## UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY RESEARCHTRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711

OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

### AND STANDARDS



## MEMORANDUM

Subject: Documentation of Future Year Ozone and Annual PM2.5DesignValues



## From: and Standards

The purpose ofthis memo is to provideprojected futureyear ozone and annual PM2.5 desim values for monitorsin the Western United Statesbased on the air qualitymodeling in support ofEPA's recentlyproposed Federal Implementation Plans to ~edice iterstate ~&s~ort of ParticulateMatter and Ozone (Transport ~ule).'Thememo further describes how these projected design values canbe used to establishwhich monitors should be further evaluatedto determineif emissions from other states significantlycontribute to nonattainmentor interfere with maintenance at these sites.

Theproposed Transport Rule addresses actions that Statesmust take in order to eliminatetransport of emissions that significantlycontribute to nonattainmentor interferewith maintenance of the 1997 %hour ozone and 1997PM2.5National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), aswell as the 2006 PM2.5NAAQS, in other states. The air qualitymodeling EPA used in support of the Transport Rule is documented in the "Air Quality ModelingTechnical SupportDocument:Transport Rule Proposal" (hereafter referred to as the "TSD"). The document canbe found at 

# htta://www.eva.gov/airaualitv/tran~vort/tech.html.

The transport rule modeling specificallyevaluated eastern States' contribution to nonattainment or interferencewith maintenance to areas in other States. Thetransportrule did not evaluate the contribution to nonattainment orthe interferencewith maintenance of states in the western portion of the continental United States. These western Stateswere, however, includedin the Transport Rule modeling domain. Therefore,the modeling results from the

I 

## The TransportRule webpage can 

## be found here: httD://www.eaa.~ov/airtransvort 

## The TransportRule NPR Federal Registernotice canbe foundhere: 75 

## FR 45,2010 (Aug. 2,2010)

InternetAddress (URL)

# . hHp://www.epa.gov RecycledlReoyclable Printed wlh

### Vegetable 01

### Based Inks

### on Recycled

### Paper 

### (Mlnlmum 25% 

### Postconsumer)

## western portion of the modeling domain can be used to project future air quality at monitors in these western States.

The Transport Rule modeling TSD contains detailed information on the model setup, emissions, meteorology, and model results for the Transport Rule modeling. The air quality model used for the Transport Rule was the CAMx photochemical model (http:llcamx.com/). EPA 

## performed air quality modeling for a 2005 base year and a 2012 "no CAIR" base case.' The modeling for 2005 was used as the base year for projecting air quality at monitors to the future. The 2012 base case modeling was used to identify future nonattainment and maintenance monitor locations and to quantify the contributions of emissions from sources in upwind statesto concentrations of 

## PM2,5, and 8-hour ozone at downwind monitoring receptors.

The CAMx modeling was completed using a 

## 36 km Continental U.S. modeling domain and a nested 12km Eastern U.S. domain. Figure 1 shows the location of the domain boundaries and Table 2 provides details on the horizontal and vertical grid specifications. Additional details

on model setup and performance can be found in the TSD.

Figure 1. Transport Rule air quality modeling domains.

? 

## In 

## supportoftlie Transport Rule, EPA 

## performed additional modeling for a 2014 ''no CAIR

## base case, and a 2014 control case that reflects tlie en~issions reductions expected fsom the Transport Rule etnissions budgets (i.e.,the "remedy" scenario). EPA 

## used the 2014 remedy case tnodeling as part ofthe analysis to quantify the air quality and health benefits from the rule.

## 3

Table 

## 1. Specifications of the air quality modeling domains.

EPA analyzed out-of-state contributions to monitors projected to show nonattainment and maintenance problems in 2012 for the 38 States that were fully contained in the 12

## km Eastern U.S. domain. In the Transport Rule, EPA made no specific findings for Western States, including those that were not fully contained within the Eastern U.S. 12km d~main.~ The modeling TSD contains information on the future year design value projection methodology (Section 111) as well as theprojected ozone and PM2.jdesign values for each monitoring site in the 12 km modeling domain (Appendix 

## B). Map Projection

Grid Resolution

Coordinate Center

True Latitudes

Dimensions

Vertical extent

The future year projection methodology used the CAMx air quality modeling results in a "relative" sense to project future concentrations of ozone and PM2.5 at monitors. Rather than use the absolute model-predicted future year ozone and PM2.5concentrations, EPA used the base year and future year predictions to calculate a (relative) percent change in ozone and PM2.5 concentrations. In this approach, the ratio of future year model predictions to base year model predictions are used to adjust ambient measured data up or down depending on the relative (percent) change in model predictions for each location. The use of ambient data as part of the calculation helps to constrain the future year design value predictions, even if the absolute model concentrations are over-predicted or under-predicted. I11 other words, anchoring the future predictions to monitored values in the base case, helps to mitigate model performance issues. As described in the TSD, the procedures for projecting PMzj and 8-hour ozone concentrations conform to the methodologies contained in the modeling guidance for attainment demonstration modeling4.

Nonattainment and Maintenance Receptors 36 

### x 

### 36 km

## Domain



# 'EPA 

## did not conduct a contribution analysis or make any specific findings for New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana since they are only partially contained within the 12kmmodeling domain. 12

### x 12km 

## Domain

4 

## U.S. EPA, 2007: 

## Guidance on the Use ofModels and Other Analyses for DemonstratingAttainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone,PM2,5, and Regional Haze; Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. htt~:llww.e~a.~ov/ttn/scram/~uidance/~uide/final-O3-pm-r11- ~uidance.pdf 

## Lalnbert Conformal Projection



### 36 km 

### 12km



### 97 deg W, 

### 40 

## deg 

## N

33 

### degN 

### and 45 

### deg N

148x112~14 279x240~ 14 

### 14

### Layers: 

## Surfaceto 100

### millibar level 

## (see Table 11-3)

## The Transport Rule proposal identifies states whose emissions contribute significantly to lionattainment andlor interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone and PM2 5 

## NAAQS in other states. I11 order to make these findings, EPA needed to address how to define "nonattainment" and "maintenance" and to identify the monitors that would be suitable for evaluation. For the Transport Rule proposal, EPA defined nonattainment and maintenance as follows: Design values of ozone and PMzsin 2012 were estimated by applying the 2005 to 2012 relative change in model-predicted ozone or PM2.5 species5 concentrations to the measured (2003-2007) ozone or PM2.5 species concentrations. For each ozone or PM2.5monitoring site, all valid design values (up to 3) from this period were averaged together. Because 2005 is included in all three design value periods, this has the effect of creating a 5-year weighted average, where the middle year is weighted 3 times, the 2'ldand 4"' 

## years are weighted twice, and the lS'and 

## 5"' years are weighted once. EPA referred to this as the "5-year weighted average" concentration (or 5-year weighted average design value).

EPA then used the 5-yearweighted average design values to project ambient concentrations for the 2012 scenario in order to determine which monitoring sites are expected to be nonattainment for the future year scenario. We also projected 2012 design values for each of Lhe individual 3-year design value periods (i.e., 2003-2005,2004-2006, and 2005-2007). The projection of design values for these individual three year periods was used to determine sites expected to have maintenance problems in the 2012 base case.

For annual averagePM2.5concentrations, any value that is greater than or equal to 15.05 l.lglni3 is rounded to 15.1 l.lg/m3and is considered to be violating the NAAQS. This approach is consistellt with the truncation and rounding procedures for the 1997 annual PM2.5NAAQS. Thus, monitor sites with future year annual PM2.5design values of 15.05l.lg/m3or greater, based

on the projection of 5-year weighted average concentrations, are predicted to be nonattainment sites. Siteswith futureyear maxi~lium design values (based on the highest ofthe three design values projected to 2012, as described above) of 15.05 &m3 or greater are predicted to be maintenance sites. We use the term "nonattainment sites" to refer to those sites that are projected to exceed the NAAQS based onboth the average and maximum design values. Those sites that are projected to be attainment based on the average design value but exceed the NAAQS based on the maximum design value are referred to as maintenance sites.

The future year ozone design values are truncated to integers6in units ofppb. This approach is consistent with the truncation and roundingprocedures for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Future year design values that are greater than or equal to 85 ppb are considered to be violating the NAAQS. Sites with futureyear 5-year weighted average ozone design values of 85

5 

## The PM2,~ 

## species include sulfate,nitrate, ammonium, particlebound water, elemental carbon, salt, other primaly PM2.5,

## and organic aerosol mass (by difference). Organic aerosol mass by difference is defined

as the difference between FRM PM2.s 

## and the sum of the other components.

6 

## The documented ozone design values includevalues to the tenths digit. Therefore,based on truncation to an integer,any value that is less than or equal to 84.9 ppb is < 85

## ppb. Any value that is greater than or equal to 85.0 

## ppb is violating the NAAQS.

## ppb or greater are predicted to be nonattainment. Sites with future year maximum design values of 85 ppb or greater are predicted to be future year maintenance sites.

2012 

## Model Results 

## for the West



## We have used the approach of the proposed Transport Rule to identify monitors in the West that are projected to show nonattainment or maintenance problems in 2012. EPA did not evaluate the contribution of the western states to other states in the proposed Transport Rule. However, as shown in Figure 1,the western states are within the scope of the 36 km modeling domain. Therefore, future year projected design values for western states can be calculated from the modeling. Using the same approach as used in the transport rule, we are able to evaluate whether monitors in these western states should be considered maintenance receptors for purposes of other section 110(a)(2)(D) actions. Appendix A and 

## B contain the model projected 2012 design values for 8-hour ozone and annual average PM2.5 for the West. This includes design values for the States of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and California. The 2012 design values for the rest of the continental U.S. is documented in Appendix 

## B of the Transport Rule Air Quality Modeling TSD. Appendix A contains projected 2012 annual PM2.5 (1997 NAAQS) design values based

on the average ambient design values and the maximum ambient design values. Appendix 

## B contains projected 2012 8-hour ozone (1997 NAAQS) design values based onthe average ambient design values and the maximum ambient design value. As noted above, sites with 2012 average design values above the NAAQS areconsidered nonattainment sites. Sites with 2012 maximum design values above the NAAQS are considered maintenance sites.

Additional ozoneinformation is included in Appendix C. Appendix 

## C contains design value information for ozonemonitoring sites in the West where 2012 projected design values could not be calculated from the Transport Rule modeling results. This was due to a limited number of "high" modeled ozone days. TheTransport Rule ozone design value projection methodology followed the recommended procedure from the ozone modeling guidance. In order to calculate a valid future year design value, the relative change in modeled ozone must be based

on the average of at least 5 modeled days with base year co~lcentrations of >= 

## 70 ppb. No future year design values were calculated for sites which did not meet this criteria. Consistent with the modeling guidance and the Transport Rule, future year ozone design values were not calculated for sites which did not meet the minimum data requirements. Appendix C contains the sites which have valid base year design value data (at least one complete design value in the 2003- 2007 period), but no valid 2012 projected design value.

Note: 

## There are nutnerous monitoring sites in the States ofNew Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Monta~~a which are in both the 36 km and 12km CAMx modeling domains. Only thc 12km results for these sites are included in Appendix A and 

## B. The appendices notc where the design values were extracted fiom the 12km model results.

# Appendix 

# A

Base year 2003-2007 and Future Year 2012 Annual Average PM2.5 Design Values- Western States

### Average Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 7 6.49 8.94 12.17 12.59 9.97 6.04 5.85 7.77 5.71 12.94 9.44 9.34 12.73 7.77 7.39 9:47 16.99 16.38 17.17 12.71 8.39 9.2 5.25 18.94 18.68 19.17 17.28 4.62 17.03 18.19

18 15.35 17.66 17.92 15.36 16.62 15.21 8.42 6.46 14.78 6.96 5.16 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 6.97 6.64 8.68 11.78 1192 9.6 5.9 5.73 8.06 5.66 13.43 9.83 10.15 12.65 7.33 7.14 9.95 15.86 14.93 15.68 12.36 8.33 9.14 5.22 17.11 17.37 18.11 15.83 4.78 16.94 18.25 18.14 14.52 17.54 17.93 15.6 16.19 14.29 8.26 6.64 13.85 6.93 4.94 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 7.06 6.87 8.98 12.54 12.59 10.23 6.18

6 8.37 5.92 13.69 9.67 9.6 13.51 7.82 7.39 9.8 17.44 16.4 17.23 12.9 8.61 9.43 5.52 19.21 19.56 20.31 17.56 4.81 18.19 19.68 19.61 15.35 18.73 19.17 16.78 17.27 15.21 8.91 6.83 14.96 7.01 5.25 

### Modeling results from 12km domain? Average Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 6.9 6.28 8.65 11.43 11

92 9.35 5.77 5.59 7.49 5.45 12.7 9.6 9.87 11.92 7.3 7.13 9.62 15.46 14.91 15.64 12.18 8.12 8.92 4.98 16.86 16.6 17.1 15.59 4.59 15.86 16.87 16.66 14.52 16.54 16.77 14.28 15.59 14.29 7.81 6.28 13.69 6.88 4.84

### Monitor ID 6057100? 60590007 60592022 60610006 6063100Ei 60631009 60651003. 60652002 60658001 60670006 

### -- 60670010 60674001 60710025 60710306 60712002 60718001 6071 9004 60730001 60730003 60730006 60731002



### -60731010 60750005 60771002 60792006 60798001 60811001 60830011 60850005



### -- 60852003 60890004 60950004 60970003 60990005 61010003 61072002 611 10007 61 110009 61112002 61113001 61131003 80010006 80050005 80130003 

### State Caiifornia California California California California California Caiifornia California California California California California Caiifornia California California California California California California California California California California Caiifornia Caiifornia California California California California Caiifornia California California California California California California California California California California California Colorado Colorado Colorado 

### County Nevada Oranqe Orange Placer Plumas Plumas Riverside Riverside Riverside Sacramento Sacramento Sacramento San Bernardino San Bernardino San Bernardino San Bernardino San Bernardino San Diego San Dig0 San Diego San Diego San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Clara Shasta Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tulare Ventura Ventura Ventura Ventura Yolo Adams Arapahoe Boulder 

### Monitor Latitude 39.33861 33.83062 33.63003 38.74583 39.93722 39.80833 33.94603 33.70853 33.99958 38.61417 38.55833 38.55583 34.03722 34.51 34.10002 34.26444 34.10688 32.63123 32.79119 32.83646 33.12771 32.70149

37.766 37.95083 35.25661 35.49139

37.4829 34.42778

37.3485 37.3062 40.54972

38.1027 38.4435 37.64167 39.13889 36.33222 34.21 34.40461

34.2775

34.255 38.66194 39.82601

39.6044 40.16458 

### Monitor Longitude -120.1703 -1 17.9385 -1 17.6759 -121.2653 -120.9378 -120.4717 -1 17.4006 -116.2154 -1 17.4160 -121.3669 -121.4919 -121.4572 -1 17.6900 -117.3306 -117.4920 -1 16.8644 -117.2741 -117.0591 -116.9421 -117.1287 -1 17.0753 -117.1497 -122.3991 -121.2675 -120.6689 -120.6681 -122.2034 -1 19.6903 -121.8950 -121.8489 -122.3792 -122.2382 -122.7100 -120.9936 -121.6175 -1 19.2903 -118.8694 -118.8100 -1 18.6847 -119.1425 -121.7278 -104.9374 -105.0195 -105.1009 

### Average Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 6.71 15.75 11.33 9.8 9.75 11.46 18.91 10.31 20.95 11.88 11.44 10.53 19.67 10.29 19.14 10.77 19.01 11.92 12.27 10.59 12.79 13.38 9.62 12.94 6.92 7.94 9.03 10.37 11.38 10.32 7.41 9.99 8.21 14.21 9.85 18.51 10.68 9.74 11.68 10.69 9.03 10.06 7.96 8.32 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 7.06 16.32 11.9 9.98 9.75 11.84 20.45 10.85 22.6 12.02 11.57 10.54 21.15 10.7 20.28 10.77 20.45 12.16 12.82 10.69 13.45 13.85 9.87 13.08 7.02 8.01 9.22 10.57 11.7 10.32 7.72 10.19 8.34 14.56 10.25 19.32 11.25 10.1 12.63 11.19 9.37 10.16 8.1 8.54 

### Average Design Value 2012 (ugIm3) 6.26 14.73 10.81 9.31 9.22 10.75 17.73 9.85 19.64 11.28 10.92 10.04 18.41 9.58 17.96 10.25 17.84 11.61 11.95 10.31 12.62 13.04 10.08 12.52 6.78 7.63 9.53 10.26 12.06 10.42 6.93 9.97 8.28 13.22 9.19 16.75 10.42 9.38 11.15 10.34 8.7 9.63 7.64 7.91 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 6.58 15.26 11.35 9.48 9.22 11.1 19.18 10.37 21.19 11.42 11.06 10.04 19.8 9.96 19.03 10.25 19.19 11.84 12.48 10.42 13.27 13.5 10.34 12.66 6.89 7.7 9.73 10.46 12.39 10.42 7.22 10.17 8.41 13.54 9.56 17.48 10.97 9.71 12.05 10.82 9.03 9.73 7.77 8.13 

### Modeling results from 12km domain?

Yes Yes Yes

### Monitor ID 80130012 80290004 80310002 80310023 80390001 80410008 80410011 80690009 80770017



### -- 81010012 81130004 81230006



### - 81230008 160010011 160050015 

### - 160090010 160270004 160410001 160490003 160790017 300870307 301111065 300131026 300290009 

### -

300290047 300310013 300470013 300470028 300490018 300530018 300630031 300810007 300890007 300930005 320030022 320030298 320030561 320031019 320032002 

### -

320310016

350010023

350010024

350050005 

### State Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado ldaho ldaho ldaho idaho ldaho ldaho ldaho Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Montana Nevada Nevada Nevada Nevada Nevada Nevada New Mexico New Mexico New Mexico 

### County Boulder Deita Denver Denver Elbert El Paso El Paso Larimer Mesa Pueblo San Miguel Weld Weld Ada Bannock Benewah Canyon Franklin ldaho Shoshone Rosebud Yellowstone Cascade Flathead Flathead Gallatin Lake Lake Lewis and Cla Lincoln Missouia Ravalli Sanders Silver Bow :lark Slark Slark Slark Slark Nashoe

3ernaliilo

3ernalillo

>haves 

### Monitor Latitude

40.0211 38.73921 39.75118 39.78108 39.23138 38.89598 38.82804 40.57129

39.0638 38.26306 37.93787 40.41488 40.20939 43.63611 42.87673 47.31667

43.5624 42.01333

46.2094 47.53639 45.62333 45.80194 47.50222 48.39972

48.2025 44.65778 47.52694 47.69222 46.60389 48.38417 46.87491 46.24552 47.59639

46.0024 36.39078 36.05222 36.16399 35.78563 38.19111 39.52508

35.1343

35.0631

33.39694 

### Monitor Longitude -105.2634 -108.0731 -104,9876 -104.9567 -104,6348 -104.7613 -104.8277 -105.0797 -108.5612 -104.6121 -107.8131 -104.7069 -104,8241 -1 16.2703 -1 12.4603 -1 16.5703 -116.5632 -1 11.8092 -116.0275 -116.2367 -106.6681 -108.4261 -1 11.2789 -1 14.3336 -114,3056 -1 11.0908 -114.1006 -114.1622 -112.0353 -115.5481 -113.9953 -114.1598 -1 15.3236 -1 12.5009 -1 14.9068 -1 15.0569 -115.1139 -115.3571 -115.1222 -1 19.8077

-106.5852

-106.5788

-104,5236 

### Average Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 6.96 7.44 9.37 9.76 4.4 6.73 7.94 7.33 9.28 7.45 4.65 8.19 8.78 8.41 7.66 9.59 8.46

7 7 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 7.06 7.62 9.74 9.76 4.54 6.73 8.11 7.4 9.48 7.65 4.81 8.35 9.28 8.51 7.74 9.69 8.64 7.7 9.58 12.13 6.58 8.18 5.8 10.16 8.55 4.31 9.06

9 8 15.12 10.27 8.58 6.85 10.53 4.07 5.8 9.44 3.78 8.79 8.15

7.13

6.81

6.58 

### Average Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 6.67 6.97 8.97 9.34 4.23 6.34 7.49 7.02 8.78 7.08 4.48 7.73 8.31 8.09 7.37 9.37 7.98 7.24 9.43 11.77 6.48 7.89 5.39 9.49 8.09 4.17 8.76 8.7 7.7 14.31 9.85 8.33 6.54 9.5 3.85 5.46 8.84 3.51 7.98 7.59

6.59

6.22

6.29 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 6.77 7.14 9.32 9.34 4.37 6.34 7.65 7.09 8.97 7.28 4.64 7.89 8.77 8.2 7.45 9.47 8.15 7.24 9.43 11.82 6.48 7.92 5.61 9.77 8.18 4.22 8.76 8.7 7.76 14.49 9.9 8.36 6.7 10.16 3.91 5.5 8.84 3.6 8.26 7.64

6.68

6.39

6.33 

### Modeling results from 12km domain? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

### Monitor ID

350130017

350130025

350431003

350439011

350450006

350490020



### - 350171002 410290133 410291001 410350004 410390060 410391007 410391009 410392013 410510080 410510246 410610119 481410037 490030003 

### --490050004 4901 10004 490350003 490351001 490353006 490353007 490353008 490490002 490494001 490495008 490495010 490570002 490570007 490571003 530330024 530330057 530330080 530530029 53061 1007 530630016 560050877 560050892 

### State New Mexico New Mexico New Mexico New Mexico New Mexico 

# - New Mexico New Mexico Oregon 

# - Oregon Oregon 

# - Oregon Oregon Oregon Oregon Oregon Oregon Oregon Texas Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Ulah Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Utah Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Wyoming Wyoming 

### county

Dona Ana

DonaAna

Sandoval

Sandoval

San Juan

Santa Fe

Grant Jackson Jackson Klamath Lane Lane Lane Lane Multnomah Multnomah Union El Paso Box Elder Cache Davis Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Utah Utah Utah Utah Weber Weber Weber King King King Pierce Snohornish Spokane Campbell Campbell 

### Average Design Value 2003-2007 (ugim3)

9.95

6.31 

### Monitor Latitude

31.79583

32.32194

35.23806

35.5064

36.7275

35.67111

32.78444 42.31408 42.53611 42.18889 44.02631

43.8345 44.0467 43.74435 45.49667

45.5613 45.33897 31.76828 41.49278 41.731 11 40.90297 40.64667 40.70861 40.73639 40.70444 40.51795 40.25361 40.34139 40.43028 40.13639 41.20639 41.17972 41.30368

47.755 47.5632 47.56833

47.1864 48.05556 47.66074 43.67694 44.09889 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3)

10.4

6.35

5.02

8.34

6.08

4.81

5.93 10.66 5.55 11.37 8.92 6.35 7.73 12.37 9.45 8.57 8.52 9.09 8.66 12.22 10.6 11.94 9.56 11.62 12.22 8.68 10.04 10.73 9.11 8.91 11.45 9.54 9.54 9.27 11.24 8.13 10.78 10.35 10.19 6.29 5.04 

### Monitor Longitude

-106.5575

-106.7678

-106.6494

-106.7222

-108.2208

-105.9536

-108.2717 -122.8792 -122.8750 -121.7225 -123.0837 -123.0353 -123.0177 -122.4805 -122.6022 -122.6788 -1 18.0945 -106.5013 -112.0181 -1 11.8375 -1 11.8845 -1 11.8497 -112.0947 -1 11.8722 -1 11.9686 -112.0231 -1 11.6631 -111.7136 -1 11.8039 -111.6597 -1 11.9747 -111.9831 -111.9871 -122.2806 -122.3405 -122.3081 -122.4517 -122.1758 -1 17.3581 -105.2358 -105.3428 

### Average Design Value 2012 (ugim3)

9.55

6.03

4.69

7.74

5.75

4.59

5.79 9.94 5.28 10.69 8.46 6.23 7.4 11.6 8.9 8.14 8.08 8.73 7.9 10.86 9.83 10.93 8.78 10.73 11.4 7.86 9.32 9.8 8.36 8.18 10.51 8.73 8.8 9.06 11.1 8.04 10.45 9.77 9.31 6.16 4.91 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (ugim3)

9.97

6.07

4.71

8.08

5.91

4.64

5.79 10.27 5.42 10.86 8.74 6.23 7.57 12.03 9.21 8.36 8.24 8.73 8.13 11.48 10.11 11.17 9.11 11.03 11.63 8.19 9.35 9.99 8.57 8.31 10.77 8.98 8.97 9.17 11.1 8.04 10.68 10.21 9.52 6.16 4.95 

### Modeling results from 12km domain?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

### Monitor ID 560050899 560090819 560131003 560210001 560330002 

### Average Design Value 2003-2007 (uglm3) 5.37 3.52 8.17 4.48 9.7 

### State Wyoming Wyoming Wyoming Wyoming Wyoming 

### Value Value Maximum Design Value 2012 (uglm3) 5.37 3.48 8.21 4.48 9.54 

### Monitor Monitor Modeling results from 12km domain? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Campbell Converse Fremont Laramie Sheridan 44.46597 43.42667 42.84105 41.13998 44.83327 -105.5517 -105.3858 -108.7363 -104.8178 -106.9646

# Appendix 

# B

Base year 2003-2007 and Future Year 2012 8-Hour Average Ozone Design Values- Western States

### Monitor ID 40070010 40130019 40131004 40131010

.-40132001 40132005 40133002 40133003 40134003

-. 401 34004 40134005 40134008 40134010 4013401 1 40137003 40137020 40137021 40139508 40139702 40139704 40139706 40139997 40213001 

## -- 40213003



### - 4021 3009 40213010 40217001



### - 40218001 60010007 60050002 60070002 60070007 60090001 60111002 60130002 60131002 60133001 60170010 60170020 60190007

### Monitor ID 60190008 60190242 60194001 60195001 60210002 60250004 60250005 60250006 60251003 60254003 60254004 60290007 60290008 60290010 60290011 60290014 60290232 60295001 60296001 6031 1004 60370002 60370016 603701 13 60371002 60371103 60371201 60371701 60372005 60376012 60379033 60390004 60430006 60470003 60531003 60570005 60570007 60591003 60592022 60610002 60610004 60610006 60650012 60652002 

### Average Design Value 2003- 2007 (PP~) 98.3 96.3 93.7 91.3 65.5 70 74.7 76.7 85 83.7 73 98.7 89.3 88 87 97.7 95.7 110 89 85.7 91.7 102 73.7 89 74 101.7 100.3 91.3 114 96.3 79.3 83.7 89.3 55.7 96.3 65 68 84.3 91.3 94 88 112.3

91 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (PP~) 89.5 88.6 87.3 84.1 63 65.8 72.2 72.2 78.6 79.7 67.7 89.1 80.7 80.2 80.1 88.2 85.6 98.3 81.1 79.1 91.1 101.7 74.9 86.3 73.7 101.9 105.1 90.2 108.5 89.8 74.2 79.2 86 54.9 90.3 79.2 71 81.5 85.7 89.4 83.3 106.9 86.1 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (PP~) 99 98 96 93 67 72 79 79 86 87 74 100 91 90 90 99 96 113 90 88 94 105 78 89 76 106 102 93 120 98 82 87 95 58 98 86 73 86 93 97 89 119 95 

### Modeling results from 12km domain? Average Design Value 2012 (PP~) 88.9 87.1 85.2 82.6 61.5 64 68.3 70.1 77.7 76.6 66.8 88 79.2 78.4 77.5 87.1 85.3 95.7 80.2 77 88.8 98.8 70.8 86.3 71.7 97.7 103.3 88.5 103.1 88.2 71.7 76.2 80.8 52.7 88.7 78.3 66.1 79.9 84.2 86.7 82.3 100.9 82.4

### Monitor Monitor Average Design Value 2003- 2007 (PP~)

102.3 98.3 108.7 101 62.3 80.7 90.7 75.7 82.3 97.3 76 94.3 68 75

84.7

123.3

98

85

91.7

106.3

80.7

114.3

100.7

119.3

103.7

115.7 66.7 71.7 72.3 69 73.3 87.7 73 59.3 63 75.3 62.3 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (PP~) 104 100 112 104 63 82 92 78 83 98 76 96 68 76

85

127

100

85

94

108

83

118

104

123

105

116 68 73 74 70 74 89 76 61 65 77 67 

### Average Design Value 2012 (PP~) 92.1 90.3 109.4 92.8 57 75.5 84.9 71.2 78.8 91 71.5 88.2 64.3 71.1

76.7

116.7

92.7

77.1

86.8

109.5

72.2

115

95.3

120

93.8

116.4 64.3 69.1 69.7 66.9 68.3 81.2 69.1 57.2 60.8 71.7 58.7 

### Maximum Modeling Design results Value from 2012 12km (PP~) domain? 93.7 91.9 112.7 95.6 57.6 76.7 86.1 73.3 79.4 91.7 71.5 89.8 64.3 721

77

### Monitor ID 60830011 60831014 60831021 60831025 60832011 60833001 60850002 60851001 60852005 60852006 60870006 60870007 60890004 60890007 60950005 60953003 60990005 60990006 61010003 61010004 61030004 61070006 61070009 61072002 

### - 61090005 61110007 61110009 61111004 61 112002 61112003 61113001 61 130004 61131003 80013001 80050002 80130011 80310002 80310014 80350004 80590002 80590005 80590006 80590011 

### Monitor Monitor Latitude Longitude 34.4278 -1 19.6903 34.5417 -119.7915 34.4028 -1 19.4575 34.4897 -120.0469 34.4455 -1 19.8284 34.6084 -120.0747 37.0000 -121.5744 37.2269 -121.9786 37.4019 -121.8425 37.0794 -121.5992 37.0522 -122.0125 36.9840 -121.9883 40.5497 -122.3792 40.4531 -122.2978 38.2269 -122.0758 38.3584 -121.9500 37.6417 -120.9936 37.4883 -120.8358 39.1389 -121.6175 39.2056 -121.8204 40.2622 -122.0928 

### State Zalifornia Zalifornia Zaiifornia Zaiifornia Zaiifornia Zaiifornia 2aiifornia Zaiifornia :alifornia Zalifornia Zalifornia Zalifornia :alifornia Zalifornia Zalifornia Zalifornia zalifornia Zalifornia Zalifornia :alifornia Zalifornia :alifornia :alifornia Zalifornia :alifornia Zaiifornia :aiifornia Zaiifornia :alifornia :alifornia :alifornia :alifornia :alifornia :olorado Zolorado Zolorado Zolorado :olorado :olorado Zolorado :oiorado Zoiorado :oiorado 

### Average Design Value 2003- 2007 (PP~) 60.5 76 60.7 73.3 62.7 65.3 70.3 71 59 75.3 61.3 54.7 78 79.3 67.7 72.7 84.7 84.7 74 82 82.7 96 103.7

92 80 79 84 88.3 89.7 65 63 74 78.7 69 78.7 77 56 73 83 76.3 70.3 81.7 80.7 

### County Santa Barbar; Santa Barbar; Santa Barbar; Santa Barbar; Santa Barbar; Santa Barbar; Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Shasta Shasta Solano Solano Stanislaus Stanislaus Sutter Sutter Tehama Tulare Tulare Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Ventura Ventura Ventura Ventura Ventura Yolo Yoio Adarns Arapahoe Boulder Denver Denver Douglas Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (PP~) 62 78 64 74 64 68 71 73 59 76 63 57 80 84 69 74 86 86 74 83 83 97 105 93 81 83 87 90 91 68 66 75 80 70 81 81 56 75 84 79 75 85 82 

### Average Design Value 2012



# 0

57 71.6 56.7 69.1 59.1 61.5 66.5 68.5 56.9 72.2 59.2 52.8 70.9 72.1 65.5 68.1 78.5 77.7 68.4 77.1 75.6 87.3 94.3 82.9 74.8 77.1 75.9 80.1 86.2 60.7 57.1 69.6 74 66.8 76 73.4 54.2 70.7 79.3 73.9 67.9 78.1 78.2 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 (PP~) 58.4 73.5 59.8 69.7 60.3 64.1 67.2 70.5 56.9 72.8 60.8 55 72.7 76.4 66.7 69.4 79.7 78.9 68.4 78 75.9 88.2 95.5 83.8 75.8 81 78.6 81.7 87.4 63.6 59.9 70.5 75.2 67.7 78.2 77.2 54.2 72.6 80.3 76.6 72.4 81.3 79.5 

### Modeling results from 12km domain?

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

### Monitor ID 80691004 81230009 80410013 80410016 80690007 320030007 320030020 320030022 320030043 320030071 320030072 320030073 320030075 320030538 320030601 320031019 320031 021 320032002 350130008 350130017 350130021 350130022 350450009 350451 005 350010019 350010023 350010024 350010027 350011013 35001 1014 350431003 350450009 350451005 490030003 4901 10004 490350003 490352004 490353006 490353007 490353008 490450003 490490002 490495008 

### Average Design Maximum Value Design 2003- Value 2007 2003-2007 

# (PPW (PP~)

72.3 74 76.7 78 73.3 74 73 74 76 78 76 77 78.7 79 78 79 80.3 82 83.7 86 83.3 84 82.7 83 83.7 85 77.7 78 76 76 80.7 81 75.3 78 79.7 81 70.7 72 71.3 72 75.3 77 72.7 74 69.7 72 71.3 72 72.3 73 71 71 72.3 73 71.7 72 73.7 75 70.3 71 73.3 74 69.7 72 71.3 72 76 78 81.3 85 81 83 

### State Zolorado Zolorado Zoiorado Zolorado Zolorado Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada Uevada 'ievada Uevada 'iew Mexico 'iew Mexico 'iew Mexico Uew Mexico Uew Mexico Uew Mexico Uew Mexico Uew Mexico Uew Mexico qew Mexico qew Mexico qew Mexico qew Mexico qew Mexico qew Mexico Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah Jtah 

### Average Design Value 2012



# 0

68.4 72.7 68.8 68.5 71.3 68.6 71 70.6 72.1 75.2 74.8 74.3 75.8 70.1 66.8 71.8 68 72 66.9 67.3 71 68.5 66.4 68.1 66.1 65 66.1 65.6 67.4 64.3 67.1 66.1 67.7 70.1 74.6 74.9 75 71.9 72.5 72.1 72.6 68.7 70.3 

### County Larimer Weld El Paso El Paso Larimer Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark DonaAna Dona Ana Dona Ana Dona Ana San Juan San Juan Bernalillo Bernalillo Bernalillo Bernalillo Bernalillo Bernalillo Sandoval San Juan San Juan BOX Elder Davis Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Tooele Utah Utah 

### Monitor Latitude 40.5775 40.3864 38.9583 38.8531 40.2772 36.0289 36.2453 36.3908 36.1081 36.1703 36.2247 36.1731 36.2724 36.1431 35.9789 35.7856 36.1205 36.1911 31.9306 31.7958 31.7961 31.7878 36.7422 36.7967 35.1073 35.1343 35.0631 35.1539 35.1932 35.2022 35.2381 36.7422 36.7967 41.4928 40.9030 40.6467 40.7364 40.7364 40.7044 40.5179 40.5434 40.2536 40.4303 

### Monitor Longitude

-105.0789 -104.7374 -104.8172 -104.9013 -105.5450 -1 14.9889 -1 15.0922 -114.9068 -115.2536 -115.2614 -115.2667 -115.3317 -1 15.2382 -115.0517 -1 14.8442 -115.3571 -115.1300 -115.1222 -106.6306 -106.5575 -106.5839 -106.6828 -107.9769 -108.4725 -106.5636 -106.5852 -106.5788 -106.6972 -106.6138

' -106.6493

-106.6494 -107.9769 -108.4725 -112.0181 -1 11.8845 -111.8497 -112.2103 -111.8722 -111.9686 -112.0231 -1 12.2988 -1 11.6631 -1 11.8039

### Count

490570007 Utah Weber 

# 1 41.1797 

# / -111.9831 490571003 Utah 

# / Weber 41.3037 

# / -111.9871 

### Average Design Maximum Average Value Design Design 2003- Value Value 2007 2003-2007 2012 

## (PP~) (PP~) (PP~)

76.7 78 70.9 78.3 81 71.7 80.3 83 73.5 

### Value

domain?

# Appendix C

Base year 2003-2007 %HourAverage Ozone Design ValuesWestern State Monitors Where a Future Year Design Value Could Not Be Calculated

### Average Design Maximum Value Design Average Maximum 2003- Value Design Design Monitor Monitor 2007 2003-2007 Value Value Monitor ID State County Latitude Longitude 

### (ppb)

### Monitor County Latitude San Mateo 37.4829 Santa Barbara 34.9492 Santa Barbara 34.7256 Santa Barbara 34.5274 Santa Barbara 34.6378 Santa Barbara 34.5961 Santa Clara 37.3485 Sanla Clara 37.3553 Santa Cruz 37.0119 Santa Cruz 36.9333 Shasta 40.5369 Siskiyou 41.7283 Solano 38.1027 Sonoma 38.4435

.a Plata 37.1022 Uontezuma 37.1983 4da 43.5895 ;anyon 43.7056 flmore 43.2866 <oolenai 47.7889 -lathead 48.5103 ,'ellowstone 45.9426 :lark 36.8081 Uashoe 39.5251 Uashoe 39.4696 Uashoe 39.4000 Uashoe 39.5405 Nashoe 39.2506 Nashoe 39.6455 Nhite Plne 39.0053

:arson City 39.1731 3ernalillo 35.0171 3ernalillo 35.1852 lonaAna 31.9306 Jona Ana 31.7958 Jona Ana 32.0411 Jona Ana 31.7961 lonaAna 31.7878 lonaAna 32.3175 idd 32.3800 ;rant 32.6919 32.7267 

### jandoval 35.2994 

### Maximum Design Value 2003-2007 (PP~) 57 53 70 60 56 69 63 64 52 56 72 64 60 49 66 73 77 66 63 67 57 59 71 71 71 69 71 65 71 73 66 69 77 72 72 72 77 74 67 69 66 71 70 

### Monitor Longitude -122.2034 -120.4367 -120.4278 -120.1965 -120.4575 -120.6303 -121.8950 -122.0514 -122.1933 -121.7958 -121.5725 -122.6344 -122.2382 -122.7100 -107.8694 -108.4903 -1 16.2235 -116.6232 -1 15.8532 -116.8045 -113.9956 -108.3510 -114.0608 -119.8077 -119.7753 -119.7396 -119.7469 -119.9564 -119.8399 -114.2158 -119.7592 -106.6574 -106.5082 -106.6306 -106.5575 -106.4092 -106.5839 -106.6828 -106.7678 -104.2622 -108.1244 -103.1229 -106.5483 

### Average Design Value 2012 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 

### Average Design Value 2003- 2007 (ppb) 53.7 50.7 66.3 56.7 54 65.3 61.7 59 51 54.7 69.7 63.5 57 47.7 63.7 72 76 66 63 67 56.3 59 70 70 70.7 67.3 70.7 65 67.7 72.3 65 69 69.3 70.7 71.3 70.7 75.3 72.7 66.5 69 66 69.5 67.7 

### Maximum Design Value 2012 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9

### Average Design Maximum Value Design Average Maximum