UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 19103

DATE: July 2, 2013

SUBJECT: Technical Support Document for the Pennsylvania Determination of Attainment 

of the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Nonattainment Area

 

FROM: Loretta Hyden, Environmental Engineer /s/

Office of Air Monitoring and Analysis

TO: File

THRU: Alice Chow, Acting Associate Director /s/

Office of Air Monitoring and Analysis

I. INTRODUCTION

This Technical Support Document (TSD) provides a technical review of the air quality 

monitoring data used to support the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) determination 

that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley nonattainment area (hereafter “the Pittsburgh Area” or “the 

Area”) has attained the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). Additional details of EPA’s determination of attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS can be found in the notice of proposed rulemaking entitled, 

“Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Determination 

of Attainment of the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard for the Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley Nonattainment Area,” which is available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No.

EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0753.

II. EPA’S REQUIREMENTS FOR A DETERMINATION OF ATTAINMENT

A. Air Quality Monitoring Data and Monitoring Network

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.13(c), the 2006 24-hour primary and secondary PM2.5

NAAQS are met when the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration, as determined in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, is less than or equal to 35 ug/m3. Data handling conventions 

and computations necessary for determining whether areas have met the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard, including requirements for data completeness, are also listed in 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N. Specifically, the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is met when the 24-hour standard design 

value, that is, the 3-year average of annual 98th percentile 24-hour average values, recorded at 

each monitoring site is less than or equal to the standard, 35 ug/m3. The 98

th percentile is 
2

defined as the daily value out of a year of PM2.5 monitoring data below which 98 percent of all 

daily values fall. 

The comparison of the 24-hour standard design value (hereafter “the 24-hour design value”) to 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS shall be based on three consecutive, complete calendar years of 

air quality data. A year meets data completeness requirements when at least 75 percent of the 

scheduled sampling days for each quarter have valid data. However, years shall be considered 

valid, notwithstanding quarters with less than complete data (even quarters with less than eleven

samples), if the resulting annual 98th percentile value or resulting 24-hour standard design value 

is greater than the level of the standard. The use of less than complete data is subject to the 

approval of EPA which may consider factors such as monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring 

diligence, and nearby concentrations in determining whether to use such data for comparisons to 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

Only complete quality-assured, quality-controlled, and certified PM2.5 data from Federal 

Reference Method (FRM), Federal Equivalent Method (FEM), or Approved Regional Method 

(ARM) monitors submitted to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) can be used in the 24-hour 

design value calculations for comparing to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, the 

PM2.5 data must be collected from monitoring sites that are eligible for making comparisons with 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as set forth in 40 CFR 58.30. 

An adequate monitoring network for PM2.5 should satisfy the specific minimum criteria for 

establishing state and local air monitoring stations for PM2.5 data collection, as described in 40 

CFR part 58, appendix D, section 4.7. Additionally, the monitoring network in place should be 

consistent with the most recent annual monitoring network plan submitted by the state or local 

agency and approved by EPA. See 40 CFR 58.10.

III. EPA’S EVALUATION OF AIR QUALITY IN THE PITTSBURGH AREA

A. Monitoring Network 

EPA previously determined that the PM2.5 monitoring network for the Pittsburgh Area is 

adequate. EPA found that the number of monitors in the Pittsburgh Area meets the minimum 

regulatory requirements given in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section 4.7, and that the 

monitoring network in place is in accordance with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and 

Allegheny County’s most recent annual monitoring network plans approved by EPA, as required 

by 40 CFR 58.10.1 During the 2010-2012 monitoring period, the Pittsburgh Area had in place a 

total of twelve PM2.5 monitoring sites, whose data was eligible for comparison to the 2006 24-

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. (See Figure 1 of Appendix B - “Application of Imputation/Bootstrap 

 

1The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s 2012 annual ambient monitoring network plan was approved by EPA in a 

February 21, 2013 letter from Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III, to Michael L. Krancer, 

Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). Allegheny County’s 2012 annual 

ambient monitoring network plan was approved by EPA in a February 21, 2013 letter from Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region III, to Dr. Ronald Voorhees, MD, MPH Acting Director of the Allegheny 

Health Department. 
3

Protocol to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 2006 NAAQS (24-hr STD) Nonattainment Area for the 

Design Value Period, 2010-2012).

B. Air Quality Monitoring Data 

In order to determine that the Pittsburgh Area attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, qualityassured, quality-controlled and state certified ambient air monitoring data of the Area for the 

monitoring period of 2010-2012 was reviewed. The PM2.5 monitoring data was measured by 

FRM, FEM, or ARM monitors, in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N. The monitoring 

data for 2010-2012 for the Pittsburgh Area is provided in Table 1, See Appendix A of this 

document for AQS Preliminary Design Value Reports (AMP480). 

Several monitors in the Pittsburgh Area had incomplete 24-hour design values for the 2010-2012

period. The “Completeness Status” column of Table 1 identifies which monitors in the 

Pittsburgh Area did not satisfy the data completeness requirement for one or more quarters of the 

2010-2012 period, as well as the substitution technique applied to deem each monitor complete. 

EPA has addressed missing data from incomplete monitors by applying one of these procedures: 

the maximum quarter substitution test (“maximum quarter test”), and EPA’s statistical 

procedure.2 A detailed discussion on the completeness issues for the 2010-2012 24-hour PM2.5

data for the Pittsburgh Area is provided in section C “Data Completeness Issues” of this 

document. 

Table 1. Pittsburgh Area’s 2010-2012 24-hour PM2.5 Air Quality Data (in μg/m3)

County AQS Site 

ID Site Name

98th Percentile 

Value

2010-2012

24-hour 

Design 

Value

Completeness 

Statusa

2010 2011 2012

Allegheny 42-003-

0002 Avalon * 33 21 27 Incomplete

Allegheny 42-003-

0008 Lawrence 30 27 20 26 Complete

Allegheny 42-003-

0067 S. Fayette 29 31 18 26 Complete

Allegheny 42-003-

0093 North Park 27 26 16 23 Max. Quarter

Allegheny 42-003-

0095 Moon 26 * * 26 Incomplete

Allegheny 42-003-

1008 Harrison 34 30 21 28 Max. Quarter

Allegheny 42-003-

1301

N. 

Braddock 37 34 27 33 Max. Quarter

Beaver 42-007- Beaver Falls 29 30 23 27 Complete

 

2The maximum quarter substitution test follows procedures in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N.
4

0014

Washington 42-125-

0005 Charleroi 27 29 23 26 Max. Quarter

Washington 42-125-

0200 Washington 27 27 21 25 Complete

Washington 42-125-

5001 Florence 22 12 16 17 Complete

Westmoreland 42-129-

0008 Greensburg 32 33 23 29 Statistical

aThis column indicates if the 24-hour design value for the monitor is: valid and complete (“Complete”) or 

incomplete (“Incomplete”). It also indicates which data substitution method, if any, was used to deem an 

incomplete 24-hour design value valid and “complete.” “Max. Quarter” denotes the maximum quarter data

substitution test, and “Statistical” denotes that EPA’s statistical procedure has been applied to address the missing 

data. Note that these techniques are discretionary.

EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for PM2.5, consistent with the requirements 

contained in 40 CFR part 50. The 2010-2012 24-hour design value determined for the Pittsburgh

Area is the highest 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile measured at all the monitors in 

the Area during this time, which meets the criteria to be used for comparison to the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Currently all monitors are measuring concentrations averaging below the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 ug/m3. The 24-hour design value of the Pittsburgh PM2.5 Area for

2010-2012 is 33 ug/m3, based on monitoring data collected at the North Braddock site (42-003-

1301).

C. Data Completeness Issues 

1. Monitoring Sites Shutdowns and Startups

Two monitors in the Pittsburgh Area, 42-003-0002 (Avalon) and 42-003-0095 (Moon), were not 

operational for the complete 2010-2012 period. The Avalon site started operating an FRM 

monitor in June 2011. As approved by EPA, the Moon site was shutdown on December 31,

2010 as it was statistically insignificant and redundant. See “Allegheny County’s 2010 Five 

Year Monitoring Assessment,” and “Pennsylvania’s 2010 Annual Network Plan.” Data from 

these monitors were not considered as part of this determination of attainment.

2. Data Substitution Tests 

Several monitors in the Pittsburgh Area were not meeting the completeness requirement for one 

or more quarter during 2010-2012 monitoring period. To address the missing data, EPA applied 

the data substitution tests described in EPA’s April 1999 guidance document “Guideline on Data 

Handling Conventions for the PM NAAQS.” The maximum quarter data substitution test 

(maximum quarter test) was applied to each incomplete monitor in the Pittsburgh Area for 2010-

2012. In the maximum quarter test, maximum recorded values are substituted for the missing 

data, and the resulting 24-hour design value is compared to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. A 

monitor with incomplete data passes the test if the 24-hour design value with maximum values 
5

substituted meets the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically, the maximum quarter test 

requires replacing the missing data with the maximum concentration recorded at the site during 

the same quarter over the three-year period in question, provided that the following criteria are 

met. The site must have valid data for at least 50 percent of the scheduled number of samples for 

each quarter for all three years, and the emissions and meteorology for the quarters to be 

substituted must be comparable to the emissions and meteorology for the quarters in question. 

The “Completeness Status” columns of Table 1 indicate which incomplete monitors passed the 

maximum quarter test, and therefore attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For more 

information on these substitution techniques, see EPA’s April 1999 “Guideline on Data Handling 

Conventions for the PM NAAQS,” available at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/pmfinal.pdf.

3. Addressing Incomplete Data with EPA’s Statistical Method 

One monitor in the Pittsburg Area, the Greensburg monitor (at site 42-129-0008), did not meet 

the completeness requirement for one quarter of 2011. EPA has addressed missing data from the 

Greensburg monitor by applying EPA’s statistical procedure. This procedure is used to compute 

a “diagnostic 24-hour design value,” which is used to judge whether the Greensburg monitor 

would likely have monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS had it collected 

complete valid data during this time. The diagnostic 24-hour design value for the Greensburg

monitor is 29 g/m3, thus showing the monitor is attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. A 

detailed explanation of how the missing data was addressed using EPA’s statistical procedure is 

provided in the following section.

a. Description of EPA’s Statistical Method 

The general concept of the statistical method used is to determine whether an incomplete monitor 

(target monitor) would have met the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by replacing the missing data 

of the target monitor with data from another monitor (candidate monitor) located within or in the 

vicinity of the nonattainment area. The first step of the statistical method is to establish a linear 

regression relationship between the target monitor and the candidate monitor, and then to use the 

linear regression to fill in the missing data for the target monitor in any quarter of the three-year 

period that did not satisfy the 75 percent completeness requirements based on actual 

observations. A “diagnostic 24-hour design value” for the monitoring period is calculated with 

the imputed data and then checked with an additional statistical technique, referred to as 

bootstrapping, to verify if the monitor has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

diagnostic 24-hour design value is used to judge whether a monitoring location would likely 

have monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS had the monitor collected 

complete valid data during this time. 

The candidate monitor is selected based on 3 different aspects: correlation value, quarterly data 

captured, and site pairing. The correlation value (R2) from the linear regression should indicate a 

“strong” linear relationship of the PM2.5 data from the candidate monitor and the target monitor. 

Then, the mean of the quarterly data captured (expressed in percentage) which provides the 

average data collection rate at each site, should determine that the site has sufficient data during 
6

the missing period of the target monitor. Additionally, pairing the site data assists in establishing 

more precise comparisons with fewer observations.

The target monitor in this analysis is the Greensburg monitor (at site 42-129-0008). The 

methodology is used to appropriately fill in the missing data of 2011 for this monitor, to judge 

whether the monitoring location would likely have monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour

PM2.5 NAAQS had the monitor collected complete valid data during this time. The PM2.5 

monitoring network within the Pittsburgh Area has twelve PM2.5 monitoring locations. The 

Avalon monitor (site 42-003-0002) was selected as the candidate monitor, because it meets the 

eligibility requirements described below.

b. Eligibility

EPA established criteria to assure that the diagnostic 24-hour design values estimated by the 

method are robust enough to allow consideration of the results in a weight of evidence decision. 

EPA established criteria for both the operating period of the candidate monitor and the number 

of days of samples that the candidate monitor and each of the possible target monitors have in 

common. EPA has not established bright lines or specific requirements for determining 

diagnostic 24-hour design values for monitors with less than complete data.

Operating Time

In order to establish a significant relationship between the monitors, the candidate monitor must 

have operated during the monitoring period in the nonattainment area (i.e., during 2010-2012 in

the Pittsburgh Area). The candidate monitor is not required to have complete data in all 12 

quarters of each 3-year period, yet should have collected sufficient observations to fill in the 

missing days of the target monitor, for the target monitor to satisfy the 75 percent completeness 

in each quarter. 

Paired samples

Pairs of sample data for the target monitor and the candidate monitor from the most recent 20-

quarter period of operation of the target monitor were used. The “period of operation” of the 

target monitor was based on the date of the last reported sample from the monitor. The candidate 

monitor had at least 100 historical sample pairs in common with the target monitor during this 

period. When there were more than 100 pairs in the 20-quarter period all available pairs were 

used. In addition to the 100 pairs over the 20 quarters, the candidate monitor had at least 20 

paired days of data in common with the target monitor for each calendar quarter (adding together 

the number of days in a given calendar quarter [Q1, Q2, Q3, or Q4] across the 20-quarter 

period). 

For this analysis, the one candidate site (Avalon) met the eligibility criteria of 100 pairs over the 

20-quarters, and had at least 20 paired days of data in common with the target monitor for each 

calendar quarter. 
7

c. Method for Determining Diagnostic 24-hour Design Values

The following includes a step-by-step explanation of the methodology used to determine the 

diagnostic 24-hour design value for the target monitor (Greensburg). Results are discussed in 

detail in the following section. 

Step 1 – Organize data and perform linear regression(s) between target monitor and possible 

candidate monitors.

All the available paired data within the period limit (see the Eligibility section) was used to 

develop a linear regression to predict target concentrations from candidate concentrations. A 

regression was performed for each possible pairing that met the criteria utilized for 100 data 

points and 20 data points per calendar quarter (across all years) in the most recent 20 quarters for

each potential candidate monitor in the nonattainment area. 

Step 2 – Select candidate site

The following steps were used to select the candidate monitor: 

(1) All possible candidate monitors were placed in order of highest correlation (based on 

the highest “R-squared” of the linear regression) with the target monitor. 

(2) Using the regression equation relating concentrations at the target monitor and the 

candidate monitor, estimates of the 24-hour average concentrations were made at the target 

monitor for all missing scheduled days in the initially incomplete quarter, during the most recent 

three-year period at the target monitor. Estimates were only made for days on which a 

concentration is available at the candidate monitor. Estimates were not made for any days in the 

quarter for which the target monitor had 75 percent or more complete data initially. The 

estimates were combined with any reported data at the target monitor during the recent 3-year 

period, and the data capture rates were computed for the originally incomplete quarter. The 

computation of these data capture rates was based on the assumption that the required sampling 

frequency for the target monitor was recorded. If the candidate monitor had a lower sampling 

frequency than the target monitor, some missing scheduled days for the target were not 

substituted for the regression-based estimates. When the candidate monitor had a lower 

sampling frequency than the target monitor, the target monitor sampling schedule was assumed 

to be a combination of the target and candidate monitors schedules, weighted by the number of 

originally present and originally missing scheduled days at the target monitor. 

(3) If after performing the process in step 2, the results produced all 12 quarters at the 

target monitor having at least 75 percent of scheduled values, the potential candidate monitor 

was selected as the candidate monitor for the remaining steps. If the 75 percent of the scheduled 

values for the target monitor were not obtained, then step 2 was repeated for the next best 

correlated site. This process was repeated until the target monitor had 75 percent of its 

scheduled values.
8

For the analysis of the Pittsburgh Area during 2010-2012, this step was completed for the one 

potential candidate monitor, the Avalon monitor (at site 42-003-0002). The Avalon site was

selected as the candidate monitor for the Greensburg monitor.

Step 3 – Diagnostic 24-hour design value computed

The diagnostic three-year averaged 24-hour design value for 2010-2012 was calculated using the 

actual observations of the target monitor and the regression-based estimates of daily 

concentrations. The 2010-2012 24-hour diagnostic design value computed for the Greensburg

monitor was below the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard level, 35 μg/m3.

Step 4 – Statistical confidence of a diagnostic 24-hour design value below the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS

In order to show that there is, at most, a 10 percent probability that the actual 24-hour design 

value (had the Greensburg monitor operated more days) was above the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, further analysis was performed as follows:

(1) Residuals were calculated from the regression.

(2) A bootstrap analysis was performed, repeating the regression-based substitution in 

Step 2 but adding to each estimated 24-hour value that substitutes for a missing scheduled 

monitored value a plus or minus residual that has been randomly drawn (with 

replacement) from the pool of regression residuals. This step randomly applies real 

residuals from the linear regression to the imputed current-period target values.

(3) Repeat (2) for a total of 1000 runs. 

(4) For each of the 1000 bootstrap trials, the 3-year 24-hour design value was calculated. 

This will provide a pseudo confidence interval for the partially imputed current-period 

24-hour design value for the target monitor.

(5) Since none of the 1000 runs resulted in diagnostic 24-hour design values above the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the Greensburg monitor was considered to have met the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

d. Statistical Results for the Greensburg Monitoring Site (42-129-0008) (Greensburg)

Figure B1 in Appendix B, shows the 2010-2012 24-hour design values and data capture rates for 

the monitoring sites in the Pittsburgh Area. In Figure B2, Appendix B, the target monitor, 

Greensburg (site 42-129-0008), is identified as Site A and the candidate site, Avalon (site 42-

003-0002), is identified as Site B. The Avalon monitor had the highest correlation with the 

Greensburg monitor and met the operating period and paired data eligibility criteria for being a 

candidate site. The results of the linear regression between the Greensburg and Avalon monitors

for the 2010-2012 24-hour design value are shown in Figure B3, Appendix B. Estimates for the 

deficient quarterly data for 2010-2012 were made. As a result of filling in the missing data, the 
9

Greensburg monitor now had all complete quarters for 2010-2012. A 2010-2012 diagnostic 24-

hour design value of 29 g/m3 was calculated for the Greensburg monitor (see Figure B4, 

Appendix B). The statistical confidence of the diagnostic 24-hour design value was checked 

using the method outlined in Step 4. None of the 1000 bootstrapping trials resulted in a violating 

24-hour design value, which provides statistical confidence that the Greensburg monitor is 

attaining the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The results of the 1000 bootstrap trials are provided in 

Figure B5, Appendix B.

Attachments

- Appendix A: EPA AQS Preliminary Design Value Report (AMP480) dated June 6, 2013, 

containing air quality data for 2010-2012 for the Allegheny and Armstrong Counties portion of 

the Pittsburgh Area

- Appendix B: Application of Imputation/Bootstrap Protocol to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 

2006 NAAQS (24-hr Std) Nonattainment Area for the Design Value Period, 2010-2012
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

DESIGN VALUE REPORT

Report Request ID: 1104852 Report Code: AMP480 Jun. 6, 2013

Selection Criteria Page 1

User ID: HXN

State County City Site Parameter POC AQCR UAR CBSA CSA

EPA

Region Method Duration Begin Date End Date

42

42

42

42

42

42

42

42

003

003

003

003

003

007

125

125

0008

0067

0093

1008

1301

0014

0005

0200

GEOGRAPHIC SELECTIONS

PROTOCOL SELECTIONS

Parameter

Classification Parameter Method Duration

DESIGN VALUE 88101

SELECTED OPTIONS

SINGLE EVENT PROCESSING

WORKFILE DELIMITER

USER SITE METADATA

MERGE PDF FILES

QUARTERLY DATA IN WORKFILE

Option Type Option Value

EXCLUDE REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENTS

,

STREET ADDRESS

YES

NO

GLOBAL DATES

2012

Start Date End Date

2012

Tribal

Code

APPLICABLE STANDARDS

Standard Description

PM25 24-hour 2006

PM25 Annual 2006
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

PRELIMINARY DESIGN VALUE REPORT

Report Date: Jun. 6, 2013

Notes: 1. Computed design values are a snapshot of the data at the time the report was run (may not be all data for year). 

 2. Some PM2.5 24-hour DVs for incomplete data that are marked invalid here may be marked valid in the Official report due to additional analysis.

 3. Annual Values not meeting completeness criteria are marked with an asterisk ('*').

Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

PRELIMINARY DESIGN VALUE REPORT

Report Date: Jun. 6, 2013

Notes: 1. Computed design values are a snapshot of the data at the time the report was run (may not be all data for year). 

 2. Some PM2.5 24-hour DVs for incomplete data that are marked invalid here may be marked valid in the Official report due to additional analysis.

 3. Annual Values not meeting completeness criteria are marked with an asterisk ('*').

Page 2 of 2

Pollutant:

Standard Units:

NAAQS Standard:

Statistic:

Statistic:

Site-LevelPM2.5 - Local Conditions(88101)

Micrograms/cubic meter (LC)(105)

PM25 24-hour 2006 / PM25 Annual 2006

Annual Weighted Mean

Annual 98th Percentile

Level:

Level:

Design Value Year: 2012

REPORT EXCLUDES MEASUREMENTS WITH REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENT FLAGS.

15

35 State Name: Pennsylvania

Site_ID /

STREET ADDRESS

|

|

|

Cred.

Days

Comp.

Qrtrs

Wtd.

Mean 

98th

Perctil

Cert&

 Eval

|

|

|

Cred.

Days

Comp.

Qrtrs

98th

Perctil

Wtd.

Mean 

Cert&

 Eval

|

|

|

Cred.

Days

Comp.

Qrtrs

98th

Perctil

Wtd.

Mean 

Cert&

 Eval

|

|

|

Design

Value

Valid

Ind.

|

|

|

Design

Value

Valid

Ind.

24-Hour Annual 2012 2011 2010

42-003-0008

42-003-0067

42-003-0093

42-003-1008

42-003-1301

42-007-0014

42-125-0005

42-125-0200

301 39TH ST, BLDG #7, LAWRENCEVILLE

3640 OLD OAKDALE RD, SOUTH FAYETTE

KUMMER RD, GOLF CLUBHOUSE, NORTH PARK

PACIFIC & IDAHO AVE, HARRISON

600 ANDERSON ST, NORTH BRADDOCK

EIGHT STREET AND RIVER ALLEY

CHARLER01 WASTE TREATMENT PLANT

MCCARRELL AND FAYETTE STS

344

108

54

110

100

358

351

366

4

4

4

4

3

4

4

4

 20.4

 18.1

 16.4

 20.7

 26.8

 22.6

 23.4

 20.6

*

 10.1

 9.2

 8.6

 10.5

 11.5

 11.9

 10.4

 10.5

*

S

S

S

S

S

347

107

50

104

100

364

317

364

4

4

3

3

3

4

3

4

 27.3

 30.6

 25.6

 29.8

 33.7

 29.8

 28.6

 27.4

*

*

*

*

 11.1

 10.6

 9.0

 11.6

 12.3

 11.7

 12.0

 10.8

*

*

*

*

346

111

52

111

106

319

352

351

4

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

 29.7

 28.5

 26.5

 34.0

 37.2

 29.4

 27.0

 27.0

*

 12.2

 11.7

 10.5

 13.0

 13.7

 12.5

 13.2

 12.1

*

 26

 26

 23

 28

 33

 27

 26

 25

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

N

Y

 11.1

 10.5

 9.4

 11.7

 12.5

 12.0

 11.9

 11.1

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

N

Y
Application of Imputation / Bootstrap Protocol to the 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 2006 NAAQS (24-hr Std)

Nonattainment Area for the Design Value Period, 

2010-2012

Schmidt 6-4-2013

• Region 3 has requested that the draft imputation / bootstrap 

protocol be run for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 2006 NAAQS 

(24-hr standard) nonattainment area, specifically for site 

421290008 that was incomplete for part of 2011. Hence, that 

site is the “Site A” in the analysis.
10-year Annual DV History 

Site A 

Site 421290008 () 

is incomplete in 2010-

2012 

 24-hour designations 

based on 2005-2007 data

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030002 38 inc-na 34 inc-a 27 inc-a

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030008 40 NA 39 NA 39 NA 39 NA 40 NA 36 NA 32 A 28 A 27 A 26 A

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030021 42 NA 37 NA 35 A 37 inc-na 35 inc-a

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030067 42 NA 44 NA 39 NA 35 A 35 A 32 A 30 A 26 A 27 A 26 A

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030093 49 NA 52 NA 52 NA 45 NA 40 NA 35 inc-a 28 inc-a 25 inc-a 25 A 23 A

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030095 41 NA 44 NA 41 NA 40 NA 36 NA 35 inc-a 26 inc-a 23 inc-a 23 inc-a 26 inc-a

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030116 44 NA 42 NA 43 NA 42 inc-na 39 inc-na

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030131 30 inc-a 25 inc-a 16 inc-a

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420030133 54 inc-na 45 inc-na 39 NA 32 inc-a 28 inc-a

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420031008 45 NA 45 NA 43 NA 42 NA 40 NA 37 NA 33 inc-a 31 inc-a 30 inc-a 28 A

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420031301 48 NA 44 NA 42 NA 38 NA 40 NA 39 NA 37 NA 35 A 34 A 33 A

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420039002 43 NA 43 NA 38 NA 40 inc-na 39 inc-na

PA Beaver Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 420070014 40 NA 38 NA 43 NA 45 NA 43 NA 36 NA 33 A 30 A 29 A 27 A

PA WashingtonPittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 421250005 42 NA 39 NA 36 NA 34 A 36 NA 33 A 32 A 28 A 28 A 26 A

PA WashingtonPittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 421250200 37 NA 35 A 34 A 33 A 35 inc-a 32 inc-a 30 A 26 A 27 A 25 A

PA WashingtonPittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 421255001 36 NA 36 NA 36 NA 38 NA 40 NA 36 NA 31 inc-a 25 A 20 A 17 A

PA Westmoreland Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 421290008 40 NA 38 NA 38 NA 37 NA 37 NA 34 A 34 A 32 A 33 inc-a 29 inc-a

2001-2003 2009-2011

24-hour Design Values (μg/m3)

2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010 2010-2012

state county

24hr_std_

naa_name

site

Figure B1
Site-level Data Capture, 2010-2012

5-year (2008-2012) # Data Pairs 

& Associated Correlation

•Site 420030002 has, 1) 

the highest correlation (in 

the NAA) with Site A1; and

2) sufficient paired data 

(i.e., 30+ obs quarter 

required to establish a 

good relationship with site 

A1; and, 3) sufficient (i.e., 

complete) data available in 

key quarters of 2010-2012 

(i.e., those deficient in the 

Site A). It is the Site B!

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

421290008 421290008 698 768 770 700 1.00

421290008 420030002 189 181 140 120 0.87

421290008 420030067 118 131 132 116 0.86

421290008 421250005 315 352 363 348 0.85

421290008 420030008 330 369 372 318 0.84

421290008 420030093 44 53 56 43 0.82

421290008 420030095 18 28 28 27 0.82

421290008 420031301 115 126 132 112 0.81

421290008 421250200 339 375 370 339 0.79

421290008 420031008 120 129 132 111 0.78

421290008 420070014 331 346 363 345 0.68

421290008 421255001 332 365 366 341 0.59

Correlation 

(r) Site A Potential Site B

Number of Matched Data Pairs (by date) (minimum of 

30+ pairs required per quarter)

'10 Q1 '10 Q2 '10 Q3 '10 Q4 '11 Q1 '11 Q2 '11 Q3 '11 Q4 '12 Q1 '12 Q2 '12 Q3 '12 Q4

421290008 91 97 90 100 91 100 100 48 97 100 100 100

420030002 88 90 90 94 100 94 77

420030008 91 98 91 99 96 92 97 96 100 95 100 82

420030067 83 93 90 97 93 80 90 90 94 93 90 77

420030093 73 87 94 87 87 73 88 80 87 93 94 80

420030095 73 87 94 93

420031008 83 93 90 97 90 73 90 90 97 97 90 77

420031301 83 80 97 87 93 73 84 80 81 97 81 70

420070014 89 77 84 100 100 99 100 100 100 91 100 100

421250005 94 100 91 100 88 65 95 100 91 100 92 100

421250200 100 99 86 100 100 99 100 100 100 100 100 100

421255001 91 99 95 97 89 99 99 89 95 86 100 100

Site

Quarterly data capture (% )

Site A 

Site B 

Site A 

Site B 

Figure B2
v_a

0

10

20

30

40

50

v_b

0 10 20 30 40 50

Linear Regression Results

• The computed 421290008 (Site A) : 420030008 (Site B) linear relationship is:

•The linear regression is 

based on the most recent 5 

years (1/2008 – 12/2012)

of paired (Site A : Site B) 

data 

•The residuals from this 

model are used in the 

subsequent bootstrapping

N = 1,389

R-square = 0.70

Site A concentration (v_a) = 2.100243 + (0.950215 * Site B conc. (v_b))

Figure B3
Imputation & Resulting Data Capture & DV Recalculation

Before

After

2011 Q4 is deficient

2011 Q4 is now complete

Incomplete DV is 29

“Complete” DV is 29

Figure B4
Bootstrapping Residuals (& DV Recalculations)

• FYI Residual distribution for 421290008 (Site A) : 420030002 (Site B) linear fit

• Using the entire distribution of residuals (overall 

stats shown to left), the next step randomly applies 

(i.e., adds) actual individual residuals from the 

linear regression to the imputed current-period Site 

A values.

•A 1000 bootstrap runs will provide a pseudo 

confidence interval for the partially imputed Site A 

2010-2012 design value

• Bootstrap results (for a run of 1000):

• Final result:

 PASS (clean data determination)

•All 1000 simulations produced a passing DV

Figure B5