500) (700 - 7400) (700 - 7300) (600 - 6700) (600 - 6400) (600 - 6200) (500 - 5500)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 7200 6800 6700 6600 6100 5800 5600 5000
(3200 - 10700) (3000 - 10200) (3000 - 10100) (2900 - 9900) (2700 - 9200) (2600 - 8800) (2500 - 8500) (2200 - 7500)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 6600 6200 6200 6100 5600 5300 5200 4500
(2500 - 10200) (2400 - 9700) (2400 - 9600) (2300 - 9400) (2100 - 8700) (2000 - 8300) (2000 - 8100) (1700 - 7100)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 4600 4400 4300 4200 3900 3700 3600 3100
(1500 - 7500) (1400 - 7100) (1400 - 7000) (1300 - 6900) (1200 - 6300) (1200 - 6100) (1100 - 5900) (1000 - 5200)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 4800 4600 4500 4400 4100 3900 3800 3300
(600 - 8700) (600 - 8300) (500 - 8200) (500 - 8000) (500 - 7400) (500 - 7100) (500 - 6900) (400 - 6000)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 5300 5000 5000 4900 4500 4300 4100 3600
(1000 - 9200) (1000 - 8700) (1000 - 8700) (900 - 8500) (900 - 7800) (800 - 7500) (800 - 7200) (700 - 6400)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 13200 12400 12300 12100 11100 10600 10300 9000

(4700 - 20800) (4400 - 19700) (4400 - 19600) (4300 - 19200) (3900 - 17700) (3700 - 16900) (3600 - 16400) (3200 - 14500) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Exposure Metric

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Study Ages Lag

distributed lag

Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Gent et al. (2003)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences of respiratory symptom-days are rounded to the nearest 100. Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 14 December 2006

### Table E-8. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 17700 16700 16600 16200 14900 14200 13800 12000
(2800 - 31100) (2700 - 29500) (2600 - 29200) (2600 - 28700) (2400 - 26400) (2200 - 25200) (2200 - 24500) (1900 - 21500)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 28400 26800 26600 26100 24100 23000 22300 19600
(12700 - 42400) (12000 - 40200) (11900 - 39900) (11600 - 39200) (10700 - 36200) (10200 - 34700) (9800 - 33700) (8600 - 29700)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 26000 24600 24400 23900 22100 21000 20400 17900
(10000 - 40300) (9500 - 38300) (9400 - 38000) (9200 - 37300) (8400 - 34400) (8000 - 32900) (7800 - 32000) (6800 - 28200)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 18200 17200 17100 16700 15300 14600 14200 12400
(5800 - 29500) (5500 - 28000) (5400 - 27700) (5300 - 27200) (4900 - 25000) (4600 - 23900) (4500 - 23200) (3900 - 20400)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 19100 18000 17900 17500 16100 15300 14900 13000
(2300 - 34500) (2200 - 32600) (2200 - 32400) (2100 - 31700) (1900 - 29200) (1800 - 27900) (1800 - 27100) (1500 - 23800)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 21000 19800 19700 19200 17700 16800 16300 14300
(4100 - 36300) (3800 - 34400) (3800 - 34100) (3700 - 33400) (3400 - 30800) (3200 - 29400) (3100 - 28500) (2700 - 25100)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 51900 49000 48700 47700 43900 41800 40600 35600

(18500 - 82200) (17400 - 77900) (17300 - 77300) (16900 - 75800) (15500 - 70000) (14800 - 66900) (14300 - 64900) (12500 - 57100) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Ages Lag Exposure Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) distributed lag

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth; incidences of respiratory symptom-days per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest 100. Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 15 December 2006

### Table E-9. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 8% 7.6% 7.5% 7.4% 6.8% 6.5% 6.3% 5.5%
(1.3% - 14.2%) (1.2% - 13.4%) (1.2% - 13.3%) (1.2% - 13.1%) (1.1% - 12%) (1% - 11.5%) (1% - 11.2%) (0.9% - 9.8%)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 12.9% 12.2% 12.1% 11.9% 11% 10.5% 10.1% 8.9%
(5.8% - 19.3%) (5.5% - 18.3%) (5.4% - 18.2%) (5.3% - 17.8%) (4.9% - 16.5%) (4.6% - 15.8%) (4.5% - 15.3%) (3.9% - 13.5%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 11.9% 11.2% 11.1% 10.9% 10% 9.6% 9.3% 8.2%
(4.6% - 18.4%) (4.3% - 17.4%) (4.3% - 17.3%) (4.2% - 17%) (3.8% - 15.7%) (3.7% - 15%) (3.5% - 14.6%) (3.1% - 12.8%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 8.3% 7.8% 7.8% 7.6% 7% 6.7% 6.5% 5.7%
(2.6% - 13.4%) (2.5% - 12.7%) (2.5% - 12.6%) (2.4% - 12.4%) (2.2% - 11.4%) (2.1% - 10.9%) (2% - 10.6%) (1.8% - 9.3%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 7% 6.6% 6.5% 6.4% 5.9% 5.6% 5.4% 4.7%
(0.8% - 12.6%) (0.8% - 11.9%) (0.8% - 11.8%) (0.8% - 11.6%) (0.7% - 10.6%) (0.7% - 10.2%) (0.6% - 9.9%) (0.6% - 8.7%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 7.6% 7.2% 7.2% 7% 6.4% 6.1% 5.9% 5.2%
(1.5% - 13.2%) (1.4% - 12.5%) (1.4% - 12.4%) (1.4% - 12.2%) (1.2% - 11.2%) (1.2% - 10.7%) (1.1% - 10.4%) (1% - 9.1%)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 10.1% 9.6% 9.5% 9.3% 8.6% 8.2% 7.9% 6.9%

(3.6% - 16%) (3.4% - 15.2%) (3.4% - 15.1%) (3.3% - 14.8%) (3% - 13.7%) (2.9% - 13%) (2.8% - 12.7%) (2.4% - 11.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Exposure Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) distributed lag

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 16 December 2006

### Table E-10. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 9 8 8 8 7 7 7 6 (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 12) (2 - 10)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 6100 5800 5800 5700 5300 5200 5000 4600
(1000 - 10500) (900 - 10100) (900 - 10000) (900 - 9900) (900 - 9300) (800 - 9000) (800 - 8800) (700 - 8000)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 9600 9300 9200 9000 8500 8200 8000 7300
(4400 - 14100) (4200 - 13600) (4200 - 13500) (4100 - 13300) (3800 - 12600) (3700 - 12200) (3600 - 11900) (3300 - 10900)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 8900 8500 8500 8300 7800 7600 7400 6700
(3500 - 13500) (3300 - 13000) (3300 - 12900) (3200 - 12700) (3000 - 12000) (2900 - 11600) (2900 - 11400) (2600 - 10400)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 6400 6100 6000 5900 5600 5400 5300 4800
(2100 - 10100) (2000 - 9700) (2000 - 9700) (1900 - 9500) (1800 - 9000) (1700 - 8700) (1700 - 8500) (1500 - 7700)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 6600 6300 6300 6100 5800 5600 5400 4900
(800 - 11700) (800 - 11300) (800 - 11200) (800 - 11000) (700 - 10300) (700 - 10000) (700 - 9800) (600 - 8900)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 7300 7000 7000 6800 6400 6200 6100 5500
(1500 - 12500) (1400 - 12000) (1400 - 11900) (1300 - 11700) (1300 - 11000) (1200 - 10700) (1200 - 10400) (1100 - 9500)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 17800 17100 16900 16600 15600 15100 14700 13400

(6500 - 27700) (6200 - 26600) (6100 - 26400) (6000 - 25900) (5600 - 24500) (5400 - 23800) (5300 - 23200) (4800 - 21200) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Gent et al. (2003)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences of respiratory symptom-days are rounded to the nearest 100. Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) Exposure Metric

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Study Ages Lag

distributed lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -17 December 2006

### Table E-11. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.9 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 24100 23000 22800 22400 21000 20400 19800 18000
(3900 - 41600) (3700 - 39900) (3700 - 39700) (3600 - 38900) (3400 - 36700) (3300 - 35600) (3200 - 34700) (2900 - 31600)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 38100 36500 36200 35500 33500 32500 31700 28800
(17400 - 55800) (16600 - 53700) (16500 - 53400) (16100 - 52400) (15200 - 49600) (14700 - 48200) (14300 - 47100) (12900 - 43000)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 35000 33600 33300 32700 30800 29900 29100 26400
(13800 - 53300) (13200 - 51200) (13100 - 50900) (12800 - 50000) (12000 - 47300) (11600 - 45900) (11300 - 44800) (10200 - 41000)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 25100 24000 23800 23400 22000 21300 20800 18800
(8200 - 40000) (7800 - 38400) (7700 - 38200) (7600 - 37400) (7100 - 35300) (6800 - 34300) (6700 - 33500) (6000 - 30500)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 26100 25000 24800 24200 22800 22000 21500 19400
(3200 - 46300) (3100 - 44400) (3000 - 44100) (3000 - 43200) (2800 - 40800) (2700 - 39500) (2600 - 38500) (2300 - 35000)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 29000 27700 27500 27000 25400 24500 24000 21700
(5700 - 49300) (5500 - 47300) (5400 - 47000) (5300 - 46100) (5000 - 43500) (4800 - 42200) (4700 - 41200) (4200 - 37600)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 70200 67300 66800 65400 61600 59600 58100 52700

(25500 - 109400)

(24400 - 105100)

(24200 - 104300)

(23600 - 102400) (22200 - 96700) (21400 - 93800) (20800 - 91600) (18800 - 83500) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences of mortality per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth; incidences of respiratory symptom-days per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest 100. Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) Ages Lag Exposure Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study



### Abt Associates Inc. E -18 December 2006

### Table E-12. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Boston, MA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%)

0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 11% 10.5% 10.4% 10.2% 9.6% 9.3% 9% 8.2%
(1.8% - 18.9%) (1.7% - 18.2%) (1.7% - 18.1%) (1.6% - 17.7%) (1.5% - 16.7%) (1.5% - 16.2%) (1.4% - 15.8%) (1.3% - 14.4%)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 17.3% 16.6% 16.5% 16.2% 15.3% 14.8% 14.4% 13.1%
(7.9% - 25.4%) (7.6% - 24.5%) (7.5% - 24.3%) (7.3% - 23.9%) (6.9% - 22.6%) (6.7% - 21.9%) (6.5% - 21.4%) (5.9% - 19.6%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 16% 15.3% 15.2% 14.9% 14% 13.6% 13.3% 12%
(6.3% - 24.3%) (6% - 23.3%) (6% - 23.2%) (5.8% - 22.7%) (5.5% - 21.5%) (5.3% - 20.9%) (5.1% - 20.4%) (4.6% - 18.7%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 11.4% 10.9% 10.9% 10.6% 10% 9.7% 9.5% 8.6%
(3.7% - 18.2%) (3.5% - 17.5%) (3.5% - 17.4%) (3.4% - 17%) (3.2% - 16.1%) (3.1% - 15.6%) (3% - 15.2%) (2.7% - 13.9%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 1 hr max. none 9.5% 9.1% 9% 8.8% 8.3% 8% 7.8% 7.1%
(1.2% - 16.9%) (1.1% - 16.2%) (1.1% - 16.1%) (1.1% - 15.8%) (1% - 14.9%) (1% - 14.4%) (0.9% - 14%) (0.9% - 12.8%)
0 - 12 1-day lag 8 hr max. none 10.6% 10.1% 10% 9.8% 9.2% 8.9% 8.7% 7.9%
(2.1% - 17.9%) (2% - 17.2%) (2% - 17.1%) (1.9% - 16.8%) (1.8% - 15.8%) (1.8% - 15.4%) (1.7% - 15%) (1.5% - 13.7%)
0 - 12 0-day lag 1 hr max. PM2.5 13.7% 13.1% 13% 12.8% 12% 11.6% 11.3% 10.3%

(5% - 21.3%) (4.8% - 20.5%) (4.7% - 20.4%) (4.6% - 20%) (4.3% - 18.9%) (4.2% - 18.3%) (4.1% - 17.9%) (3.7% - 16.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 .

****This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- wheeze Gent et al. (2003) Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- shortness of breath Gent et al. (2003) Lag

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003)

Respiratory symptoms among asthmatic medication-users -- chest tightness Gent et al. (2003) distributed lag Exposure

Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, non-accidental Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages



### Abt Associates Inc. E -19 December 2006

### Table E-13. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 33 31 29 26 23 22 19 14 (11 - 55) (10 - 52) (10 - 48) (9 - 43) (8 - 39) (7 - 36) (6 - 32) (5 - 24) all 1 hr max. none 314 300 288 268 249 238 222 183 (99 - 525) (95 - 501) (91 - 482) (85 - 448) (79 - 417) (75 - 399) (70 - 372) (58 - 307) all 1 hr max. none 118 113 108 101 93 89 83 69 (37 - 199) (35 - 190) (34 - 182) (31 - 170) (29 - 157) (28 - 151) (26 - 140) (21 - 116) all 24 hr avg. none 16 15 14 12 11 10 9 7 (-14 - 45) (-13 - 42) (-12 - 39) (-11 - 35) (-10 - 31) (-9 - 29) (-8 - 26) (-6 - 19) all 24 hr avg. none 26 24 22 20 18 17 15 11 (10 - 41) (9 - 39) (9 - 36) (8 - 32) (7 - 29) (6 - 27) (6 - 24) (4 - 18) all 24 hr avg. CO 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 6 (4 - 24) (4 - 23) (4 - 21) (3 - 19) (3 - 17) (3 - 16) (2 - 14) (2 - 10) all 24 hr avg. NO2 12 12 11 10 9 8 7 5 (2 - 23) (2 - 21) (2 - 20) (2 - 18) (2 - 16) (1 - 15) (1 - 13) (1 - 10) all 24 hr avg. PM10 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 7 (-6 - 36) (-5 - 34) (-5 - 32) (-5 - 28) (-4 - 25) (-4 - 24) (-3 - 21) (-2 - 16) all 24 hr avg. SO2 11 10 9 8 7 7 6 5 (0 - 21) (0 - 20) (0 - 18) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 14) (0 - 12) (0 - 9) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag Study



### Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*



### Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 20 December 2006

### Table E-14. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) all 1 hr max. none 5.8 5.6 5.4 5 4.6 4.4 4.1 3.4 (1.9 - 9.8) (1.8 - 9.3) (1.7 - 9) (1.6 - 8.3) (1.5 - 7.7) (1.4 - 7.4) (1.3 - 6.9) (1.1 - 5.7) all 1 hr max. none 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.3 (0.7 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.6 - 3.4) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.5 - 2.9) (0.5 - 2.8) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.4 - 2.2) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.6) (-0.2 - 0.5) (-0.2 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient.



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 



### Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*



### Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Study



### Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 21 December 2006

### Table E-15. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 1 hr max. none 1.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% (0.5% - 2.5%) (0.5% - 2.4%) (0.4% - 2.3%) (0.4% - 2.1%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.3% - 1.5%) all 1 hr max. none 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag Study

Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 22 December 2006

### Table E-16. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 55 52 50 47 44 43 40 34 (18 - 91) (18 - 87) (17 - 84) (16 - 79) (15 - 74) (14 - 71) (13 - 67) (11 - 57) all 1 hr max. none 427 412 401 381 361 350 335 294 (136 - 712) (131 - 687) (127 - 669) (121 - 636) (115 - 603) (111 - 585) (106 - 559) (93 - 493) all 1 hr max. none 161 156 151 144 136 132 126 111 (51 - 271) (49 - 261) (47 - 254) (45 - 242) (43 - 229) (41 - 222) (39 - 212) (35 - 187) all 24 hr avg. none 26 25 24 22 21 20 19 16 (-23 - 73) (-22 - 70) (-21 - 68) (-20 - 64) (-19 - 60) (-18 - 57) (-17 - 54) (-14 - 46) all 24 hr avg. none 42 40 39 36 34 33 31 26 (16 - 68) (15 - 65) (15 - 63) (14 - 59) (13 - 55) (13 - 53) (12 - 50) (10 - 43) all 24 hr avg. CO 23 22 22 20 19 18 17 15 (7 - 40) (7 - 38) (6 - 37) (6 - 34) (6 - 32) (5 - 31) (5 - 29) (4 - 25) all 24 hr avg. NO2 20 19 19 18 16 16 15 13 (4 - 37) (3 - 35) (3 - 34) (3 - 32) (3 - 30) (3 - 29) (3 - 27) (2 - 23) all 24 hr avg. PM10 25 24 23 22 20 20 18 16 (-10 - 59) (-9 - 57) (-9 - 55) (-8 - 51) (-8 - 48) (-8 - 46) (-7 - 44) (-6 - 37) all 24 hr avg. SO2 17 17 16 15 14 14 13 11 (0 - 34) (0 - 33) (0 - 32) (0 - 30) (0 - 28) (0 - 27) (0 - 25) (0 - 22) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Study

Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -23 December 2006

### Table E-17. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) all 1 hr max. none 7.9 7.7 7.5 7.1 6.7 6.5 6.2 5.5 (2.5 - 13.2) (2.4 - 12.8) (2.4 - 12.4) (2.3 - 11.8) (2.1 - 11.2) (2.1 - 10.9) (2 - 10.4) (1.7 - 9.2) all 1 hr max. none 3 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.1 (0.9 - 5) (0.9 - 4.9) (0.9 - 4.7) (0.8 - 4.5) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.7 - 3.9) (0.6 - 3.5) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (-0.4 - 1.4) (-0.4 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag Study

Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. E -24 December 2006

### Table E-18. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Chicago, IL, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 1 hr max. none 2% 2% 1.9% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.6% 1.4% (0.6% - 3.4%) (0.6% - 3.3%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.6% - 3%) (0.5% - 2.9%) (0.5% - 2.8%) (0.5% - 2.7%) (0.4% - 2.3%) all 1 hr max. none 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.4% - 1.2%) (-0.4% - 1.1%) (-0.3% - 1.1%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.2%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.2% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Health Effects*

Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Study

Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Ages Lag

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -25 December 2006

### Table E-19. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 19 18 17 15 14 14 13 10 (-12 - 49) (-11 - 46) (-11 - 44) (-9 - 39) (-9 - 37) (-9 - 36) (-8 - 33) (-6 - 26) all 24 hr avg. none 12 11 11 9 9 9 8 6 (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 18) (3 - 16) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (2 - 11) all 24 hr avg. none 11 11 10 9 9 8 8 6 (0 - 23) (0 - 21) (0 - 21) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 17) (0 - 15) (0 - 12) all 24 hr avg. none 10 9 9 8 7 7 6 5 (4 - 15) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 12) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) all 24 hr avg. CO 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 (2 - 9) (1 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. NO2 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (0 - 5) all 24 hr avg. PM10 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 (-2 - 13) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 11) (-2 - 10) (-2 - 10) (-1 - 9) (-1 - 7) all 24 hr avg. SO2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) 65+ 1 hr max. none 45 43 42 37 36 35 32 27 (12 - 79) (11 - 75) (11 - 72) (10 - 65) (9 - 63) (9 - 60) (8 - 56) (7 - 47)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 26 December 2006

### Table E-20. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.7 (-0.8 - 3.5) (-0.8 - 3.3) (-0.8 - 3.2) (-0.7 - 2.8) (-0.6 - 2.7) (-0.6 - 2.6) (-0.6 - 2.4) (-0.5 - 1.9) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0 - 1.6) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) 65+ 1 hr max. none 20.9 19.8 19.2 17.3 16.6 16 14.9 12.4 (5.3 - 36.2) (5.1 - 34.4) (4.9 - 33.4) (4.4 - 30) (4.2 - 28.8) (4.1 - 27.8) (3.8 - 25.9) (3.2 - 21.6)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 27 December 2006

### Table E-21. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 65+ 1 hr max. none 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% (0.3% - 2%) (0.3% - 1.9%) (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1.5%) (0.2% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.2%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 28 December 2006

### Table E-22. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 49 47 46 43 42 40 39 35 (-31 - 128) (-30 - 123) (-29 - 120) (-27 - 112) (-26 - 109) (-25 - 105) (-25 - 102) (-22 - 91) all 24 hr avg. none 31 30 29 27 27 26 25 22 (10 - 52) (10 - 50) (10 - 49) (9 - 45) (9 - 44) (9 - 43) (8 - 41) (7 - 37) all 24 hr avg. none 30 28 28 26 25 24 24 21 (-1 - 59) (-1 - 57) (-1 - 56) (-1 - 52) (-1 - 51) (-1 - 49) (-1 - 47) (-1 - 42) all 24 hr avg. none 25 24 24 22 21 21 20 18 (10 - 40) (9 - 39) (9 - 38) (8 - 35) (8 - 34) (8 - 33) (8 - 32) (7 - 29) all 24 hr avg. CO 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 (4 - 24) (4 - 23) (4 - 22) (4 - 21) (3 - 20) (3 - 19) (3 - 19) (3 - 17) all 24 hr avg. NO2 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 (2 - 22) (2 - 21) (2 - 21) (2 - 19) (2 - 19) (2 - 18) (2 - 18) (2 - 16) all 24 hr avg. PM10 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 (-6 - 35) (-6 - 34) (-5 - 33) (-5 - 31) (-5 - 30) (-5 - 29) (-5 - 28) (-4 - 25) all 24 hr avg. SO2 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 (0 - 20) (0 - 20) (0 - 19) (0 - 18) (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) 65+ 1 hr max. none 89 85 84 78 76 73 71 64 (23 - 153) (22 - 147) (22 - 145) (20 - 135) (20 - 132) (19 - 127) (18 - 123) (16 - 111)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness



### Abt Associates Inc. E -29 December 2006

### Table E-23. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.1 3 2.9 2.8 2.5 (-2.2 - 9.2) (-2.1 - 8.8) (-2.1 - 8.6) (-1.9 - 8) (-1.9 - 7.8) (-1.8 - 7.5) (-1.8 - 7.3) (-1.6 - 6.5) all 24 hr avg. none 2.2 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.6 (0.8 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.6) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.7 - 3.3) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 3) (0.5 - 2.7) all 24 hr avg. none 2.1 2 2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 (-0.1 - 4.2) (-0.1 - 4.1) (-0.1 - 4) (0 - 3.7) (0 - 3.6) (0 - 3.5) (0 - 3.4) (0 - 3) all 24 hr avg. none 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 (0.7 - 2.9) (0.7 - 2.8) (0.6 - 2.7) (0.6 - 2.5) (0.6 - 2.5) (0.6 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.5 - 2.1) all 24 hr avg. CO 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 (0.2 - 1.6) (0.1 - 1.5) (0.1 - 1.5) (0.1 - 1.4) (0.1 - 1.3) (0.1 - 1.3) (0.1 - 1.3) (0.1 - 1.1) all 24 hr avg. PM10 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 (-0.4 - 2.5) (-0.4 - 2.4) (-0.4 - 2.4) (-0.4 - 2.2) (-0.4 - 2.2) (-0.3 - 2.1) (-0.3 - 2) (-0.3 - 1.8) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.4) (0 - 1.4) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1) 65+ 1 hr max. none 40.9 39.3 38.6 36 35.2 33.9 32.9 29.5 (10.5 - 70.6) (10.1 - 67.9) (9.9 - 66.7) (9.2 - 62.1) (9 - 60.8) (8.7 - 58.6) (8.4 - 56.8) (7.5 - 51.1)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. E -30 December 2006

### Table E-24. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Cleveland, OH, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% (-0.4% - 1.7%) (-0.4% - 1.7%) (-0.4% - 1.6%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) (-0.3% - 1.4%) (-0.3% - 1.4%) (-0.3% - 1.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. none 1.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.1% (0% - 3.2%) (0% - 3%) (0% - 3%) (0% - 2.8%) (0% - 2.7%) (0% - 2.6%) (0% - 2.5%) (0% - 2.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2.1%) (0.5% - 2%) (0.4% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.5%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% (-0.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.3% - 1.6%) (-0.3% - 1.6%) (-0.3% - 1.5%) (-0.2% - 1.5%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) 65+ 1 hr max. none 2.2% 2.2% 2.1% 2% 1.9% 1.9% 1.8% 1.6% (0.6% - 3.9%) (0.6% - 3.7%) (0.5% - 3.7%) (0.5% - 3.4%) (0.5% - 3.3%) (0.5% - 3.2%) (0.5% - 3.1%) (0.4% - 2.8%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz et al. (1996) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

avg of 1-day and 2-day lags Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Hospital admissions, respiratory illness



### Abt Associates Inc. E -31 December 2006

### Table E-25. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 24 22 21 21 17 16 15 11 (-8 - 56) (-7 - 51) (-7 - 49) (-7 - 48) (-6 - 40) (-5 - 38) (-5 - 35) (-4 - 27) all 24 hr avg. none 12 11 11 11 9 8 8 6 (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 18) (4 - 18) (3 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (2 - 10) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 107 102 99 97 87 83 78 66 (-17 - 229) (-17 - 218) (-16 - 212) (-16 - 209) (-14 - 186) (-13 - 178) (-13 - 168) (-11 - 142) all 1 hr max. none 58 55 54 53 47 45 42 36 (18 - 98) (17 - 93) (17 - 91) (17 - 89) (15 - 79) (14 - 76) (13 - 72) (11 - 61) all 24 hr avg. none 29 27 26 25 21 20 18 14 (-27 - 85) (-25 - 78) (-24 - 75) (-23 - 73) (-20 - 62) (-18 - 57) (-17 - 53) (-13 - 41) all 24 hr avg. none 11 10 10 9 8 7 7 5 (-1 - 23) (-1 - 21) (-1 - 20) (-1 - 20) (-1 - 17) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 14) (-1 - 11) all 24 hr avg. none 10 9 9 9 7 7 6 5 (4 - 16) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 14) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) all 24 hr avg. CO 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. NO2 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 (1 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (0 - 4) all 24 hr avg. PM10 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 3 (-2 - 14) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 10) (-2 - 10) (-1 - 9) (-1 - 7) all 24 hr avg. SO2 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) all 24 hr avg. none 9 9 8 8 7 6 6 4 (-7 - 25) (-7 - 23) (-7 - 22) (-6 - 22) (-5 - 18) (-5 - 17) (-5 - 16) (-3 - 12) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric



### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US

Cities (2004) Lag



### Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects* Study Ages



### distributed lag distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, respiratory 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 32 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Lag Health Effects* Study Ages



### Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -19 -18 -17 -16 -14 -13 -12 -9

(-55 - 16) (-51 - 15) (-49 - 14) (-48 - 14) (-40 - 12) (-37 - 11) (-34 - 10) (-26 - 8) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -5 -4 -4 -4 -3 -3 -3 -2

(-41 - 30) (-38 - 28) (-36 - 27) (-35 - 26) (-29 - 22) (-27 - 20) (-25 - 19) (-19 - 14) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3

(-30 - 40) (-28 - 37) (-27 - 36) (-26 - 35) (-22 - 29) (-20 - 27) (-19 - 25) (-14 - 19) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 16 15 14 14 12 11 10 8

(-19 - 50) (-17 - 46) (-17 - 44) (-16 - 43) (-14 - 37) (-13 - 34) (-12 - 31) (-9 - 24) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -13 -12 -11 -11 -9 -9 -8 -6 (-46 - 19) (-42 - 17) (-41 - 17) (-39 - 16) (-33 - 14) (-31 - 13) (-28 - 12) (-22 - 9) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 12 11 11 11 9 8 8 6 (-20 - 43) (-18 - 40) (-18 - 38) (-17 - 37) (-14 - 31) (-13 - 29) (-12 - 27) (-9 - 21) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 (-35 - 30) (-32 - 28) (-31 - 27) (-30 - 26) (-25 - 22) (-24 - 20) (-22 - 19) (-17 - 14) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 (-32 - 32) (-30 - 30) (-29 - 29) (-28 - 28) (-23 - 24) (-22 - 22) (-20 - 20) (-15 - 16) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions 0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag 2-day lag

3-day lag

0-day lag

1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 33 December 2006

### Table E-26. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1.2 1.1 1 1 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 (-0.4 - 2.7) (-0.3 - 2.5) (-0.3 - 2.4) (-0.3 - 2.3) (-0.3 - 2) (-0.3 - 1.8) (-0.2 - 1.7) (-0.2 - 1.3) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 5.2 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.2 4 3.8 3.2 (-0.8 - 11.1) (-0.8 - 10.6) (-0.8 - 10.3) (-0.8 - 10.1) (-0.7 - 9) (-0.7 - 8.6) (-0.6 - 8.2) (-0.5 - 6.9) all 1 hr max. none 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.7 (0.9 - 4.7) (0.8 - 4.5) (0.8 - 4.4) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.7 - 3.8) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.6 - 3.5) (0.5 - 2.9) all 24 hr avg. none 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1 1 0.9 0.7 (-1.3 - 4.1) (-1.2 - 3.8) (-1.2 - 3.6) (-1.1 - 3.6) (-1 - 3) (-0.9 - 2.8) (-0.8 - 2.6) (-0.6 - 2) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-0.1 - 1.1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 1) (-0.1 - 1) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1.1) (-0.3 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.9) (-0.2 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.6) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, respiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidental Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Ages Lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study



### distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 34 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Ages Lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study



### Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -7.6 -7.1 -6.8 -6.6 -5.5 -5.1 -4.7 -3.6

(-22.3 - 6.4) (-20.6 - 5.9) (-19.7 - 5.7) (-19.2 - 5.5) (-16.1 - 4.7) (-14.9 - 4.3) (-13.7 - 4) (-10.5 - 3.1) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -1.9 -1.7 -1.7 -1.6 -1.4 -1.3 -1.2 -0.9

(-16.3 - 12) (-15.1 - 11.1) (-14.5 - 10.7) (-14.1 - 10.4) (-11.8 - 8.8) (-11 - 8.1) (-10.1 - 7.5) (-7.7 - 5.8) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 2.3 2.1 2 2 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.1

(-12.1 - 16.1) (-11.2 - 14.9) (-10.7 - 14.3) (-10.4 - 13.9) (-8.8 - 11.7) (-8.1 - 10.9) (-7.5 - 10.1) (-5.7 - 7.7) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 6.5 6 5.8 5.6 4.8 4.4 4.1 3.1

(-7.6 - 20.1) (-7 - 18.6) (-6.7 - 17.9) (-6.5 - 17.4) (-5.5 - 14.7) (-5.1 - 13.7) (-4.7 - 12.6) (-3.6 - 9.7) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -5.2 -4.8 -4.6 -4.4 -3.7 -3.5 -3.2 -2.4 (-18.5 - 7.5) (-17 - 7) (-16.3 - 6.7) (-15.9 - 6.5) (-13.3 - 5.5) (-12.4 - 5.1) (-11.4 - 4.7) (-8.7 - 3.6) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 5 4.6 4.4 4.3 3.6 3.4 3.1 2.4 (-8 - 17.3) (-7.4 - 16) (-7 - 15.4) (-6.9 - 15) (-5.8 - 12.6) (-5.4 - 11.8) (-4.9 - 10.8) (-3.8 - 8.3) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.7 -0.7 -0.6 -0.6 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.3 (-14.1 - 12) (-13 - 11.1) (-12.5 - 10.7) (-12.1 - 10.4) (-10.2 - 8.8) (-9.5 - 8.1) (-8.7 - 7.5) (-6.7 - 5.8) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-13 - 13) (-12 - 12) (-11.5 - 11.5) (-11.2 - 11.2) (-9.4 - 9.5) (-8.7 - 8.8) (-8 - 8.1) (-6.1 - 6.3) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 

### Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### 0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag

0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 35 December 2006

### Table E-27. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% (-0.2% - 2.4%) (-0.2% - 2.3%) (-0.2% - 2.3%) (-0.2% - 2.2%) (-0.1% - 2%) (-0.1% - 1.9%) (-0.1% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 1.5%) all 1 hr max. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.3% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.8%) (-0.2% - 0.7%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 1.2% 1.1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% (-0.9% - 3.2%) (-0.9% - 2.9%) (-0.8% - 2.8%) (-0.8% - 2.8%) (-0.7% - 2.3%) (-0.6% - 2.2%) (-0.6% - 2%) (-0.4% - 1.5%) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US

Cities (2004) Lag

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects* Study Ages

distributed lag distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, respiratory 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 36 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Lag Health Effects* Study Ages

Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.7% -0.7% -0.7% -0.6% -0.5% -0.5% -0.5% -0.3%

(-2.1% - 0.6%) (-2% - 0.6%) (-1.9% - 0.5%) (-1.8% - 0.5%) (-1.6% - 0.5%) (-1.4% - 0.4%) (-1.3% - 0.4%) (-1% - 0.3%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.2% -0.2% -0.2% -0.2% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1%

(-1.6% - 1.2%) (-1.5% - 1.1%) (-1.4% - 1%) (-1.4% - 1%) (-1.1% - 0.8%) (-1.1% - 0.8%) (-1% - 0.7%) (-0.7% - 0.6%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

(-1.2% - 1.6%) (-1.1% - 1.4%) (-1% - 1.4%) (-1% - 1.3%) (-0.8% - 1.1%) (-0.8% - 1.1%) (-0.7% - 1%) (-0.6% - 0.7%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3%

(-0.7% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.8%) (-0.6% - 1.7%) (-0.6% - 1.7%) (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.5% - 1.3%) (-0.5% - 1.2%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.6% -0.6% -0.6% -0.6% -0.5% -0.4% -0.4% -0.3% (-2.3% - 0.9%) (-2.1% - 0.9%) (-2% - 0.8%) (-2% - 0.8%) (-1.7% - 0.7%) (-1.5% - 0.6%) (-1.4% - 0.6%) (-1.1% - 0.5%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-1% - 2.2%) (-0.9% - 2%) (-0.9% - 1.9%) (-0.9% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.6%) (-0.7% - 1.5%) (-0.6% - 1.4%) (-0.5% - 1%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% 0% (-1.8% - 1.5%) (-1.6% - 1.4%) (-1.6% - 1.3%) (-1.5% - 1.3%) (-1.3% - 1.1%) (-1.2% - 1%) (-1.1% - 0.9%) (-0.8% - 0.7%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (-1.6% - 1.6%) (-1.5% - 1.5%) (-1.4% - 1.4%) (-1.4% - 1.4%) (-1.2% - 1.2%) (-1.1% - 1.1%) (-1% - 1%) (-0.8% - 0.8%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions 0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag 2-day lag

3-day lag

0-day lag

1-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 37 December 2006

### Table E-28. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 46 43 43 42 38 35 34 29 (-15 - 106) (-14 - 100) (-14 - 98) (-14 - 97) (-12 - 87) (-11 - 81) (-11 - 79) (-9 - 67) all 24 hr avg. none 24 22 22 22 19 18 18 15 (8 - 39) (7 - 37) (7 - 36) (7 - 36) (6 - 32) (6 - 30) (6 - 29) (5 - 25) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 158 150 148 147 134 128 125 111 (-26 - 336) (-24 - 320) (-24 - 316) (-24 - 313) (-22 - 287) (-21 - 274) (-20 - 268) (-18 - 239) all 1 hr max. none 86 82 81 80 73 70 68 61 (27 - 144) (26 - 137) (25 - 136) (25 - 134) (23 - 123) (22 - 117) (21 - 115) (19 - 102) all 24 hr avg. none 56 53 52 51 46 43 42 36 (-52 - 162) (-49 - 151) (-48 - 150) (-48 - 147) (-42 - 132) (-40 - 124) (-39 - 120) (-33 - 103) all 24 hr avg. none 21 20 19 19 17 16 16 13 (-2 - 44) (-2 - 41) (-2 - 40) (-2 - 40) (-2 - 36) (-2 - 33) (-2 - 33) (-2 - 28) all 24 hr avg. none 19 18 18 17 16 15 14 12 (7 - 31) (7 - 29) (7 - 29) (7 - 28) (6 - 25) (6 - 24) (5 - 23) (5 - 20) all 24 hr avg. CO 11 10 10 10 9 8 8 7 (3 - 18) (3 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 15) (2 - 14) (2 - 13) (2 - 11) all 24 hr avg. NO2 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 (2 - 17) (2 - 16) (2 - 16) (2 - 15) (1 - 14) (1 - 13) (1 - 13) (1 - 11) all 24 hr avg. PM10 11 11 11 10 9 9 8 7 (-4 - 27) (-4 - 25) (-4 - 25) (-4 - 25) (-4 - 22) (-3 - 21) (-3 - 20) (-3 - 17) all 24 hr avg. SO2 8 7 7 7 6 6 6 5 (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 15) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) (0 - 12) (0 - 12) (0 - 10) all 24 hr avg. none 18 17 16 16 14 13 13 11 (-14 - 46) (-13 - 44) (-13 - 43) (-13 - 42) (-12 - 38) (-11 - 36) (-11 - 35) (-9 - 30) 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag

Mortality, respiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. (2004) Exposure Metric

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US

Cities (2004) Lag

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects* Study Ages

distributed lag distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model



### Abt Associates Inc. E -38 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Exposure Metric Lag Health Effects* Study Ages Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Other Pollutants in Model
Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -37 -34 -34 -33 -30 -28 -27 -23

(-109 - 30) (-102 - 29) (-100 - 28) (-99 - 28) (-88 - 25) (-82 - 23) (-80 - 23) (-68 - 19) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -9 -8 -8 -8 -7 -7 -7 -6

(-79 - 57) (-74 - 53) (-73 - 53) (-72 - 52) (-64 - 46) (-60 - 44) (-58 - 42) (-50 - 36) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 11 10 10 10 9 8 8 7

(-58 - 76) (-55 - 71) (-54 - 70) (-53 - 69) (-47 - 62) (-44 - 58) (-43 - 57) (-37 - 48) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 31 29 29 28 25 24 23 20

(-37 - 94) (-34 - 89) (-34 - 87) (-33 - 86) (-30 - 77) (-28 - 73) (-27 - 71) (-23 - 60) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -25 -23 -23 -23 -20 -19 -18 -16 (-90 - 36) (-84 - 34) (-83 - 33) (-82 - 33) (-73 - 29) (-68 - 27) (-66 - 27) (-56 - 23) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 24 22 22 22 19 18 18 15 (-38 - 81) (-36 - 76) (-35 - 75) (-35 - 74) (-31 - 66) (-29 - 62) (-28 - 61) (-24 - 52) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 -2 (-69 - 57) (-64 - 53) (-63 - 52) (-62 - 52) (-55 - 46) (-52 - 43) (-50 - 42) (-43 - 36) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (-63 - 61) (-59 - 57) (-58 - 57) (-57 - 56) (-51 - 50) (-48 - 47) (-47 - 46) (-39 - 39) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 2-day lag

3-day lag 2-day lag

3-day lag

0-day lag

1-day lag 0-day lag

1-day lag

Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Abt Associates Inc. E -39 December 2006

### Table E-29. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 2.2 2.1 2.1 2 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.4 (-0.7 - 5.2) (-0.7 - 4.8) (-0.7 - 4.8) (-0.7 - 4.7) (-0.6 - 4.2) (-0.6 - 3.9) (-0.5 - 3.8) (-0.5 - 3.3) all 24 hr avg. none 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.2) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 7.7 7.3 7.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.4 (-1.3 - 16.3) (-1.2 - 15.5) (-1.2 - 15.4) (-1.2 - 15.2) (-1.1 - 13.9) (-1 - 13.3) (-1 - 13) (-0.9 - 11.6) all 1 hr max. none 4.2 4 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.3 2.9 (1.3 - 7) (1.2 - 6.6) (1.2 - 6.6) (1.2 - 6.5) (1.1 - 6) (1.1 - 5.7) (1 - 5.6) (0.9 - 4.9) all 24 hr avg. none 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.1 2 1.7 (-2.5 - 7.8) (-2.4 - 7.4) (-2.3 - 7.3) (-2.3 - 7.2) (-2.1 - 6.4) (-1.9 - 6) (-1.9 - 5.8) (-1.6 - 5) all 24 hr avg. none 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (-0.1 - 2.1) (-0.1 - 2) (-0.1 - 2) (-0.1 - 1.9) (-0.1 - 1.7) (-0.1 - 1.6) (-0.1 - 1.6) (-0.1 - 1.3) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 (0.4 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 (-0.2 - 1.3) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.8) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 (-0.7 - 2.3) (-0.6 - 2.1) (-0.6 - 2.1) (-0.6 - 2.1) (-0.6 - 1.9) (-0.5 - 1.7) (-0.5 - 1.7) (-0.4 - 1.5) 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag 0-day lag
distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Ages Lag

Huang et al. (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, respiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -40 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric Health Effects* Study Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Ages Lag

Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -14.8 -13.9 -13.7 -13.5 -12 -11.2 -10.9 -9.3

(-43.7 - 12.3) (-40.8 - 11.5) (-40.3 - 11.4) (-39.7 - 11.2) (-35.3 - 10) (-33 - 9.4) (-32.1 - 9.1) (-27.2 - 7.8) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -3.6 -3.4 -3.3 -3.3 -2.9 -2.7 -2.7 -2.3

(-31.9 - 22.9) (-29.8 - 21.5) (-29.4 - 21.2) (-29 - 20.9) (-25.8 - 18.7) (-24.1 - 17.5) (-23.5 - 17.1) (-19.9 - 14.6) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 4.4 4.1 4 4 3.6 3.3 3.2 2.8

(-23.5 - 30.5) (-22 - 28.6) (-21.7 - 28.2) (-21.4 - 27.8) (-19 - 24.9) (-17.8 - 23.4) (-17.3 - 22.8) (-14.7 - 19.5) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 12.5 11.7 11.6 11.4 10.2 9.5 9.3 7.9

(-14.7 - 38) (-13.8 - 35.6) (-13.6 - 35.2) (-13.4 - 34.7) (-11.9 - 31.1) (-11.2 - 29.2) (-10.9 - 28.4) (-9.3 - 24.3) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -10 -9.3 -9.2 -9.1 -8.1 -7.6 -7.4 -6.3 (-36.3 - 14.4) (-33.9 - 13.5) (-33.5 - 13.3) (-32.9 - 13.1) (-29.3 - 11.7) (-27.4 - 11) (-26.6 - 10.7) (-22.6 - 9.1) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 9.5 8.9 8.8 8.7 7.7 7.3 7.1 6 (-15.5 - 32.6) (-14.5 - 30.6) (-14.3 - 30.2) (-14.1 - 29.8) (-12.5 - 26.7) (-11.7 - 25.1) (-11.4 - 24.4) (-9.7 - 20.9) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -1.4 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.1 -1.1 -1 -0.9 (-27.6 - 22.8) (-25.8 - 21.4) (-25.4 - 21.1) (-25 - 20.8) (-22.3 - 18.6) (-20.9 - 17.5) (-20.3 - 17) (-17.2 - 14.5) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 (-25.4 - 24.6) (-23.8 - 23.1) (-23.5 - 22.8) (-23.1 - 22.5) (-20.6 - 20.1) (-19.2 - 18.9) (-18.7 - 18.4) (-15.9 - 15.7) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag 0-day lag

1-day lag

2-day lag

3-day lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled),



### Abt Associates Inc. E -41 December 2006

### Table E-30. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Detroit, MI, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 1%) (-0.1% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 1.7% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% (-0.3% - 3.6%) (-0.3% - 3.4%) (-0.3% - 3.4%) (-0.3% - 3.3%) (-0.2% - 3%) (-0.2% - 2.9%) (-0.2% - 2.8%) (-0.2% - 2.5%) all 1 hr max. none 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% (-0.6% - 1.7%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.4%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.3% - 1.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% (-0.1% - 1.8%) (-0.1% - 1.7%) (-0.1% - 1.7%) (-0.1% - 1.6%) (-0.1% - 1.5%) (-0.1% - 1.4%) (-0.1% - 1.3%) (-0.1% - 1.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 2.2% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.4% (-1.8% - 5.9%) (-1.7% - 5.6%) (-1.7% - 5.5%) (-1.7% - 5.4%) (-1.5% - 4.9%) (-1.4% - 4.6%) (-1.3% - 4.5%) (-1.1% - 3.8%) 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag
distributed lag

Mortality, respiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Huang et al. (2004) Exposure Metric

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Schwartz -- 14 US

Cities (2004) Lag

Mortality, nonaccidental Health Effects* Study Ages

distributed lag distributed lag

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Ito (2003) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Ito (2003)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model



### Abt Associates Inc. E -42 December 20060.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Exposure Metric Lag Health Effects* Study Ages Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Other Pollutants in Model
Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -1.4% -1.3% -1.3% -1.3% -1.2% -1.1% -1.1% -0.9%

(-4.2% - 1.2%) (-3.9% - 1.1%) (-3.9% - 1.1%) (-3.8% - 1.1%) (-3.4% - 1%) (-3.2% - 0.9%) (-3.1% - 0.9%) (-2.6% - 0.8%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.3% -0.2%

(-3.1% - 2.2%) (-2.9% - 2.1%) (-2.8% - 2%) (-2.8% - 2%) (-2.5% - 1.8%) (-2.3% - 1.7%) (-2.3% - 1.6%) (-1.9% - 1.4%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%

(-2.3% - 2.9%) (-2.1% - 2.8%) (-2.1% - 2.7%) (-2.1% - 2.7%) (-1.8% - 2.4%) (-1.7% - 2.3%) (-1.7% - 2.2%) (-1.4% - 1.9%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8%

(-1.4% - 3.7%) (-1.3% - 3.4%) (-1.3% - 3.4%) (-1.3% - 3.3%) (-1.2% - 3%) (-1.1% - 2.8%) (-1% - 2.7%) (-0.9% - 2.3%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -1.2% -1.2% -1.2% -1.1% -1% -0.9% -0.9% -0.8% (-4.5% - 1.8%) (-4.2% - 1.7%) (-4.2% - 1.7%) (-4.1% - 1.6%) (-3.7% - 1.5%) (-3.4% - 1.4%) (-3.3% - 1.3%) (-2.8% - 1.1%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% (-1.9% - 4.1%) (-1.8% - 3.8%) (-1.8% - 3.8%) (-1.8% - 3.7%) (-1.6% - 3.3%) (-1.5% - 3.1%) (-1.4% - 3.1%) (-1.2% - 2.6%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none -0.2% -0.2% -0.2% -0.2% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% (-3.5% - 2.9%) (-3.2% - 2.7%) (-3.2% - 2.6%) (-3.1% - 2.6%) (-2.8% - 2.3%) (-2.6% - 2.2%) (-2.5% - 2.1%) (-2.2% - 1.8%) Ito (2003) 65+ 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-3.2% - 3.1%) (-3% - 2.9%) (-2.9% - 2.9%) (-2.9% - 2.8%) (-2.6% - 2.5%) (-2.4% - 2.4%) (-2.3% - 2.3%) (-2% - 2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 2-day lag

3-day lag 2-day lag

3-day lag

0-day lag

1-day lag 0-day lag

1-day lag

Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled), Hospital admissions (unscheduled),

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).



### Abt Associates Inc. E -43 December 2006

### Table E-31. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 22 20 19 17 16 15 13 8 (1 - 42) (1 - 39) (1 - 37) (1 - 32) (1 - 30) (1 - 28) (1 - 25) (0 - 15) all 24 hr avg. none 11 10 10 8 8 7 6 4 (4 - 18) (3 - 16) (3 - 16) (3 - 13) (3 - 13) (2 - 12) (2 - 11) (1 - 6) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 70 66 65 59 57 55 52 42 (6 - 132) (6 - 126) (6 - 123) (5 - 112) (5 - 109) (5 - 104) (5 - 99) (4 - 80) all 1 hr max. none 58 55 54 49 48 46 43 35 (18 - 98) (17 - 93) (17 - 91) (15 - 83) (15 - 81) (14 - 77) (14 - 73) (11 - 59) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 3 (-1 - 16) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 15) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 11) (-1 - 10) (0 - 6) all 24 hr avg. none 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 3 (3 - 13) (3 - 12) (3 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 5) all 24 hr avg. CO 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (1 - 5) (1 - 4) (0 - 3) all 24 hr avg. NO2 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) all 24 hr avg. PM10 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 (-2 - 11) (-2 - 10) (-2 - 10) (-1 - 8) (-1 - 8) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 4) all 24 hr avg. SO2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 6) (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 2) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 44 December 2006

### Table E-32. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 2 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.2 (0.2 - 3.9) (0.2 - 3.7) (0.2 - 3.6) (0.2 - 3.3) (0.2 - 3.2) (0.1 - 3.1) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.3) all 1 hr max. none 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1 (0.5 - 2.9) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.7) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (-0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). 

### Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 45 December 2006

### Table E-33. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) all 1 hr max. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 46 December 2006

### Table E-34. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 18 16 16 13 13 12 11 7 (1 - 34) (1 - 32) (1 - 31) (1 - 26) (1 - 25) (1 - 23) (1 - 21) (0 - 13) all 24 hr avg. none 9 8 8 7 6 6 5 3 (3 - 15) (3 - 13) (3 - 13) (2 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (1 - 5) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 63 59 58 53 51 48 46 36 (6 - 119) (5 - 113) (5 - 110) (5 - 100) (5 - 97) (4 - 92) (4 - 87) (3 - 69) all 1 hr max. none 53 50 49 44 43 40 38 30 (16 - 88) (16 - 84) (15 - 82) (14 - 74) (13 - 72) (13 - 68) (12 - 64) (9 - 51) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 2 (-1 - 13) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 12) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 5) all 24 hr avg. none 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 2 (2 - 10) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 7) (2 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 4) all 24 hr avg. CO 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (1 - 5) (1 - 4) (1 - 4) (1 - 4) (0 - 2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 (1 - 6) (1 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 1 (-1 - 9) (-1 - 8) (-1 - 8) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 7) (-1 - 6) (-1 - 5) (-1 - 3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 5) (0 - 4) (0 - 4) (0 - 3) (0 - 3) (0 - 2) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -47 December 2006

### Table E-35. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 (0.2 - 3.5) (0.2 - 3.3) (0.2 - 3.2) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.6) (0.1 - 2) all 1 hr max. none 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 0.9 (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.4 - 2.4) (0.4 - 2.2) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.5) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) (0 - 0.1) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental



### Abt Associates Inc. E -48 December 2006

### Table E-36. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Houston, TX, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) all 1 hr max. none 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.1% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.8%) all 1 hr max. none 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19

US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -49 December 2006

### Table E-37. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 31 30 27 22 20 19 16 9 (-74 - 135) (-72 - 131) (-66 - 120) (-52 - 95) (-49 - 90) (-46 - 83) (-38 - 69) (-22 - 41) all 24 hr avg. none 67 64 59 47 44 41 34 20 (22 - 111) (22 - 107) (20 - 98) (16 - 78) (15 - 74) (14 - 68) (11 - 56) (7 - 33) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 50 48 44 35 33 30 25 15 (0 - 98) (0 - 95) (0 - 88) (0 - 69) (0 - 65) (0 - 61) (0 - 50) (0 - 30) all 24 hr avg. none 57 56 51 40 38 35 29 17 (22 - 93) (21 - 90) (19 - 83) (15 - 65) (15 - 62) (13 - 57) (11 - 47) (7 - 28) all 24 hr avg. CO 32 31 28 22 21 20 16 10 (9 - 54) (9 - 53) (8 - 48) (7 - 38) (6 - 36) (6 - 33) (5 - 28) (3 - 16) all 24 hr avg. NO2 28 27 25 19 18 17 14 8 (5 - 50) (5 - 49) (4 - 45) (3 - 35) (3 - 34) (3 - 31) (3 - 26) (1 - 15) all 24 hr avg. PM10 34 33 30 24 23 21 17 10 (-13 - 81) (-13 - 78) (-12 - 72) (-9 - 57) (-9 - 54) (-8 - 50) (-7 - 41) (-4 - 25) all 24 hr avg. SO2 24 23 21 17 16 15 12 7 (0 - 47) (0 - 46) (0 - 42) (0 - 33) (0 - 31) (0 - 29) (0 - 24) (0 - 14) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 38 37 34 28 27 25 21 13 (-16 - 90) (-16 - 88) (-15 - 82) (-12 - 67) (-11 - 64) (-11 - 61) (-9 - 51) (-6 - 32)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 28 27 26 23 22 21 19 14 (-36 - 90) (-35 - 89) (-34 - 85) (-29 - 73) (-28 - 71) (-27 - 69) (-24 - 61) (-18 - 45)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** 0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- springMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 50 December 2006

### Table E-38. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.8 - 1.4) (-0.8 - 1.4) (-0.7 - 1.3) (-0.5 - 1) (-0.5 - 0.9) (-0.5 - 0.9) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.1) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.4)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 (-0.4 - 1.1) (-0.4 - 1.1) (-0.4 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.9) (-0.3 - 0.9) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.3 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.5)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Other Pollutants in Model Lag Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- springMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Ages

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Exposure Metric

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

0-day lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 51 December 2006

### Table E-39. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.2% - 1%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (-0.4% - 2.1%) (-0.4% - 2%) (-0.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 1.5%) (-0.3% - 1.5%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.2%) (-0.1% - 0.7%)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% (-1% - 2.5%) (-1% - 2.4%) (-0.9% - 2.3%) (-0.8% - 2%) (-0.8% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.7%) (-0.5% - 1.2%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** 0-day lag Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- springMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 52 December 2006

### Table E-40. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 24 23 21 15 15 13 11 7 (-58 - 105) (-55 - 100) (-50 - 91) (-36 - 66) (-35 - 64) (-32 - 59) (-26 - 48) (-16 - 29) all 24 hr avg. none 52 49 45 33 32 29 24 14 (17 - 86) (17 - 82) (15 - 74) (11 - 54) (11 - 53) (10 - 48) (8 - 39) (5 - 23) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 38 37 33 24 24 22 18 11 (0 - 76) (0 - 73) (0 - 66) (0 - 48) (0 - 47) (0 - 43) (0 - 35) (0 - 21) all 24 hr avg. none 45 43 39 28 27 25 20 12 (17 - 72) (16 - 69) (15 - 62) (11 - 45) (10 - 44) (10 - 41) (8 - 33) (5 - 20) all 24 hr avg. CO 25 24 21 16 15 14 11 7 (7 - 42) (7 - 40) (6 - 37) (5 - 27) (4 - 26) (4 - 24) (3 - 19) (2 - 12) all 24 hr avg. NO2 22 21 19 14 13 12 10 6 (4 - 39) (4 - 37) (3 - 34) (2 - 25) (2 - 24) (2 - 22) (2 - 18) (1 - 11) all 24 hr avg. PM10 27 25 23 17 16 15 12 7 (-10 - 63) (-10 - 60) (-9 - 55) (-6 - 40) (-6 - 39) (-6 - 35) (-5 - 29) (-3 - 17) all 24 hr avg. SO2 18 18 16 12 11 10 8 5 (0 - 37) (0 - 35) (0 - 32) (0 - 23) (0 - 22) (0 - 21) (0 - 17) (0 - 10) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 34 33 31 24 24 23 19 12 (-15 - 82) (-14 - 80) (-13 - 74) (-10 - 59) (-10 - 58) (-10 - 55) (-8 - 46) (-5 - 28)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 27 26 25 21 21 20 18 13 (-35 - 87) (-34 - 85) (-32 - 81) (-27 - 69) (-27 - 68) (-26 - 66) (-23 - 58) (-17 - 43)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -53 December 2006

### Table E-41. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 (-0.6 - 1.1) (-0.6 - 1.1) (-0.5 - 1) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.3 - 0.6) (-0.3 - 0.5) (-0.2 - 0.3) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. none 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.2) (0 - 0.1) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.3)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 (-0.4 - 1) (-0.4 - 1) (-0.4 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.3 - 0.7) (-0.2 - 0.5)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag

0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag Ages

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Exposure Metric

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. ***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** Mortality, cardiorespiratory

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Lag Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- springMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -54 December 2006

### Table E-42. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Los Angeles, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Huang et al. (2004)***** all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 1%) (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% (-0.3% - 1.9%) (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.3% - 1.7%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.6%)

Linn et al. (2000)****** 30+ 24 hr avg. none 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (-0.9% - 2.4%) (-0.9% - 2.3%) (-0.9% - 2.2%) (-0.7% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.9%) (-0.7% - 1.8%) (-0.6% - 1.6%) (-0.5% - 1.2%)

*Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. ** ***Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles County.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 0-day lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag distributed lag

******Los Angeles is defined in this study as Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The spring C-R function was run with April - June air quality data; the summer C-R function was run with July - September air quality data. Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness --

summer Hospital admissions (unscheduled), pulmonary illness -- springMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)*****

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)***** Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)  Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004)** *** Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Huang et al. -- 19 US

Cities (2004)***** 0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -55 December 2006

### Table E-43. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 17 15 15 13 13 12 11 9 (6 - 28) (5 - 25) (5 - 25) (4 - 22) (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (3 - 15) all 24 hr avg. none 59 54 54 47 46 42 41 33 (37 - 81) (34 - 75) (34 - 74) (30 - 65) (29 - 63) (27 - 58) (26 - 56) (21 - 46) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 59 54 53 47 46 42 41 33 (28 - 90) (26 - 82) (25 - 81) (22 - 71) (22 - 69) (20 - 64) (19 - 62) (16 - 50) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 15 14 13 12 11 10 10 8 (1 - 28) (1 - 26) (1 - 26) (1 - 23) (1 - 22) (0 - 20) (0 - 20) (0 - 16) all 24 hr avg. none 12 11 11 10 9 9 8 7 (5 - 19) (4 - 18) (4 - 18) (4 - 16) (4 - 15) (3 - 14) (3 - 13) (3 - 11) all 24 hr avg. CO 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 (2 - 11) (2 - 11) (2 - 10) (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 6) all 24 hr avg. NO2 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 (1 - 11) (1 - 10) (1 - 10) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) all 24 hr avg. PM10 7 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 (-3 - 17) (-3 - 16) (-2 - 15) (-2 - 14) (-2 - 13) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 12) (-2 - 10) all 24 hr avg. SO2 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 (0 - 10) (0 - 9) (0 - 9) (0 - 8) (0 - 8) (0 - 7) (0 - 7) (0 - 6) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

### Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Lag Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric



### distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 56 December 2006

### Table E-44. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) all 24 hr avg. none 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.1 3 2.8 2.7 2.2 (2.5 - 5.3) (2.3 - 4.9) (2.2 - 4.9) (2 - 4.3) (1.9 - 4.2) (1.8 - 3.8) (1.7 - 3.7) (1.4 - 3) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.1 3 2.8 2.7 2.2 (1.8 - 5.9) (1.7 - 5.4) (1.7 - 5.4) (1.5 - 4.7) (1.4 - 4.6) (1.3 - 4.2) (1.3 - 4.1) (1 - 3.3) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 (0 - 1.9) (0 - 1.7) (0 - 1.7) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.3) (0 - 1.1) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.3 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 (-0.2 - 1.1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.2 - 1) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.8) (-0.1 - 0.6) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.4) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Lag Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 



### Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric



### Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).

### Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 57 December 2006

### Table E-45. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.5% - 1%) (0.4% - 0.9%) (0.4% - 0.9%) (0.4% - 0.8%) (0.4% - 0.8%) (0.3% - 0.7%) (0.3% - 0.7%) (0.3% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.3% - 1%) (0.3% - 1%) (0.3% - 0.9%) (0.3% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.6%) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.4% (0% - 1.5%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.4%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.2%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.9%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% (-0.1% - 0.9%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.7%) (-0.1% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.5%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Lag Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag

0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 58 December 2006

### Table E-46. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 30 28 28 26 26 24 24 21 (10 - 50) (10 - 47) (9 - 47) (9 - 43) (9 - 42) (8 - 40) (8 - 40) (7 - 35) all 24 hr avg. none 107 101 101 93 91 86 85 75 (67 - 146) (63 - 138) (63 - 137) (58 - 127) (57 - 124) (54 - 117) (53 - 116) (47 - 103) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 106 100 100 92 90 85 84 75 (51 - 161) (48 - 152) (48 - 151) (44 - 140) (43 - 137) (41 - 129) (40 - 128) (36 - 114) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 26 25 25 23 23 21 21 19 (1 - 51) (1 - 48) (1 - 48) (1 - 44) (1 - 44) (1 - 41) (1 - 41) (1 - 36) all 24 hr avg. none 22 21 21 19 19 18 17 15 (8 - 35) (8 - 33) (8 - 33) (7 - 30) (7 - 30) (7 - 28) (7 - 28) (6 - 25) all 24 hr avg. CO 12 11 11 11 10 10 10 9 (4 - 21) (3 - 19) (3 - 19) (3 - 18) (3 - 18) (3 - 17) (3 - 16) (3 - 15) all 24 hr avg. NO2 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 (2 - 19) (2 - 18) (2 - 18) (2 - 17) (2 - 16) (2 - 15) (1 - 15) (1 - 14) all 24 hr avg. PM10 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 (-5 - 31) (-5 - 29) (-5 - 29) (-4 - 27) (-4 - 26) (-4 - 25) (-4 - 24) (-4 - 22) all 24 hr avg. SO2 9 8 8 8 8 7 7 6 (0 - 18) (0 - 17) (0 - 17) (0 - 16) (0 - 15) (0 - 14) (0 - 14) (0 - 13) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag Lag Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -59 December 2006

### Table E-47. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 2 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.4 (0.7 - 3.3) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.6 - 2.9) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.5 - 2.3) all 24 hr avg. none 7 6.6 6.6 6.1 6 5.7 5.6 5 (4.4 - 9.6) (4.2 - 9.1) (4.2 - 9.1) (3.9 - 8.4) (3.8 - 8.2) (3.6 - 7.7) (3.5 - 7.6) (3.1 - 6.8) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 7 6.6 6.6 6.1 6 5.6 5.6 4.9 (3.3 - 10.6) (3.2 - 10) (3.1 - 10) (2.9 - 9.2) (2.8 - 9) (2.7 - 8.5) (2.7 - 8.4) (2.4 - 7.5) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.2 (0.1 - 3.4) (0.1 - 3.2) (0.1 - 3.2) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.7) (0.1 - 2.4) all 24 hr avg. none 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.5 - 2.2) (0.5 - 2.2) (0.5 - 2) (0.5 - 2) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.6) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 (0.2 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 (0.1 - 1.3) (0.1 - 1.2) (0.1 - 1.2) (0.1 - 1.1) (0.1 - 1.1) (0.1 - 1) (0.1 - 1) (0.1 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 (-0.3 - 2) (-0.3 - 1.9) (-0.3 - 1.9) (-0.3 - 1.8) (-0.3 - 1.7) (-0.3 - 1.6) (-0.3 - 1.6) (-0.2 - 1.4) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 (0 - 1.2) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 1.1) (0 - 1) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.8) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Lag Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E -60 December 2006

### Table E-48. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Philadelphia, PA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) all 24 hr avg. none 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% (0.8% - 1.8%) (0.8% - 1.7%) (0.8% - 1.7%) (0.7% - 1.6%) (0.7% - 1.5%) (0.7% - 1.5%) (0.7% - 1.4%) (0.6% - 1.3%) all 24 hr avg. TSP, SO2 1.3% 1.2% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 0.9% (0.6% - 2%) (0.6% - 1.9%) (0.6% - 1.9%) (0.5% - 1.7%) (0.5% - 1.7%) (0.5% - 1.6%) (0.5% - 1.6%) (0.4% - 1.4%) Huang et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.1% 1% (0.1% - 2.8%) (0.1% - 2.6%) (0.1% - 2.6%) (0.1% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2.4%) (0.1% - 2.2%) (0.1% - 2.2%) (0% - 2%) all 24 hr avg. none 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% (0.5% - 1.9%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.8%) (0.4% - 1.7%) (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.4% - 1.5%) (0.3% - 1.3%) all 24 hr avg. CO 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) all 24 hr avg. NO2 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) all 24 hr avg. PM10 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% (-0.3% - 1.7%) (-0.3% - 1.6%) (-0.3% - 1.6%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.3%) (-0.2% - 1.2%) all 24 hr avg. SO2 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% (0% - 1%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.7%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 0-day lag distributed lag 0-day lag

0-day lag

0-day lag distributed lag 1-day lag

1-day lag
distributed lag Lag Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** 

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Huang et al. -- 19 US Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Exposure Metric

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Health Effects* Study Ages

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm).Mortality, nonaccidental

Mortality, cardiorespiratoryMortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Moolgavkar et al.

(1995)

Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory Mortality, cardiorespiratory



### Abt Associates Inc. E -61 December 2006

### Table E-49. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 8 8 8 7 7 7 6 5 (-25 - 42) (-25 - 41) (-23 - 39) (-21 - 35) (-21 - 34) (-20 - 34) (-19 - 31) (-16 - 26) all 24 hr avg. none 12 12 11 10 10 10 9 8 (4 - 21) (4 - 20) (4 - 19) (4 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 17) (3 - 15) (3 - 13) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag Exposure

Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag

distributed lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 62 December 2006

### Table E-50. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 (-2.1 - 3.4) (-2 - 3.3) (-1.9 - 3.1) (-1.8 - 2.9) (-1.7 - 2.8) (-1.7 - 2.7) (-1.5 - 2.5) (-1.3 - 2.2) all 24 hr avg. none 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1.1) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Study Ages



### distributed lag distributed lag Lag Exposure

Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 63 December 2006

### Table E-51. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.6% - 1%) (-0.6% - 1%) (-0.6% - 0.9%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.8%) (-0.5% - 0.7%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Study

distributed lag distributed lag Ages Lag Exposure Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 64 December 2006

### Table E-52. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 (-37 - 60) (-36 - 58) (-35 - 57) (-32 - 53) (-32 - 52) (-31 - 50) (-30 - 49) (-27 - 44) all 24 hr avg. none 18 17 17 16 15 15 14 13 (6 - 30) (6 - 29) (6 - 28) (5 - 26) (5 - 26) (5 - 25) (5 - 24) (4 - 22) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages

distributed lag distributed lag Lag Exposure

Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E -65 December 2006

### Table E-53. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 (-3 - 4.9) (-2.9 - 4.8) (-2.8 - 4.6) (-2.6 - 4.3) (-2.6 - 4.2) (-2.5 - 4.1) (-2.4 - 4) (-2.2 - 3.6) all 24 hr avg. none 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 2) (0.4 - 1.8) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study

distributed lag distributed lag Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E -66 December 2006

### Table E-54. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Sacramento, CA, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (-0.9% - 1.4%) (-0.8% - 1.4%) (-0.8% - 1.3%) (-0.8% - 1.3%) (-0.8% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 1.2%) (-0.7% - 1.2%) (-0.6% - 1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Exposure Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*

distributed lag distributed lag Study Ages Lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -67 December 2006

### Table E-55. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 (-4 - 9) (-4 - 8) (-4 - 8) (-3 - 6) (-3 - 6) (-2 - 5) (-2 - 5) (-1 - 3) all 24 hr avg. none 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 (1 - 4) (1 - 3) (1 - 3) (1 - 3) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 2) (0 - 1) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 

### distributed lag Exposure

Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag



### distributed lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 68 December 2006

### Table E-56. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 

### Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 (-1.2 - 2.7) (-1.1 - 2.4) (-1 - 2.3) (-0.8 - 1.8) (-0.8 - 1.7) (-0.7 - 1.5) (-0.6 - 1.3) (-0.4 - 0.9) all 24 hr avg. none 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Study Ages



### distributed lag distributed lag Lag Exposure

Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 69 December 2006

### Table E-57. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.2% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.2% - 0.4%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (-0.1% - 0.1%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Study

distributed lag distributed lag Ages Lag Exposure Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 70 December 2006

### Table E-58. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 (-9 - 20) (-9 - 19) (-8 - 18) (-8 - 16) (-7 - 15) (-7 - 15) (-6 - 14) (-5 - 12) all 24 hr avg. none 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) (1 - 7) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 6) (1 - 5) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages

distributed lag distributed lag Lag Exposure

Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E -71 December 2006

### Table E-59. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 (-2.6 - 5.6) (-2.5 - 5.4) (-2.4 - 5.2) (-2.2 - 4.7) (-2.1 - 4.5) (-2 - 4.3) (-1.8 - 4) (-1.5 - 3.3) all 24 hr avg. none 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1 0.8 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.4 - 2.2) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.4 - 1.8) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. ** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study

distributed lag distributed lag Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E -72 December 2006

### Table E-60. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: St. Louis, MO, April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4 Bell et al. (2004) all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.4% - 0.9%) (-0.4% - 0.9%) (-0.4% - 0.8%) (-0.4% - 0.8%) (-0.3% - 0.7%) (-0.3% - 0.7%) (-0.3% - 0.6%) all 24 hr avg. none 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Exposure Metric

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)Mortality, nonaccidentalMortality, nonaccidental Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects*

distributed lag distributed lag Study Ages Lag



### Abt Associates Inc. E -73 December 2006

### Table E-61. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 (2 - 12) (2 - 10) (2 - 11) (2 - 9) (2 - 9) (2 - 8) (2 - 8) (1 - 7) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 

### distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 74 December 2006

### Table E-62. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4


### all 24 hr avg. none 1.2 1 1.1 1 1 0.8 0.9 0.7 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1.2) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. 

### distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 75 December 2006

### Table E-63. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study Ages Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. E - 76 December 2006

### Table E-64. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 14 12 13 12 12 10 11 10 (5 - 23) (4 - 20) (4 - 21) (4 - 19) (4 - 19) (3 - 17) (4 - 18) (3 - 16) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Ages Lag Exposure Metric

distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study



### Abt Associates Inc. E -77 December 2006

### Table E-65. Estimated Incidence of Health Risks per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 2.4 2.1 2.2 2 2 1.8 1.9 1.7 (0.8 - 3.9) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.8 - 3.7) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.6 - 3) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.6 - 2.9) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Ages Lag Exposure Metric

distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Health Effects per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study



### Abt Associates Inc. E -78 December 2006

### Table E-66. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Health Risks Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: Washington, D.C., April - September, Based on Adjusting 2002 O 3 

### Concentrations

0.084/4*** 0.084/3 0.080/4 0.074/5 0.074/4 0.074/3 0.070/4 0.064/4
all 24 hr avg. none 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) *Health effects are associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.

 This alternative 8-hr standard assumes an alternative rounding convention where the standard is specified to the third decimal place. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O3 coefficient. Ages Lag Exposure Metric

distributed lag

** *These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Health Effects Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Mortality, nonaccidental Bell et al. -- 95 US

Cities (2004) Other Pollutants in Model Health Effects* Study



### Abt Associates Inc. E -79 December 2006

# Appendix F: Calculation of Risk Above Policy Relevant Background

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 F-1 Appendix F: Calculation of Risk Above Policy Relevant Background



# The estimated policy relevant background (PRB) ozone concentrations that we are using are derived from GEOS-CHEM model predictions, and the measured ambient ozone concentrations are sometimes lower than these PRB values. There is a question of how to best treat this in our estimation of risk above PRB.

Let x 0 

# denote the “as is” (ambient) O 3 

# level, and y 0 

# denote the corresponding baseline incidence rate. The difference in health effects incidence, Δy = y 0 

# - y, corresponding to a given difference in ambient O 3 

# levels, Δx = (x 0 

# – x) > 0 can be calculated for log-linear concentrationresponse functions by:

Δy = y 0 

# [1 – e - βΔx 

# ] . (1)

If we let Δx = c – b, where c = the “as is” O 3 

# concentration and b = the PRB O 3 

# concentration, the risk above background (Δy = y 0 

# – y b 

# = the difference in health effects incidence rates from the as-is concentration incidence rate, y 0 

# , to the PRB concentration incidence rate, y b 

# ) can similarly be calculated for log-linear concentration- response functions by equation 1 (where now Δy = y 0 

# – y b 

# and Δx = c – b).
Without loss of generality we can take the baseline incidence rate y 0 

# to be 1. Then
Δy = [1 – e - βΔx 

# ]. (2)
Now we consider the implications of different ways of calculating risk above background. To simplify this analysis, we use the approximation to equation (2), valid for β ≈ 0,
Δy = β Δx = β (c – b) . (3)

Let c t 

# be the measured concentrations (t=1 to N), b t 

# the true background concentrations, and B the estimated background concentration. Then the overall bias, θ, in the estimated background is given by 

#  
t t N 

# bB 1 

#  (4)

The true risk above background, R, is 

# 

 



    
t tt

t t 

# bcxyR )(   (5)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 F-2 If the measured concentrations c t 

# are always greater than the estimated background B, then equation 3 (approximating equation 2) gives an estimated risk above background of



# BcBcR

t t t t 

#   



#   )( ˆ (6)

and the error E of this estimate is


#     NbBBcbcRRE

t t t t t tt 

#  

#    )()()( ˆ (7)

However, the measured concentrations are sometimes smaller than the estimated background. In these cases we cannot use equation 6 since it is not physically realizable. The error E of our risk estimate will depend on how we calculate risk in this situation.

Method I. When c t 

# < B we set the risk to zero in equation 6, with the rationale that, since ambient concentrations cannot go below background, we lower the estimated background concentrations in these cases down to the ambient concentration c t 

# . Then the estimate of risk above background is



# 

 

#  Bct t

t 

# Bc )(  (8)

where Bct

t 

###  

# indicates the summation over all times t when c t 

# > B.

The error E of this estimate is 

# 

 

  

# 

Bct t Bct t t tt

t t 

# Bc NBcbcE )( )()(    (9)

since



#     NBcbc

t t t tt 

# 

   

#   )()( (10)



#      NBcBc bc
Bct t

Bct t t tt

t t 

# 

     

#   



 

# )()()( (11)

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 F-3 

#   



 

# 

     Bct t

Bct t t tt

t t 

# Bc NBc bc )( )()(      (12)

Method II. When c t 

# < B we set the background for that day equal to c t 

# and increase B on other days to yield the original monthly average background concentration, or use some other method of adjusting b t 

# to use daily varying background concentrations B t 

# that are always less then the measured concentrations and whose average is the original monthly average background concentration B. This approach places more credence on the average estimated background than on the estimated background values for individual hours. The error of this estimate of risk above background is given by



#     NbBNbBE

t t t tt 

# 

    

#   ) ()( (13)

Discussion
To recap, the error of the estimate of risk if we use method I is:



# 

 

# 

Bct t I

t 

# Bc NE )( 

and the error of the estimate of risk if we use method II is:



#   NE II 

# 

.
If we have overestimated background, 0   

# , and 

# 0

 II 

# E . Since the second term in E I 

# , 

# 

 

# 
Bct t

t 

# Bc )(  , must be  0, III 

# EE  . If, as is likely, 

# 

 

# 
Bct t

t 

# Bc )(  is smaller in absolute

value than 

#   N , then III



# EE  0

.

If we have overestimated background, then, the first method would be preferable; if background is underestimated, then the second method would be more accurate. Since we believe that we have overestimated background in cases where the observed concentration is lower than the estimates background obtained from the GEOS-CHEM model, we have applied the first method in estimating risks in this draft report.

# Appendix G: Explanation of How a Distributed Lag Model Can Be Used in the Risk

Assessment

# Abt Associates Inc. December 2006 G-1 A linear concentration-response (C-R) function with a distributed lag has the following form:

ntn t t t t 

# x

xxx y

   

#   



2211 0


# Without loss of generality, we illustrate the application of a distributed lag model to a risk assessment letting n=2 – i.e., with a model in which today’s mortality is a function of today’s pollutant concentration, x t 

# , yesterday’s pollutant concentration, x t-1 

# , and the day before yesterday’s pollutant concentration, x t-2 

# . The model is:

2211 0



 

#  t t t t 

# xxx y 

. Given this model, the following three equations hold:

2211 0



 

#  t t t t 

# xxx y 

12

110 1



  

#  t t t t 

# xxx y 

t t t t 

# xxx y 21120 2 

#      

# Summing these three equations and collecting terms yields:

221 2

1 2

0 1 1

0 20 2 

# 3

 

  

  

 

#                       

#  
t t i i t i i t i i t t

ti i 

# xx x x x y    

.

Thus a change in the pollutant concentration on day t (i.e., a change in x t 

# ) results in a change in

the sum of mortality cases on days t, t+1, and t+2. In particular, if we let z t 

# denote 

#  

 2 t

ti i 

# y 

# , then



# 

 

#    2

0

i i

t t


# x z 

.

Thus, the change in the sum of mortality incidence on the same day, next day, and day after that equals the sum of the coefficients for the pollutant concentration on the same day, the previous day, and the day before that. Note that the application of a distributed lag model in a risk assessment thus does not require any assumption that the decreases on all the days in the modelare the same. It does require that the distributed lag C-R function is linear. Because the loglinear functions used in the risk assessment are almost linear, the above is a good approximation.

# Appendix H: Additional Results for Five Locations for the Current Standard and Two

Alternative Standards, Based on 2002, 2003, and 2004 Air Quality Data

## Table H-1. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 5 4 3 (-26 - 37) (-20 - 29) (-15 - 22) (-11 - 16) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 9 7 5 (4 - 20) (3 - 15) (2 - 12) (2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 64 55 43 31 (22 - 107) (18 - 91) (14 - 71) (10 - 52) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 445 403 332 261 (141 - 742) (128 - 674) (105 - 556) (83 - 438) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 168 152 125 98 (53 - 282) (48 - 256) (39 - 211) (31 - 166) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 36 18 11 4 (2 - 70) (1 - 35) (1 - 22) (0 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 9 6 2 (6 - 30) (3 - 15) (2 - 9) (1 - 3) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 101 66 52 34 (9 - 191) (6 - 125) (5 - 98) (3 - 65) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 84 55 43 28 (26 - 141) (17 - 93) (14 - 73) (9 - 48) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 56 22 12 5 (-136 - 246) (-52 - 95) (-28 - 51) (-12 - 23) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 121 47 25 11 (41 - 201) (16 - 78) (8 - 42) (4 - 18) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 79 54 43 32 (27 - 132) (18 - 90) (15 - 72) (11 - 54) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Chicago

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2003 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### New York Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta



## Abt Associates Inc. H-1 December 2006

## Table H-2. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 

### distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 (-1.7 - 2.5) (-1.3 - 2) (-1 - 1.5) (-0.7 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 (0.4 - 2) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 8.3 7.5 6.2 4.9 (2.6 - 13.8) (2.4 - 12.5) (2 - 10.3) (1.5 - 8.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.1 2.8 2.3 1.8 (1 - 5.3) (0.9 - 4.8) (0.7 - 3.9) (0.6 - 3.1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 (0.1 - 2) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.6) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3 1.9 1.5 1 (0.3 - 5.6) (0.2 - 3.7) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 1.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.5 1.6 1.3 0.8 (0.8 - 4.2) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.3 - 1.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 (-1.4 - 2.6) (-0.5 - 1) (-0.3 - 0.5) (-0.1 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 0.5 0.3 0.1 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. 

### Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Chicago Location Study



### Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Lag Exposure Metric Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with 2003 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just

Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### New York Houston

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



## Abt Associates Inc. H-2 December 2006

### Table H-3. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

### Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.1% 1.9% 1.6% 1.2% (0.7% - 3.5%) (0.6% - 3.2%) (0.5% - 2.6%) (0.4% - 2.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% (0.2% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0% (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.4%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.1% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% (0.1% - 2.1%) (0.1% - 1.4%) (0.1% - 1.1%) (0% - 0.7%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.3% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.5%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0% 0% (-0.5% - 0.9%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0% (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Chicago

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2003 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards** Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

New York Houston

Los Angeles Atlanta



### Abt Associates Inc. H-3 December 2006

### Table H-4. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 5 4 3 (-26 - 38) (-20 - 29) (-15 - 22) (-11 - 16) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 9 7 5 (4 - 20) (3 - 15) (2 - 12) (2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 33 23 14 (16 - 81) (11 - 55) (8 - 39) (5 - 24) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 394 314 249 183 (125 - 658) (99 - 525) (79 - 417) (58 - 307) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 148 118 93 69 (46 - 250) (37 - 199) (29 - 157) (21 - 116) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 35 22 16 8 (2 - 67) (1 - 42) (1 - 30) (0 - 15) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 11 8 4 (6 - 28) (4 - 18) (3 - 13) (1 - 6) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 93 70 57 42 (9 - 176) (6 - 132) (5 - 109) (4 - 80) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 78 58 48 35 (24 - 130) (18 - 98) (15 - 81) (11 - 59) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 62 31 20 9 (-149 - 271) (-74 - 135) (-49 - 90) (-22 - 41) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 133 67 44 20 (45 - 221) (22 - 111) (15 - 74) (7 - 33) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 60 43 33 24 (20 - 100) (15 - 72) (11 - 55) (8 - 39) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Study Lag Exposure Metric Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2004 O 3

Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Atlanta

Chicago Location

New York Houston



### Abt Associates Inc. H-4 December 2006

### Table H-5. Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 (-1.8 - 2.6) (-1.3 - 1.9) (-1 - 1.5) (-0.7 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.2 - 1) (0.1 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.3 5.8 4.6 3.4 (2.3 - 12.2) (1.9 - 9.8) (1.5 - 7.7) (1.1 - 5.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.8 2.2 1.7 1.3 (0.9 - 4.6) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.5 - 2.9) (0.4 - 2.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 0.6 0.5 0.2 (0.1 - 2) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 0.9) (0 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.7 2 1.7 1.2 (0.3 - 5.2) (0.2 - 3.9) (0.2 - 3.2) (0.1 - 2.3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.3 1.7 1.4 1 (0.7 - 3.8) (0.5 - 2.9) (0.4 - 2.4) (0.3 - 1.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 (-1.6 - 2.8) (-0.8 - 1.4) (-0.5 - 0.9) (-0.2 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 0.7 0.5 0.2 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Chicago

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with 2004 O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just

Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Atlanta Location Study

Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Lag Exposure Metric

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Houston

Los Angeles



### Abt Associates Inc. H-5 December 2006

### Table H-6. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

### Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4 distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (-0.6% - 0.8%) (-0.4% - 0.6%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.9% 1.5% 1.2% 0.9% (0.6% - 3.1%) (0.5% - 2.5%) (0.4% - 2%) (0.3% - 1.5%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% (0.2% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.6%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0% - 0.7%) (0% - 0.5%) (0% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) (0% - 0.1%) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1% 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% (0.1% - 1.9%) (0.1% - 1.5%) (0.1% - 1.2%) (0% - 0.9%) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.4%) (0.2% - 1.1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.1% - 0.7%) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0% (-0.5% - 1%) (-0.3% - 0.5%) (-0.2% - 0.3%) (-0.1% - 0.2%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.1%) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% (0.1% - 0.3%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.2%) (0% - 0.1%) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. (2004)
Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Los Angeles

**Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Study Lag Exposure Metric Percent of Total Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with 2004

O 3 Concentrations and O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**

Atlanta

Chicago Location



### Abt Associates Inc. H-6 December 2006

## Table H-7. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 8 6 4 5 (-2 - 17) (-2 - 14) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 11) 8 6 4 5 (3 - 13) (2 - 10) (2 - 7) (2 - 8) 30 16 17 20 (-27 - 86) (-14 - 45) (-15 - 49) (-18 - 58) 49 26 28 33 (19 - 80) (10 - 41) (11 - 45) (13 - 53) 13 8 6 4 (-2 - 27) (-1 - 16) (-1 - 13) (-1 - 9) 13 8 6 4 (5 - 21) (3 - 13) (2 - 10) (2 - 7) 90 50 24 19 (1 - 178) (0 - 98) (0 - 48) (0 - 37) 104 57 28 22 (40 - 168) (22 - 93) (11 - 45) (8 - 35) 97 53 50 53 (31 - 161) (17 - 89) (16 - 83) (17 - 89) 71 39 36 39 (27 - 114) (15 - 63) (14 - 59) (15 - 63)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 

### coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 

### Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. H-7 December 2006

## Table H-8. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.7) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.5) 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.4 (-0.5 - 1.6) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.3 - 0.9) (-0.3 - 1.1) 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.6 (0.4 - 1.5) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.2 - 1) 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0 - 0.8) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.3) 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.2) 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 (0 - 1.9) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.2 - 1) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.6 (0.3 - 1.8) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 1) 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.2 - 0.7)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 

### coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 

### Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. H-8 December 2006

## Table H-9. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2003 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2003 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.5% (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.1% - 1%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.8%) 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% (-0.5% - 1.7%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.3% - 1%) (-0.4% - 1.1%) 1% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6% (0.4% - 1.6%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1%) 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (-0.1% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 1.2% 0.7% 0.3% 0.3% (0% - 2.4%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.5%) 1.4% 0.8% 0.4% 0.3% (0.5% - 2.3%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.5%) 1.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% (0.3% - 1.8%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.2% - 1%) 0.8% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.2% - 0.7%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O3. Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. H-9 December 2006

## Table H-10. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 8 6 5 3 (-3 - 18) (-2 - 14) (-1 - 10) (-1 - 7) 8 6 5 3 (3 - 13) (2 - 10) (2 - 8) (1 - 5) 23 16 11 7 (-21 - 66) (-14 - 45) (-10 - 31) (-6 - 19) 38 26 18 11 (14 - 61) (10 - 41) (7 - 29) (4 - 18) 16 8 6 3 (0 - 32) (-1 - 16) (-1 - 12) (0 - 6) 14 8 6 3 (5 - 22) (3 - 13) (2 - 9) (1 - 5) 15 50 33 15 (-2 - 31) (0 - 98) (0 - 65) (0 - 30) 14 57 38 17 (5 - 22) (22 - 93) (15 - 62) (7 - 28) 12 53 41 29 (-2 - 26) (17 - 89) (13 - 68) (9 - 49) 13 39 30 21 (5 - 20) (15 - 63) (11 - 48) (8 - 34)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## ` H-10 December 2006

## Table H-11. Estimated Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O3 Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 (-0.2 - 1.2) (-0.1 - 0.9) (-0.1 - 0.7) (-0.1 - 0.5) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4) 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 (-0.4 - 1.2) (-0.3 - 0.8) (-0.2 - 0.6) (-0.1 - 0.4) 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.3) 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0 - 2.3) (0 - 0.5) (0 - 0.4) (0 - 0.2) 1 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.4 - 1.6) (0.1 - 0.4) (0.1 - 0.3) (0 - 0.1) 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 (-0.1 - 1.5) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.7) (0 - 0.3) 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 (0.3 - 1.1) (0.2 - 1) (0.2 - 0.6) (0.1 - 0.3) 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.3 (0 - 0.8) (0.2 - 1) (0.1 - 0.8) (0.1 - 0.5) 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2 - 0.7) (0.1 - 0.5) (0.1 - 0.4)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Incidences per 100,000 relevant population are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Cardiorespiratory Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. H-11 December 2006

## Table H-12. Estimated Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 

## Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Two Alternative 8-Hour Daily Maximum Standards: April - September, Based on Adjusting 2004 O 3 

## Concentrations*

2004 Air Quality 0.084/4*** 0.074/4 0.064/4


### 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (-0.3% - 1.8%) (-0.2% - 1.4%) (-0.2% - 1.1%) (-0.1% - 0.8%) 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% (-0.4% - 1.3%) (-0.3% - 0.9%) (-0.2% - 0.6%) (-0.1% - 0.4%) 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.3%) 0.9% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% (0% - 1.7%) (0% - 0.8%) (0% - 0.6%) (0% - 0.3%) 0.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% (0.3% - 1.2%) (0.1% - 0.6%) (0.1% - 0.4%) (0.1% - 0.2%) 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% 0.2% (-0.1% - 1.3%) (0% - 1.3%) (0% - 0.9%) (0% - 0.4%) 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% 0.2% (0.2% - 0.9%) (0.3% - 1.3%) (0.2% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.4%) 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% (-0.1% - 1.2%) (0.2% - 1%) (0.1% - 0.8%) (0.1% - 0.5%) 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% (0.2% - 1%) (0.2% - 0.7%) (0.1% - 0.5%) (0.1% - 0.4%)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. **Incidence was quantified down to estimated policy relevant background levels. Percents are rounded to the nearest tenth.



### Los Angeles Los Angeles

19 U.S. Cities

New York New York

19 U.S. Cities Houston Houston

19 U.S. Cities

*All results are for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . Results are based on single-pollutant single-city models or a single-pollutant multi-city model estimated in Huang et al. (2004).

***These 8-hr average standards, denoted m/n, are characterized by a concentration of m ppm and an nth daily maximum. So, for example, the current standard is 0.084/4 -- 0.084 ppm, 4th daily maximum 8-hr average. These nth daily maximum standards require that the average of the 3 annual nth daily maxima over a 3-year period be at or below the specified level (e.g., 0.084 ppm). Risk Assessment Location Study Location Percent of Total Incidence of Cardiorespiratory Mortality Associated with O 3 Concentrations that Just Meet the Current and Alternative O 3 Standards**



### Atlanta Atlanta

19 U.S. Cities

Chicago Chicago

19 U.S. Cities



## Abt Associates Inc. H-12 December 2006

# Appendix I: Additional PRB Sensitivity Analyses

### Table I-1. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 14 3 (-26 - 38) (-61 - 87) (-14 - 20) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 28 7 (4 - 20) (9 - 46) (2 - 11) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 11 4 (2 - 12) (4 - 19) (1 - 7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 85 21 (16 - 81) (28 - 141) (7 - 36) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 394 493 298 (125 - 658) (157 - 822) (94 - 498) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 148 186 112 (46 - 250) (58 - 313) (35 - 189) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 27 45 14 (-17 - 69) (-29 - 118) (-9 - 37) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 29 9 (6 - 28) (10 - 48) (3 - 15) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 33 61 16 (-11 - 76) (-20 - 140) (-5 - 36) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 31 8 (6 - 28) (10 - 52) (3 - 13) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 128 159 99 (-21 - 274) (-26 - 339) (-16 - 211) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 70 86 54 (22 - 117) (27 - 145) (17 - 90) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 40 74 19 (-37 - 116) (-68 - 213) (-18 - 55) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 35 54 19 (2 - 67) (3 - 104) (1 - 37) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 27 10 (6 - 28) (9 - 44) (3 - 16) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 93 110 78 (9 - 176) (10 - 208) (7 - 148) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 78 92 65 (24 - 130) (29 - 154) (20 - 109) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 62 85 40 (-149 - 271) (-206 - 372) (-97 - 177) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 133 183 87 (45 - 221) (62 - 304) (29 - 145) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 60 105 30 (20 - 100) (35 - 174) (10 - 50) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 36 12 (8 - 38) (12 - 60) (4 - 21) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 82 129 45 (52 - 112) (81 - 176) (28 - 61) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 17 7 (-36 - 59) (-52 - 85) (-22 - 36) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 25 11 (6 - 29) (9 - 42) (4 - 18) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 7 1 (-6 - 13) (-11 - 24) (-2 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 6 1 (1 - 5) (2 - 10) (0 - 2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 13 5 (3 - 14) (4 - 21) (2 - 8) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Lag Exposure

Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-1 December 2006

### Table I-2. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 17 6 (-37 - 54) (-72 - 103) (-25 - 35) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 33 11 (6 - 29) (11 - 55) (4 - 19) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 15 7 (3 - 17) (5 - 25) (2 - 12) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 69 104 42 (23 - 115) (35 - 173) (14 - 70) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 505 605 410 (161 - 840) (193 - 1005) (130 - 683) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 191 229 155 (60 - 321) (72 - 384) (49 - 260) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 61 81 43 (-38 - 157) (-51 - 210) (-27 - 112) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 38 52 27 (13 - 64) (17 - 86) (9 - 46) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 57 86 36 (-18 - 131) (-28 - 197) (-11 - 82) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 44 18 (10 - 48) (15 - 73) (6 - 30) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 181 212 150 (-30 - 385) (-35 - 451) (-25 - 320) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 99 116 82 (31 - 165) (36 - 194) (26 - 138) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 69 105 43 (-64 - 198) (-98 - 300) (-40 - 125) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 48 17 (2 - 57) (3 - 93) (1 - 32) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 24 8 (5 - 24) (8 - 39) (3 - 14) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 85 103 69 (8 - 161) (9 - 194) (6 - 132) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 71 86 58 (22 - 119) (27 - 144) (18 - 97) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 51 73 31 (-124 - 224) (-178 - 322) (-76 - 138) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 110 158 68 (37 - 184) (53 - 263) (23 - 113) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 105 156 69 (35 - 174) (52 - 258) (23 - 115) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 37 51 26 (12 - 62) (17 - 85) (9 - 43) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 132 181 91 (83 - 180) (114 - 247) (57 - 124) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 16 21 11 (-48 - 78) (-63 - 102) (-35 - 56) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 31 17 (8 - 39) (10 - 51) (6 - 28) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 10 4 (-11 - 23) (-17 - 36) (-6 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 9 3 (2 - 10) (3 - 15) (1 - 6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 20 11 (5 - 25) (7 - 33) (4 - 18) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. I-2 December 2006

### Table I-3. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.9 0.2 (-1.8 - 2.6) (-4.1 - 5.9) (-1 - 1.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.9 0.4 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.1 - 0.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.6 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.2 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.6 0.4 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.1 - 0.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.3 9.2 5.5 (2.3 - 12.2) (2.9 - 15.3) (1.8 - 9.3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.8 3.5 2.1 (0.9 - 4.6) (1.1 - 5.8) (0.7 - 3.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.9 3.3 1.0 (-1.2 - 5) (-2.1 - 8.5) (-0.6 - 2.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 2.1 0.6 (0.4 - 2) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.2 - 1.1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.6 2.9 0.8 (-0.5 - 3.7) (-0.9 - 6.8) (-0.2 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1 - 0.6) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 6.2 7.7 4.8 (-1 - 13.3) (-1.3 - 16.5) (-0.8 - 10.2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.4 4.2 2.6 (1.1 - 5.7) (1.3 - 7) (0.8 - 4.4) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 2.0 3.6 0.9 (-1.8 - 5.6) (-3.3 - 10.3) (-0.9 - 2.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.6 0.6 (0.1 - 2) (0.1 - 3.1) (0 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.8 0.3 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.3 - 1.3) (0.1 - 0.5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.7 3.2 2.3 (0.3 - 5.2) (0.3 - 6.1) (0.2 - 4.3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.3 2.7 1.9 (0.7 - 3.8) (0.8 - 4.5) (0.6 - 3.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.9 0.4 (-1.6 - 2.8) (-2.2 - 3.9) (-1 - 1.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 1.9 0.9 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.3 - 1.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.2 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.5 2.4 0.8 (0.5 - 2.5) (0.8 - 4) (0.3 - 1.4) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 5.4 8.5 2.9 (3.4 - 7.4) (5.3 - 11.6) (1.8 - 4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.4 0.6 (-3 - 4.8) (-4.3 - 6.9) (-1.8 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.1 0.9 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.3 - 1.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.9 0.4 (-1.7 - 3.6) (-3.2 - 6.9) (-0.6 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.7 0.3 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.5 2.2 0.8 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.3 - 1.4) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Lag Exposure

Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-3 December 2006

### Table I-4. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with "As Is" O 3 

### Concentrations: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.1 0.4 (-2.5 - 3.6) (-4.9 - 6.9) (-1.7 - 2.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 2.2 0.8 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.3 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.5 2.2 1.0 (0.5 - 2.5) (0.7 - 3.6) (0.3 - 1.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.9 0.8 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.7 - 3.2) (0.3 - 1.3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 9.4 11.2 7.6 (3 - 15.6) (3.6 - 18.7) (2.4 - 12.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.6 4.3 2.9 (1.1 - 6) (1.3 - 7.2) (0.9 - 4.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4.3 5.8 3.1 (-2.7 - 11.3) (-3.7 - 15.1) (-2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.8 3.7 2.0 (0.9 - 4.6) (1.2 - 6.2) (0.7 - 3.3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.8 4.2 1.7 (-0.9 - 6.3) (-1.4 - 9.6) (-0.6 - 4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.1 0.9 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.7 - 3.5) (0.3 - 1.5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 8.8 10.3 7.3 (-1.4 - 18.7) (-1.7 - 21.9) (-1.2 - 15.5) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 4.8 5.6 4.0 (1.5 - 8) (1.8 - 9.4) (1.2 - 6.7) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 3.4 5.1 2.1 (-3.1 - 9.6) (-4.7 - 14.6) (-2 - 6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.4 0.5 (0.1 - 1.7) (0.1 - 2.7) (0 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.7 0.2 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.2 - 1.2) (0.1 - 0.4) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.5 3.0 2.0 (0.2 - 4.7) (0.3 - 5.7) (0.2 - 3.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.1 2.5 1.7 (0.7 - 3.5) (0.8 - 4.2) (0.5 - 2.9) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.8 0.3 (-1.3 - 2.4) (-1.9 - 3.4) (-0.8 - 1.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1.7 0.7 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.2 - 1.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1.7 0.8 (0.4 - 2) (0.6 - 2.9) (0.3 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.4 3.4 1.7 (0.8 - 4.1) (1.1 - 5.6) (0.6 - 2.8) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 8.7 11.9 6.0 (5.5 - 11.9) (7.5 - 16.2) (3.8 - 8.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.7 0.9 (-3.9 - 6.4) (-5.2 - 8.4) (-2.8 - 4.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.9 2.5 1.4 (0.6 - 3.2) (0.8 - 4.2) (0.5 - 2.3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.9 2.8 1.1 (-3.1 - 6.7) (-4.8 - 10.3) (-1.8 - 3.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.7 2.5 1.0 (0.6 - 2.8) (0.8 - 4.2) (0.3 - 1.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.6 3.5 1.9 (0.9 - 4.4) (1.2 - 5.8) (0.6 - 3.2) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Above:**

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) Location Study Lag

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-4 December 2006

### Table I-5. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 12 2 (-20 - 29) (-53 - 76) (-9 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 24 4 (3 - 15) (8 - 40) (1 - 7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 10 3 (2 - 9) (3 - 16) (1 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 30 67 12 (10 - 50) (23 - 112) (4 - 19) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 310 412 220 (98 - 519) (131 - 689) (70 - 368) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 117 155 83 (37 - 197) (49 - 262) (26 - 139) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 20 36 9 (-12 - 51) (-22 - 93) (-5 - 23) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 23 6 (4 - 21) (8 - 38) (2 - 9) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 49 10 (-8 - 54) (-16 - 113) (-3 - 23) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 25 5 (4 - 20) (8 - 42) (2 - 8) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 105 138 78 (-17 - 226) (-22 - 294) (-13 - 167) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 57 75 42 (18 - 96) (23 - 126) (13 - 71) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 29 60 12 (-26 - 83) (-55 - 172) (-11 - 35) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 22 39 9 (1 - 42) (2 - 75) (1 - 18) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 11 19 5 (4 - 18) (6 - 32) (2 - 8) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 70 86 56 (6 - 133) (8 - 163) (5 - 106) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 58 72 47 (18 - 98) (23 - 121) (15 - 79) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 32 52 13 (-77 - 141) (-126 - 228) (-31 - 57) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 69 112 28 (23 - 115) (38 - 187) (9 - 46) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 43 76 15 (15 - 72) (25 - 126) (5 - 24) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 29 7 (6 - 28) (10 - 48) (2 - 12) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 61 103 26 (38 - 83) (64 - 140) (17 - 36) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 13 4 (-25 - 41) (-40 - 65) (-13 - 21) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 20 6 (4 - 20) (7 - 32) (2 - 11) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 5 1 (-4 - 9) (-9 - 20) (-1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2 5 1 (1 - 4) (2 - 8) (0 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 10 3 (2 - 12) (3 - 17) (1 - 5) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Lag Exposure Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study



### Abt Associates Inc. I-5 December 2006

### Table I-6. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 15 4 (-30 - 43) (-63 - 90) (-18 - 26) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 29 8 (5 - 23) (10 - 48) (3 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 13 6 (3 - 15) (4 - 21) (2 - 9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 55 88 31 (18 - 91) (29 - 146) (10 - 51) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 427 526 333 (136 - 712) (167 - 876) (106 - 556) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 161 199 126 (51 - 271) (62 - 334) (39 - 212) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 49 69 33 (-31 - 128) (-44 - 180) (-21 - 87) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 31 44 21 (10 - 52) (15 - 73) (7 - 35) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 46 73 27 (-15 - 106) (-24 - 169) (-9 - 63) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 38 14 (8 - 39) (13 - 62) (5 - 23) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 158 189 128 (-26 - 336) (-31 - 403) (-21 - 273) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 86 103 70 (27 - 144) (32 - 173) (22 - 117) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 56 89 33 (-52 - 162) (-83 - 256) (-31 - 95) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 34 8 (1 - 34) (2 - 65) (1 - 16) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 17 4 (3 - 15) (6 - 28) (1 - 7) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 63 80 48 (6 - 119) (7 - 151) (4 - 92) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 53 66 40 (16 - 88) (21 - 112) (13 - 68) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 44 9 (-58 - 105) (-106 - 192) (-22 - 41) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 52 95 20 (17 - 86) (32 - 157) (7 - 33) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 84 121 45 (28 - 139) (41 - 202) (15 - 74) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 30 43 19 (10 - 50) (14 - 71) (6 - 32) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 107 152 68 (67 - 146) (96 - 208) (43 - 94) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 17 8 (-37 - 60) (-51 - 83) (-24 - 40) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 18 25 12 (6 - 30) (8 - 41) (4 - 20) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 9 3 (-9 - 20) (-15 - 31) (-5 - 11) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 8 3 (2 - 8) (3 - 13) (1 - 4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 17 9 (5 - 23) (6 - 28) (3 - 14) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Location Study Lag Exposure Metric



### Abt Associates Inc. I-6 December 2006

### Table I-7. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 11 1 (-15 - 22) (-47 - 68) (-6 - 9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 22 3 (2 - 12) (7 - 36) (1 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 8 2 (1 - 7) (3 - 14) (1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 23 55 6 (8 - 39) (19 - 92) (2 - 10) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 249 347 157 (79 - 417) (110 - 580) (50 - 263) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 93 131 59 (29 - 157) (41 - 220) (18 - 99) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 30 6 (-9 - 37) (-19 - 78) (-3 - 14) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 19 3 (3 - 15) (6 - 32) (1 - 6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 17 40 6 (-6 - 40) (-13 - 93) (-2 - 13) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 21 3 (3 - 15) (7 - 34) (1 - 5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 87 117 59 (-14 - 186) (-19 - 251) (-9 - 126) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 47 64 32 (15 - 79) (20 - 107) (10 - 54) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 21 49 7 (-20 - 62) (-45 - 142) (-6 - 20) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 16 32 6 (1 - 30) (2 - 62) (0 - 11) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 16 3 (3 - 13) (5 - 26) (1 - 5) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 57 73 44 (5 - 109) (7 - 139) (4 - 84) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 48 61 37 (15 - 81) (19 - 103) (12 - 62) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 20 41 6 (-49 - 90) (-98 - 179) (-15 - 27) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 44 88 13 (15 - 74) (29 - 146) (4 - 22) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 33 64 9 (11 - 55) (21 - 106) (3 - 15) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 13 25 5 (4 - 21) (8 - 41) (2 - 8) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 46 88 17 (29 - 63) (55 - 120) (11 - 24) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 11 3 (-21 - 34) (-35 - 57) (-9 - 16) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 17 5 (3 - 17) (6 - 28) (2 - 8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2 4 0 (-3 - 6) (-7 - 16) (-1 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 4 0 (0 - 2) (1 - 6) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 9 2 (2 - 9) (3 - 14) (1 - 3) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-7 December 2006

### Table I-8. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 13 3 (-24 - 35) (-57 - 81) (-13 - 19) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 11 26 6 (4 - 19) (9 - 43) (2 - 10) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 12 5 (3 - 12) (4 - 19) (2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 44 76 22 (15 - 74) (26 - 127) (7 - 37) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 361 460 269 (115 - 603) (146 - 767) (85 - 450) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 136 174 102 (43 - 229) (54 - 292) (32 - 171) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 42 62 27 (-26 - 109) (-39 - 160) (-17 - 71) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 27 39 17 (9 - 44) (13 - 65) (6 - 29) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 38 64 20 (-12 - 87) (-21 - 146) (-7 - 47) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 19 33 10 (6 - 32) (11 - 54) (3 - 17) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 134 166 105 (-22 - 287) (-27 - 354) (-17 - 224) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 73 90 57 (23 - 123) (28 - 152) (18 - 96) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 46 77 25 (-42 - 132) (-72 - 223) (-23 - 72) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 13 27 5 (1 - 25) (2 - 53) (0 - 10) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 13 2 (2 - 10) (4 - 22) (1 - 4) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 51 67 37 (5 - 97) (6 - 128) (3 - 71) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 43 56 31 (13 - 72) (18 - 95) (10 - 52) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 33 4 (-35 - 64) (-80 - 145) (-10 - 18) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 32 71 9 (11 - 53) (24 - 118) (3 - 15) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 70 107 34 (23 - 116) (36 - 177) (12 - 57) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 26 38 16 (9 - 42) (13 - 63) (5 - 26) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 91 136 55 (57 - 124) (85 - 185) (35 - 76) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 15 7 (-32 - 52) (-46 - 74) (-20 - 33) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 22 10 (5 - 26) (7 - 37) (3 - 16) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 7 2 (-7 - 15) (-12 - 27) (-4 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 7 2 (1 - 6) (2 - 11) (1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 12 15 7 (4 - 19) (5 - 25) (2 - 12) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. I-8 December 2006

### Table I-9. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 10 1 (-11 - 16) (-41 - 59) (-4 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 19 2 (2 - 8) (6 - 31) (1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 7 1 (1 - 6) (2 - 11) (0 - 2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 43 2 (5 - 24) (14 - 72) (1 - 4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 183 281 98 (58 - 307) (89 - 470) (31 - 164) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 69 105 37 (21 - 116) (33 - 178) (11 - 62) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 24 3 (-6 - 26) (-15 - 63) (-2 - 8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 15 2 (2 - 11) (5 - 26) (1 - 3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 11 32 2 (-4 - 27) (-10 - 73) (-1 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 16 1 (2 - 10) (5 - 27) (0 - 2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 66 97 40 (-11 - 142) (-16 - 207) (-6 - 85) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 36 52 21 (11 - 61) (16 - 88) (7 - 36) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 14 38 3 (-13 - 41) (-35 - 111) (-3 - 8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 21 2 (0 - 15) (1 - 41) (0 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 10 1 (1 - 6) (3 - 17) (0 - 1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 42 56 30 (4 - 80) (5 - 106) (3 - 56) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 35 47 25 (11 - 59) (15 - 79) (8 - 42) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 27 1 (-22 - 41) (-64 - 117) (-3 - 6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 20 57 3 (7 - 33) (19 - 96) (1 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 24 51 4 (8 - 39) (17 - 84) (1 - 7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 20 3 (3 - 15) (7 - 34) (1 - 4) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 33 73 10 (21 - 46) (46 - 100) (6 - 13) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 5 10 2 (-16 - 26) (-29 - 48) (-6 - 10) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 8 14 3 (3 - 13) (5 - 24) (1 - 5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 3 0 (-1 - 3) (-5 - 11) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1 3 0 (0 - 1) (1 - 5) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 7 1 (1 - 7) (2 - 12) (0 - 2) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-9 December 2006

### Table I-10. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum: April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 4 12 2 (-19 - 27) (-50 - 72) (-9 - 13) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 23 4 (3 - 14) (8 - 38) (1 - 7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 6 10 3 (2 - 10) (3 - 17) (1 - 6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 34 65 15 (11 - 57) (22 - 108) (5 - 25) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 294 393 206 (93 - 493) (125 - 656) (65 - 345) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 111 148 77 (35 - 187) (46 - 249) (24 - 130) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 35 54 21 (-22 - 91) (-34 - 141) (-13 - 55) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 22 34 13 (7 - 37) (12 - 57) (4 - 22) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 29 54 14 (-9 - 67) (-17 - 124) (-4 - 32) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 15 28 7 (5 - 25) (9 - 46) (2 - 12) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 111 143 83 (-18 - 239) (-23 - 305) (-13 - 177) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 61 78 45 (19 - 102) (24 - 130) (14 - 75) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 36 66 17 (-33 - 103) (-61 - 189) (-16 - 49) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 17 2 (0 - 13) (1 - 34) (0 - 4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 9 1 (1 - 5) (3 - 14) (0 - 2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 36 51 24 (3 - 69) (5 - 97) (2 - 46) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 30 43 20 (9 - 51) (13 - 72) (6 - 34) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 7 21 1 (-16 - 29) (-50 - 91) (-2 - 4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 14 45 2 (5 - 23) (15 - 74) (1 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 57 87 23 (19 - 95) (29 - 145) (8 - 38) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 21 33 12 (7 - 35) (11 - 56) (4 - 20) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 75 119 43 (47 - 103) (75 - 163) (27 - 59) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 9 13 5 (-27 - 44) (-40 - 66) (-16 - 26) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 13 20 8 (4 - 22) (7 - 33) (3 - 13) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 6 1 (-5 - 12) (-10 - 22) (-2 - 5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3 5 1 (1 - 5) (2 - 9) (0 - 2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 10 13 6 (3 - 16) (5 - 22) (2 - 9) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality Associated with O 3 Above:**

Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington



### Abt Associates Inc. I-10 December 2006

### Table I-11. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.8 0.1 (-1.3 - 1.9) (-3.5 - 5.1) (-0.6 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.6 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.4 0.4 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1 - 0.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.3 0.2 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.1 - 0.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.8 7.7 4.1 (1.8 - 9.7) (2.4 - 12.8) (1.3 - 6.8) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.2 2.9 1.5 (0.7 - 3.7) (0.9 - 4.9) (0.5 - 2.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.6 0.6 (-0.9 - 3.7) (-1.6 - 6.7) (-0.4 - 1.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.6 0.4 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.1 - 0.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 2.4 0.5 (-0.4 - 2.6) (-0.8 - 5.5) (-0.2 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.2 0.2 (0.2 - 1) (0.4 - 2) (0.1 - 0.4) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.1 6.7 3.8 (-0.8 - 10.9) (-1.1 - 14.3) (-0.6 - 8.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.8 3.6 2.1 (0.9 - 4.7) (1.1 - 6.1) (0.6 - 3.5) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.9 0.6 (-1.3 - 4) (-2.7 - 8.4) (-0.5 - 1.7) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.1 0.3 (0 - 1.2) (0.1 - 2.2) (0 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.6 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.2 - 0.9) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.1 2.5 1.6 (0.2 - 3.9) (0.2 - 4.8) (0.2 - 3.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7 2.1 1.4 (0.5 - 2.9) (0.7 - 3.6) (0.4 - 2.3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.5 0.1 (-0.8 - 1.5) (-1.3 - 2.4) (-0.3 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.2 0.3 (0.2 - 1.2) (0.4 - 2) (0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.8 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.3 - 1.4) (0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.9 0.5 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.2 - 0.8) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 4.0 6.8 1.7 (2.5 - 5.5) (4.2 - 9.2) (1.1 - 2.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.1 0.4 (-2.1 - 3.4) (-3.3 - 5.4) (-1.1 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.2 - 0.9) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.6 0.2 (-1.2 - 2.7) (-2.6 - 5.7) (-0.3 - 0.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.4 0.2 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 1.8 0.5 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.6 - 3) (0.2 - 0.9) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with O 3 Above:**

Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995) Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Lag Exposure Metric

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study



### Abt Associates Inc. I-11 December 2006

### Table I-12. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet the Current Standard (0.084 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum): April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.0 0.3 (-2 - 2.9) (-4.3 - 6.1) (-1.2 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.9 0.6 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.7 - 3.2) (0.2 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.9 0.8 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.6 - 3.1) (0.3 - 1.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.6 0.6 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.2 - 0.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.9 9.8 6.2 (2.5 - 13.2) (3.1 - 16.3) (2 - 10.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.0 3.7 2.3 (0.9 - 5) (1.2 - 6.2) (0.7 - 3.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3.5 5.0 2.4 (-2.2 - 9.2) (-3.1 - 12.9) (-1.5 - 6.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 3.2 1.5 (0.8 - 3.7) (1.1 - 5.2) (0.5 - 2.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 3.6 1.3 (-0.7 - 5.2) (-1.2 - 8.2) (-0.4 - 3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.8 0.7 (0.4 - 1.9) (0.6 - 3) (0.2 - 1.1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 7.7 9.2 6.2 (-1.3 - 16.3) (-1.5 - 19.5) (-1 - 13.2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 4.2 5.0 3.4 (1.3 - 7) (1.6 - 8.4) (1.1 - 5.7) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 2.7 4.3 1.6 (-2.5 - 7.8) (-4 - 12.4) (-1.5 - 4.6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.0 0.2 (0 - 1) (0.1 - 1.9) (0 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.5 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.2 - 0.8) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.8 2.3 1.4 (0.2 - 3.5) (0.2 - 4.4) (0.1 - 2.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.5 2.0 1.2 (0.5 - 2.6) (0.6 - 3.3) (0.4 - 2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.5 0.1 (-0.6 - 1.1) (-1.1 - 2) (-0.2 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.0 0.2 (0.2 - 0.9) (0.3 - 1.7) (0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.4 0.5 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.2 - 0.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.0 2.8 1.3 (0.7 - 3.3) (0.9 - 4.7) (0.4 - 2.1) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 7.0 10.0 4.5 (4.4 - 9.6) (6.3 - 13.7) (2.8 - 6.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.4 0.7 (-3 - 4.9) (-4.2 - 6.8) (-2 - 3.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.5 2.0 1.0 (0.5 - 2.4) (0.7 - 3.4) (0.3 - 1.6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.6 2.5 0.9 (-2.6 - 5.6) (-4.2 - 9) (-1.4 - 3.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.2 0.8 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.3 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.4 3.0 1.5 (0.8 - 3.9) (1 - 4.9) (0.5 - 2.5) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) Location Study Lag

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Above:**

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-12 December 2006

### Table I-13. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.7 0.1 (-1 - 1.5) (-3.2 - 4.6) (-0.4 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.5 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.2 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 1.0 0.1 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0 - 0.2) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 4.6 6.5 2.9 (1.5 - 7.7) (2 - 10.8) (0.9 - 4.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7 2.4 1.1 (0.5 - 2.9) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.3 - 1.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 2.1 0.4 (-0.6 - 2.7) (-1.3 - 5.6) (-0.2 - 1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.4 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1 - 0.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 2.0 0.3 (-0.3 - 2) (-0.6 - 4.5) (-0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 1.0 0.1 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.3 - 1.7) (0 - 0.2) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 4.2 5.7 2.8 (-0.7 - 9) (-0.9 - 12.2) (-0.5 - 6.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.3 3.1 1.5 (0.7 - 3.8) (1 - 5.2) (0.5 - 2.6) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 2.4 0.3 (-1 - 3) (-2.2 - 6.9) (-0.3 - 1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.9 0.2 (0 - 0.9) (0.1 - 1.8) (0 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.5 0.1 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.2 - 0.8) (0 - 0.1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7 2.2 1.3 (0.2 - 3.2) (0.2 - 4.1) (0.1 - 2.5) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.4 1.8 1.1 (0.4 - 2.4) (0.6 - 3) (0.3 - 1.8) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.4 0.1 (-0.5 - 0.9) (-1 - 1.9) (-0.2 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 0.9 0.1 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.3 - 1.5) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.7 0.1 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.2 - 1.2) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.6 0.3 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.1 - 0.5) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 3.0 5.8 1.1 (1.9 - 4.2) (3.6 - 7.9) (0.7 - 1.6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 0.9 0.3 (-1.7 - 2.8) (-2.8 - 4.6) (-0.8 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.4 0.4 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.3) (0.1 - 0.6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.2 0.1 (-0.8 - 1.7) (-2.1 - 4.5) (-0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 1.1 0.1 (0.1 - 0.7) (0.4 - 1.8) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.0 1.5 0.4 (0.3 - 1.6) (0.5 - 2.5) (0.1 - 0.6) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-13 December 2006

### Table I-14. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.074 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.9 0.2 (-1.6 - 2.4) (-3.8 - 5.5) (-0.9 - 1.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.7 0.4 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.6 - 2.9) (0.1 - 0.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.7 0.7 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.6 - 2.8) (0.2 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.4 0.4 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.1 - 0.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 6.7 8.6 5.0 (2.1 - 11.2) (2.7 - 14.3) (1.6 - 8.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.5 3.2 1.9 (0.8 - 4.3) (1 - 5.4) (0.6 - 3.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 3.0 4.4 1.9 (-1.9 - 7.8) (-2.8 - 11.5) (-1.2 - 5.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.9 2.8 1.2 (0.6 - 3.2) (0.9 - 4.7) (0.4 - 2.1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.8 3.1 1.0 (-0.6 - 4.2) (-1 - 7.1) (-0.3 - 2.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.6 0.5 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.2 - 0.8) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 6.5 8.0 5.1 (-1.1 - 13.9) (-1.3 - 17.2) (-0.8 - 10.9) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.5 4.4 2.8 (1.1 - 6) (1.4 - 7.4) (0.9 - 4.7) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 3.8 1.2 (-2.1 - 6.4) (-3.5 - 10.8) (-1.1 - 3.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.8 0.1 (0 - 0.7) (0 - 1.5) (0 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.4 0.1 (0.1 - 0.3) (0.1 - 0.7) (0 - 0.1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.5 2.0 1.1 (0.1 - 2.9) (0.2 - 3.8) (0.1 - 2.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.3 1.7 0.9 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.5 - 2.8) (0.3 - 1.5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.3 0.0 (-0.4 - 0.7) (-0.8 - 1.5) (-0.1 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.7 0.1 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.3 - 1.2) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.2 0.4 (0.3 - 1.3) (0.4 - 2) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.7 2.5 1.0 (0.6 - 2.8) (0.8 - 4.2) (0.3 - 1.7) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 6.0 8.9 3.6 (3.8 - 8.2) (5.6 - 12.2) (2.3 - 5) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.2 0.5 (-2.6 - 4.2) (-3.7 - 6.1) (-1.6 - 2.7) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.3 1.8 0.8 (0.4 - 2.1) (0.6 - 3) (0.3 - 1.3) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.2 2.1 0.6 (-2.1 - 4.5) (-3.6 - 7.7) (-1 - 2.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.9 0.5 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.6 - 3.2) (0.2 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.0 2.7 1.2 (0.7 - 3.4) (0.9 - 4.4) (0.4 - 2) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Above:**

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) Location Study Lag

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-14 December 2006

### Table I-15. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2004*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.6 0.1 (-0.7 - 1.1) (-2.8 - 4) (-0.2 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 1.3 0.1 (0.1 - 0.6) (0.4 - 2.1) (0 - 0.2) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.0 0.2 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.1 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.8 0.0 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0 - 0.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.4 5.2 1.8 (1.1 - 5.7) (1.7 - 8.7) (0.6 - 3) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.3 2.0 0.7 (0.4 - 2.2) (0.6 - 3.3) (0.2 - 1.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.7 0.2 (-0.5 - 1.9) (-1.1 - 4.6) (-0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.5 1.1 0.1 (0.2 - 0.8) (0.4 - 1.8) (0 - 0.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.5 0.1 (-0.2 - 1.3) (-0.5 - 3.5) (0 - 0.3) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.8 0.1 (0.1 - 0.5) (0.3 - 1.3) (0 - 0.1) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 3.2 4.7 1.9 (-0.5 - 6.9) (-0.8 - 10.1) (-0.3 - 4.1) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.7 2.5 1.0 (0.5 - 2.9) (0.8 - 4.3) (0.3 - 1.8) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.9 0.1 (-0.6 - 2) (-1.7 - 5.4) (-0.1 - 0.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.6 0.0 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 1.2) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1 0.3 0.0 (0 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.5) (0 - 0) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.2 1.6 0.9 (0.1 - 2.3) (0.2 - 3.1) (0.1 - 1.7) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.0 1.4 0.7 (0.3 - 1.7) (0.4 - 2.3) (0.2 - 1.2) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1 0.3 0.0 (-0.2 - 0.4) (-0.7 - 1.2) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.6 0.0 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.2 - 1) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.6 0.0 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.2 - 0.9) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1) (0.5 - 2.2) (0.1 - 0.3) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 2.2 4.8 0.6 (1.4 - 3) (3 - 6.6) (0.4 - 0.9) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.4 0.8 0.2 (-1.3 - 2.2) (-2.4 - 3.9) (-0.5 - 0.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.2 0.2 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.4 - 1.9) (0.1 - 0.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.9 0.0 (-0.4 - 0.9) (-1.5 - 3.3) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.8 0.0 (0.1 - 0.4) (0.3 - 1.3) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.3 0.2 (0.2 - 1.2) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.1 - 0.4) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population

Associated with O 3 Above:**

Atlanta Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Location Study Lag Exposure Metric

Boston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Chicago Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Cleveland Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Detroit Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Houston Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Los Angeles Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

New York Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Philadelphia Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sacramento Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

St Louis Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-15 December 2006

### Table I-16. Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Alternative Estimates of Policy Relevant Background (PRB) on Estimated Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 

### Concentrations that Just Meet An Alternative Standard of 0.064 ppm, 4th Daily Maximum : April - September, 2002*

Estimates of PRB Concentrations Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Minus 5 ppb*** Estimates of PRB

Concentrations Plus 5

ppb distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.3 0.8 0.1 (-1.3 - 1.8) (-3.4 - 4.9) (-0.6 - 0.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.5 0.3 (0.2 - 1) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.1 - 0.5) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.5 0.5 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.5 - 2.4) (0.2 - 0.8) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.2 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.4 - 2) (0.1 - 0.5) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.5 7.3 3.8 (1.7 - 9.2) (2.3 - 12.2) (1.2 - 6.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.1 2.8 1.4 (0.6 - 3.5) (0.9 - 4.6) (0.5 - 2.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 2.5 3.9 1.5 (-1.6 - 6.5) (-2.4 - 10.1) (-0.9 - 3.9) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.6 2.5 1.0 (0.5 - 2.7) (0.8 - 4.1) (0.3 - 1.6) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.6 0.7 (-0.5 - 3.3) (-0.8 - 6) (-0.2 - 1.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.3 0.3 (0.2 - 1.2) (0.4 - 2.2) (0.1 - 0.6) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 5.4 6.9 4.0 (-0.9 - 11.6) (-1.1 - 14.8) (-0.7 - 8.6) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 2.9 3.8 2.2 (0.9 - 4.9) (1.2 - 6.3) (0.7 - 3.7) Ito (2003) 0-day lag 24 hr avg. 1.7 3.2 0.8 (-1.6 - 5) (-3 - 9.2) (-0.8 - 2.4) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.2 0.5 0.1 (0 - 0.4) (0 - 1) (0 - 0.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1 0.3 0.0 (0 - 0.2) (0.1 - 0.4) (0 - 0) Schwartz (2004) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 1.1 1.5 0.7 (0.1 - 2) (0.1 - 2.9) (0.1 - 1.4) 0-day lag 1 hr max. 0.9 1.3 0.6 (0.3 - 1.5) (0.4 - 2.1) (0.2 - 1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1 0.2 0.0 (-0.2 - 0.3) (-0.5 - 1) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.1 0.5 0.0 (0 - 0.2) (0.2 - 0.8) (0 - 0) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.6 1.0 0.3 (0.2 - 1.1) (0.3 - 1.6) (0.1 - 0.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.4 2.2 0.8 (0.5 - 2.3) (0.7 - 3.7) (0.3 - 1.3) 1-day lag 24 hr avg. 5.0 7.8 2.8 (3.1 - 6.8) (4.9 - 10.7) (1.8 - 3.9) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.7 1.1 0.4 (-2.2 - 3.6) (-3.3 - 5.4) (-1.3 - 2.1) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.1 1.6 0.6 (0.4 - 1.8) (0.5 - 2.7) (0.2 - 1) Bell et al. (2004) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.9 1.8 0.4 (-1.5 - 3.3) (-3 - 6.4) (-0.6 - 1.4) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 0.8 1.6 0.3 (0.3 - 1.4) (0.5 - 2.6) (0.1 - 0.6) distributed lag 24 hr avg. 1.7 2.3 1.0 (0.6 - 2.9) (0.8 - 3.9) (0.3 - 1.6) *All results are for mortality (among all ages) associated with short-term exposures to O 3 . All results are based on single-pollutant models.

***In Atlanta, 10 ppb were subtracted from estimated PRB concentrations; in all other locations, 5 ppb were subtracted. Note: Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence or credible intervals based on statistical uncertainty surrounding the O 3 coefficient. New York

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Moolgavkar et al. (1995)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Washington Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

**Incidences are rounded to the nearest whole number; incidences per 100,000 relevant population and percents are rounded to the nearest tenth. Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Sacramento

St Louis Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Incidence of Non-Accidental Mortality per 100,000 Relevant Population Associated with O 3 Above:**

Detroit

Houston Bell et al. (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004) Atlanta

Boston

Chicago

Cleveland Exposure Metric

Bell et al. (2004) Location Study Lag

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Bell et al. -- 95 US Cities (2004)

Schwartz -- 14 US Cities (2004) Schwartz (2004)



### Abt Associates Inc. I-16 December 2006United StatesEnvironmental ProtectionAgencyOffice of Air Quality Planning and StandardsHealth and Environmental Impacts DivisionResearch Triangle Park, NCPublication No. EPA 452/R-07-009July 2007Postal information in this section where appropriate.