### 1



### DATE: 25 August 2015

SUBJECT: Technical Support Document Regarding Ozone Monitor ing Data – Determinations of Attainment, 1-Year Attainment Date Extensions, a nd Reclassifications for Marginal Areas under the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Qu ality Standard (NAAQS)

FROM: Butch Stackhouse, Environmental Protection Special ist

H. Lynn Dail, Environmental Scientist Robert Lingard, Environmental Protection Specialist

TO: Air and Radiation Docket

THRU: Scott Mathias, Associate Director

Air Quality Policy Division

Megan Brachtl, Group Leader State and Local Programs Group

This document provides a technical review of the ai r quality monitoring data used to support the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed de terminations of attainment or failure to attain by the statutory attainment date of July 20, 2015 for the Marginal ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas, designated May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088) and identified in List 1, “ 2008 Ozone Marginal Nonattainment Areas

. ” The TSD also provides the air quality monitoring d ata and state certifications that support determination s that certain areas qualify for a 1-year

extension of their attainment date.

List 1: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Are as

Atlanta, GA Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA Baton Rouge, LA Calaveras County, CA Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, ND-SC 1


### Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI Chico (Butte County), CA Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Cleveland-Lorain, OH Columbus, OH Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Fort Collins-Loveland, CO Dukes County, MA Greater Connecticut, CT Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX

1 On July 28, 2015, the EPA redesignated the North C arolina portion of the Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC nonattainment area for 2008 8-hr Ozone, effective A ugust 27, 2015. See 80 FR 44873.

### 2



### Imperial County, CA
Jamestown, NY Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA Knoxville, TN 2



### Lancaster, PA Mariposa County, CA Memphis, TN-MS-AR Nevada County (Western part), CA New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE Phoenix-Mesa, AZ Pittsburg-Beaver Valley, PA Reading, PA San Diego County, CA San Francisco Bay Area, CA San Luis Obispo County (Eastern San Luis Obispo), C A Seaford, DE Sheboygan, WI St. Louis-St., Charles-Farmington, MO-IL
Tuscan Buttes, CA Upper Green River Basin, WY Washington, DC-MD-VA

I. BACKGROUND

On May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088) and June 11, 2012 (77 FR 34221), EPA designated as nonattainment any area that was violating the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent years (2008–2010) of air monitoring dat a. There are 36 areas identified above that were classified as Marginal nonattainment areas und er the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Marginal areas are required to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS no late r than July 20, 2015. See 40 CFR 51.1103. Partial counties are identified with “(P)” in the a rea county listings below.

The Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton 8-hour ozone nonatta inment area is located in Eastern Pennsylvania and consists of Carbon, Lehigh and Nor thampton Counties. The Atlanta 8-hour

ozone nonattainment area is located in Northern Geo rgia and consists of Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dekalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fo rsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Newton, Paulding and Rockdale Counties.

The Baton Rouge 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in South Central Louisiana and consists of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston and West Baton Rouge Parishes.

The Calaveras County, California 8-hour ozone nonat tainment area is located in Central California, west of the City of Stockton and consis ts of Calaveras County. The Charlotte-Rock

2 On July 13, 2015, the EPA redesignated to attainme nt the Knoxville, TN nonattainment area for 2008 8- hr Ozone, effective August 12, 2015. See 80 FR 39970.

### 3



### Hill, North Carolina 8-hour ozone nonattainment are a is located in southwestern North Carolina

on the border with South Carolina and consists of C abarrus (P), Gaston (P), Iredell (P), Lincoln (P), Mecklenburg, Rowan (P), and Union (P) Counties in North Carolina and consists of York County in South Carolina. The Chicago-Naperville 8 -hour ozone nonattainment area encompasses three states consisting of Northeastern Illinois, Northwestern Indiana and Southeastern Wisconsin and consists of Cook, Du Pag e, Grundy (P), Kane, Kendall (P), Lake, McHenry and Will Counties in Illinois, Lake and Por ter Counties in Indiana and Kenosha County (P) in Wisconsin. The Chico (Butte County) 8-hour nonattainment area is located in

North Central California and consists of Butte Coun ty. The Cincinnati 8-hour nonattainment area encompasses three bordering states at Southeas tern Indiana, Northern Kentucky and Southwestern Ohio, and consists of Dearborn County (P) in Indiana, Boone (P), Campbell (P) and Kenton (P) Counties in Kentucky, Butler, Clermo nt, Clinton, Hamilton and Warren Counties

in Ohio. The Cleveland-Akron-Lorain 8-hour ozone no nattainment area is located in North

Central Ohio on Lake Erie and consists of Ashtabula , Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage and Summit Counties. The Columbus 8-hour o zone nonattainment area is located in Southwestern Ohio and consists of Delaware, Fairfie ld, Franklin, Knox, Licking and Madison

Counties.

The Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-Loveland 8-h our ozone nonattainment area is located in Central Colorado and consists of Adams, Arapahoe, B oulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Larimer (P) and Weld (P) Counties. The D ukes County 8-hour ozone nonattainment

area is an island located offshore of Eastern Massa chusetts.

The Greater Connecticut 8-hour ozone nonattainment area encompasses a majority of Connecticut and consists of Hartford, Litchfield, N ew London, Tolland and Windham Counties.

The Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 8-hour ozone nonatta inment area is located in Eastern Texas and consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galv eston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery and

Waller Counties.

The Imperial County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in Southern California and is limited to Imperial County. The Jamestown 8-hour o zone nonattainment area is located in Western New York and is limited to Chautauqua Count y.

The Kern County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in Southern California, north of Los Angeles and is limited to Kern County (P). The Knoxville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area

is located in Eastern Tennessee and consists of And erson (P), Blount and Knox Counties.

The Lancaster 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is lo cated in Eastern Pennsylvania and is limited to Lancaster County.

The Mariposa County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in Central California and is limited to Mariposa County. The Memphis 8-hour ozo ne nonattainment area encompasses Eastern Arkansas, Northern Mississippi and Western Tennessee, and consists of Crittenden County in Arkansas, De Soto County (P) in Mississip pi and Shelby County in Tennessee.

### 4



### The Nevada County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area i s located in Central California and is limited to Nevada County (P). The New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island 8-hour ozone nonattainment area encompasses Connecticut, New Jer sey and New York and consists of Fairfield, Middlesex and New Haven Counties in Conn ecticut, Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Passaic, So merset, Sussex, Union and Warren Counties in New Jersey and in New York consists of Bronx, Kings, Nassau, New York, Queens, Richmond, Rockland, Suffolk and Westchester Countie s.

The Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City 8-hour oz one nonattainment area encompasses Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and Pennsylvania and consists of New Castle County in Delaware, Cecil County in Maryland, Atlantic, Burli ngton, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean and Salem Counties in New Jersey and in Pennsylvania consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelph ia Counties. The Phoenix Mesa 8-hour

ozone nonattainment area is located in South Centra l Arizona and consists of Maricopa (P) and Pinal (P) Counties. The Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 8 -hour ozone nonattainment area is located in Western Pennsylvania and consists of Allegheny, Arm strong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland Counties.

The Reading 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is loca ted in and limited to Berks County, Pennsylvania.

The San Diego County 8-hour ozone nonattainment are a is located in Southern California and consists of San Diego County (P). The San Francisc o Bay Area 8-hour ozone nonattainment

area is located on the West Central Shore of Califo rnia and consists of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano (P) and Sonoma (P) Counties. The San Luis Obispo 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in the Eastern part of San Luis Obispo, California. The Sheboygan 8-hour ozone non attainment area is located in Eastern Wisconsin on the Lake Michigan shore and is limited to Sheboygan County. The St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington 8-hour ozone nonattainment area encompasses Illinois and Missouri and consists of Madison, Monroe and St. Clair Counties in Illinois and in Missouri consists of Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles and St. Louis Coun ties and St. Louis City in Missouri.

The Tuscan Buttes 8-hour ozone nonattainment area i s located in California and consists of part of Tehama County (P).

The Upper Green River Basin 8-hour ozone nonattainm ent area in Southwestern Wyoming and consists of Lincoln, Sublette and Sweetwater (P) Co unties.

The Washington, DC-MD-VA 8-hour ozone nonattainment area encompasses the District of Columbia, Southern Maryland and Northern Virginia a nd consists of the entire district of the District of Columbia, the counties of Calvert, Char les, Frederick, Montgomery and Prince George’s in Maryland, and in Virginia consists of A lexandria, Arlington County, Fairfax, Fairfax County, Falls Church, Loudoun County, Manassas, Man assas Park and Prince William Counties.

The individual state maps with the boundaries and c ounties included in each nonattainment area

are available from the EPA’s Green Book website at

### 5



### http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/hnmapa.html . The maps are available for downloading at http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/map_download.h tml . The list of counties in each of the Marginal nonattainment areas is available at http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/hnc.html

. For the exact boundaries of the 2008 8-hour ozone n onattainment areas classified as Marginal which are the subject of this document, refer to th e applicable table entitled “2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)” for the particular s tate in 40 CFR Part 81, Subpart C— Section 107 Attainment Status Designations.

II. EVALUATION OF AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA

A. Data Requirements

The criteria for determining if an area is attainin g the 2008 ozone NAAQS are set out in 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50. The determi nation is based on the most recent three consecutive calendar years of complete, quality-ass ured air quality monitoring data at all regulatory ozone monitoring sites in the area. To a ttain this standard, at each regulatory monitor the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour aver age ozone concentrations averaged over the three-year period (the ozone design value, or “DV”) must not exceed the ozone standard. The level of the 2008 NAAQS for ozone is 0.075 parts pe r million (ppm). Based on an ozone data rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, ap pendix P, the standard is met if the DV is 0.075 ppm (equivalent to 75 parts per billion) or l ower. When the DV is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm at each monitoring site within the area, the area attains the NAAQS.

The data must be collected and quality-assured in a ccordance with 40 CFR part 58. The data supporting attainment of the standard must be compl ete in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix P. The data completeness requirement is me t when at least 90% of days in the required ozone monitoring season (see Appendix D to 40 CFR 5 8) have valid ambient monitoring data, averaged over three years, and no single year has l ess than 75% data completeness. For example, the ozone season for the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonat tainment area extends from the beginning of April through the end of October, thus the complete ozone season for this area consists of 214 monitoring days and the 75% annual data completeness requirement is met with at least 160 days of valid ambient monitoring data during this area’s annual ozone season.

State and local monitoring network plans are subjec t to approval by EPA on an annual basis, and any interim modifications to those plans must also be approved by EPA. The annual monitoring network plan process is provided in 40 CFR 58.10 an d the requirements governing system

modifications and discontinuations are laid out in 40 CFR 58.14. Where state or local agencies seek to modify the ambient air quality monitoring n etworks by discontinuing a monitor station, the EPA may approve such modifications subject to t he criteria established in 40 CFR 58.14(c). EPA may not approve such discontinuation if doing s o would compromise data collection needed for implementation of a NAAQS. If a monitor has been discontinued subject to 40 CF R

58.14 such that the discontinuation results in insu fficient data to calculate a valid design value according to Appendix P to 40 CFR Part 50, EPA will determine the applicable area’s attainment status based on the remaining monitors in the area.

### 6



### B. Certified Air Quality Monitoring Data, 2012-2014

The 2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas identified in List 1 above submitted quality assured air quality monitoring data to the EPA’s Ai r Quality System (AQS) for calendar years 2012, 2013, and 2014. The states then certified tha t data with a data certification letter sent to the applicable EPA Regional Administrator. A monitor le vel summary report from the AQS of the 8- hour ozone data for the 36 areas is provided in “Exhibit 1 : 2008 Designated Marginal Nonattainment Areas for 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 201 2-2014 Design Values & Data Completeness” located in the Appendix to this document.



### III. Data Analysis and Determinations of Attainment

The 2008 nonattainment areas identified in List 1 a bove were classified as Marginal for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Because these areas were classi fied as Marginal ozone nonattainment areas, the statutory ozone attainment date, as pres cribed by section 181(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and as implemented by 40 CFR 51.1103, is July 20, 2015. ( See 80 FR 12264 at 12313, March 6, 2015).

A. EPA’s Determinations of Attainment for Nonattainmen t Areas that have Attained the 2008 Ozone NAAQS by the Applicable Attainment Date

The EPA is proposing to determine, in accordance wi th section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the provisions of the EPA’s SIP Requirements Rule for t he 2008 ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 51.1103), that 17 of 36 Marginal nonattainment area s have attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable deadline for that standard, which is July 20, 2015. This proposed determination is based upon three years of complete, quality-assured and certified 2012-2014 data, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA’s AQS datab ase. 3



### Table 1 lists all 17 Marginal areas for which EPA i s proposing a determination of attainment by the July 20, 2015 attainment date. Table 1 provides the 2012-2014 design values and data completeness status for the monitors in each of the 17 areas that were operating during the period 2012-2014. The data included meets the data complet eness requirements of Appendix P, except

where otherwise noted. Table 1 also shows the annua l fourth highest daily maximum, DV, percent of days per year with valid ambient monitor ing data, and the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data.

3 Some areas attained the standard with 2011, 2012 a nd 2013 data and maintained the standard in 2014.7Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA420958000 Northampton Pennsylvania 0.073 0.064 0.066 0.067 98 83 90 90420770004 Lehigh Pennsylvania 0.075 0.068 0.068 0.070 96 100 96 97420950025 Northampton Pennsylvania 0.073 0.065 0.067 0.068 99 81 98 93Baton Rouge, LA220470009 Iberville Louisiana 0.074 0.061 0.061 0.065 98 100 98 99221210001West BatonRouge Louisiana 0.070 0.060 0.066 0.065 97 100 10099220330013 East Baton Rouge Louisiana 0.070 0.062 0.068 0.066 93 99 96 96220050004 Ascension Louisiana 0.071 0.062 0.069 0.067 98 99 98 98220330009 East Baton Rouge Louisiana 0.072 0.066 0.070 0.069 98 100 99 99220470012 Iberville Louisiana 0.073 0.068 0.068 0.069 97 98 96 97220630002 Livingston Louisiana 0.071 0.069 0.073 0.071 98 100 100 99220330003 East Baton Rouge Louisiana 0.075 0.067 0.075 0.072 97 98 97 97Calaveras County, CA060090001 Calaveras California 0.076 0.067 0.071 0.071 98 99 98 98Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC371191005 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.073 0.062 0.063 0.066 99 100 100 1008Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014371090004 LincolnNorthCarolina 0.076 0.064 0.064 0.068 100 100 97 99371590021 RowanNorthCarolina 0.080 0.062 0.064 0.068 100 98 100 99371790003 UnionNorthCarolina 0.075 0.062 0.067 0.068 100 94 100 98371190041 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.080 0.067 0.065 0.070 99 99 100 99371191009 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.085 0.066 0.068 0.073 100 100 98 99371590022 RowanNorthCarolina 0.077 0.063 (2) 98 99 66Chico (Butte County), CA060070008 Butte California 0.065 0.062 0.066 0.06496 99 98 98060070007 Butte California 0.078 0.071 0.074 0.07497 96 99 97Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN210150003 Boone Kentucky 0.074 0.059 0.062 0.065 100 100 100 100391650007 Warren Ohio 0.080 0.067 0.071 0.072 100 99 100 100390170004 Butler Ohio 0.083 0.068 0.070 0.073 100 98 99 99390170018 Butler Ohio 0.084 0.068 0.069 0.073 95 100 99 98390271002 Clinton Ohio 0.086 0.064 0.070 0.073 10099 99 99390610010 Hamilton Ohio 0.083 0.064 0.073 0.073 8797 100 95390610040 Hamilton Ohio 0.082 0.069 0.069 0.073 10099 100 1009Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014390179991 Butler Ohio 0.085 0.069 0.069 0.074 93 9494 94210373002 Campbell Kentucky 0.084 0.072 0.071 0.07599 100 99 99390250022 Clermont Ohio 0.091 0.066 0.068 0.075 100100 98 99390610006 Hamilton Ohio 0.087 0.069 0.070 0.075 9695 96 96Columbus, OH390490081 Franklin Ohio 0.076 0.065 0.068 0.069 10099 100 100390830002 Knox Ohio 0.074 0.067 0.066 0.069 100 100100 100390890005 Licking Ohio 0.077 0.065 0.066 0.069 99 100 100 100390410002 Delaware Ohio 0.077 0.070 0.066 0.071 9998 100 99390970007 Madison Ohio 0.078 0.066 0.069 0.071 10099 95 98390490037 Franklin Ohio 0.081 0.070 0.069 0.073 98100 100 99390490029 Franklin Ohio 0.082 0.073 0.070 0.075 99100 100 100Dukes County, MA250070001 Dukes Massachusetts 0.082 0.065 0.059 0.068 97 97 95 96Jamestown, NY360130006 Chautauqua New York 0.081 0.066 0.066 0.071 97 95 97 96360130011 Chautauqua New York 0.081 (3) 9431Knoxville, TN470090102 Blount Tennessee 0.064 0.059 0.058 0.06099 100 99 99470930021 Knox Tennessee 0.073 0.057 0.060 0.063 9998 98 9810Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014470090101 Blount Tennessee 0.075 0.064 0.064 0.06797 98 99 98470931020 Knox Tennessee 0.078 0.061 0.063 0.067 100 96 98 98Lancaster, PA420710012 Lancaster Pennsylvania 0.079 0.063 0.0630.068 99 100 100 100420710007 Lancaster Pennsylvania 0.081 0.066 0.0660.071 100 99 100 100Memphis, TN-MS-AR280330002 DeSoto Mississippi 0.075 0.065 0.067 0.069 98 100 99 99471571004 Shelby Tennessee 0.084 0.063 0.065 0.07088 98 100 95050350005 Crittenden Arkansas 0.079 0.067 0.067 0.071 99 99 99 99471570021 Shelby Tennessee 0.083 0.069 0.067 0.073100 98 100 99471570075 Shelby Tennessee 0.086 0.069 0.066 0.07399 100 98 99Reading, PA420110006 Berks Pennsylvania 0.075 0.061 0.063 0.066 99 100 95 98420110011 Berks Pennsylvania 0.078 0.068 0.068 0.071 98 99 98 98San Francisco Bay Area, CA060010009 Alameda California 0.040 0.046 0.057 0.047 95 98 98 97060010011 Alameda California 0.046 0.045 0.051 0.047 96 95 98 96060750005 San Francisco California 0.047 0.043 0.052 0.047 95 97 97 96060131004 Contra Costa California 0.049 0.052 0.0550.052 98 98 98 98060410001 Marin California 0.049 0.057 0.064 0.05698 98 98 9811Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014060811001 San Mateo California 0.050 0.056 0.064 0.056 97 97 98 97060550003 Napa California 0.058 0.055 0.062 0.058 97 97 98 97060950004 Solano California 0.056 0.055 0.064 0.05896 99 97 97060850005 Santa Clara California 0.057 0.060 0.0650.060 95 94 96 95060012001 Alameda California 0.052 0.059 0.072 0.061 100 100 100 100060950005 Solano California 0.067 0.061 0.063 0.06398 99 96 98060130002 Contra Costa California 0.070 0.057 0.0670.064 98 98 98 98060851001 Santa Clara California 0.063 0.062 0.0690.064 98 100 100 99060850002 Santa Clara California 0.066 0.063 0.0710.066 94 99 99 97060131002 Contra Costa California 0.072 0.062 0.0690.067 99 76 96 90060132007 Contra Costa California 0.065 0.065 0.0720.067 98 98 98 98060852006 Santa Clara California 0.070 0.067 0.0730.070 100 100 100 100060010007 Alameda California 0.071 0.069 0.076 0.072 98 98 99 98060852009 Santa Clara California 0.061 0.063 (4)99 93 64060970003 Sonoma California 0.042 0.055 (4) 98 9564060970004 Sonoma California 0.054 (5) 95 32Seaford, DE100051002 Sussex Delaware 0.084 0.065 0.063 0.070 100 93 100 98100051003 Sussex Delaware 0.085 0.072 0.067 0.074 92 97 97 95Tuscan Buttes, CA061030004 Tehama California 0.077 0.072 0.076 0.075100 98 98 9912Table 1 - Marginal 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas Qualifying for a Determination of Attainment by the July 20,2015 Attainment DateAQS SiteIDCounty Name State4th Highest Daily Max 8-hrAverage Value2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014Upper Green River Basin, WY560350101 Sublette Wyoming 0.067 0.061 0.057 0.061100 98 94 97560350099 Sublette Wyoming 0.065 0.061 0.060 0.06293 97 94 95560350700 Sublette Wyoming 0.065 0.064 0.060 0.06394 98 96 96560350100 Sublette Wyoming 0.067 0.063 0.062 0.064100 98 97 98560351002 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.064 0.062 0.064100 100 98 99560350097 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.059 (6) 97 9865560359991 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.066 0.062 (7) 7491 91 85(1)The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is 0.075 parts per million (ppm). The design value is the 3-year average of theannual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour averageozone concentration. Each area’s design value is determined by thehighest design value among monitors with valid design values. The design values shown here are computed using FederalReference Method or equivalent data reported by State, Tribal, and Local monitoring agencies to EPA'sAir Quality System(AQS) as ofJuly 20, 2015. Individual 8-hour concentrations that wereflagged by state, tribal, or local monitoring agencies ashaving been affected by an exceptional event (e.g.,wildfire, volcanic eruption) and received concurrence from the associatedEPA Regional Office are not included in these calculations.(2)Monitor shut down prior to the end of the 2014 ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficientdata to calculate a valid2012-2014 design value. Monitor previously attainedthe NAAQS based on 2011-2013 data. The monitor shut down wasapproved by EPA through the annual monitoring network plan review process (see 40 CFR 58.10).(3)Monitor shut down on 1/1/2013 and did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. The previousDV for the monitor recorded a violation in 2010-2012 (0.076 ppm), but the remaining site in the nonattainment area alwayshad the highest DV in the area. The monitor shut down was approved by EPA through the annual monitoring network planreview process (see 40 CFR 58.10).13(4)Monitor shut down prior to the end of the 2014 ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficientdata to calculate a valid2012-2014 design value. Monitor previously attainedthe NAAQS based on 2011-2013 data. The monitor shut down wasapproved by EPA through the annual monitoring network plan review process (see 40 CFR 58.10).(5)Monitor began operation at the beginning of the 2014 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collectedsufficient data tocalculate a valid 3-year design value.(6)Monitor shut down at the end of the 2013 ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. Monitor previously attained theNAAQS based on 2011-2013 data. The monitor was designated a SpecialPurpose monitor in AQS and in the Wyoming Annual Monitoring Network Plan. 40 CFR Section 58.20(f) specifies that “Priorapproval from EPA is not required for discontinuance of an SPM."(7)CASTNET monitor started 6/1/2011, and had incomplete data in 2012 so that a valid design value for 2012-2014 could not becalculated. Since inception in 2011, and with complete data through March 2015 with the exception of missing June and July2012 data, the monitor has recorded no readings that have exceeded the ozone standard of 0.075 ppm.

### 14



### B. EPA’s Determinations to Grant 1-Year Attainment Dat e Extensions to Certain 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas

The EPA is proposing to grant 1-year attainment dat e extensions for eight Marginal nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, on th e basis that the state air agencies adequately demonstrated that they have met the requ irements under Clean Air Act section 181(a)(5) to qualify for a 1-year extension to thei r attainment date. CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.1107 specify that EPA may grant a 1-year extension of an area’s attainment date if the state has complied with all requirements and co mmitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan, and all monitors in the area have a fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average of 0.075 ppm or less for the attainment year.

With regard to CAA section 181(a)(5)(A), the states submitted requests to the EPA which certify that the states have complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan and that all monitor s in the area have a fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average of 0.075 ppm or less for the attainment year. These letters, the signatory parties, the dates of request, and the ad equacy of each letter for purposes of 181(a)(5)(A) are provided below in Table 2, “ 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Requesting a 1-Year Extension to their Attain ment Date .” The state letters are available in the docket for this rulemaking.

The State of Delaware did not submit a request for a one-year extension of the attainment date for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City nonat tainment area. However, the other three states with jurisdiction over the Philadelphia nona ttainment area did request such an extension, and EPA interprets CAA section 181(a)(5)’s provisio n that the Administrator may grant an extension “[u]pon application by any State” (emphasis added) to mean that if any state with jurisdiction over the nonattainment area requests s uch extension, the Agency will consider granting the request provided that the criteria in section 181(a)(5) are met for all of the governing

states.

The EPA is proposing to find that the State of Dela ware has complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the Philadelphia-Wilmingt on-Atlantic City area in the applicable implementation plan in accordance with CAA section 181(a)(5)(A). EPA recently proposed to disapprove a revision to Delaware’s New Source Revi ew (NSR) preconstruction permitting program regulation, see 80 FR 30015 (May 26, 2015), but we do not believe that this proposed disapproval in itself prohibits EPA from granting a n extension under section 181(a)(5) for the Philadelphia area. Despite this proposed disapprova l of a SIP revision, EPA is here proposing to find the Delaware meets the requirements of section 181(a)(5)(A), that is, it has complied with all the requirements and commitments pertaining to the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area in the applicable implementation plan, because no preconstruction permits have been issued that are inconsistent with the EPA-approved NSR pre construction program in Delaware’s SIP.

### 15



### Table 2: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas Requesting a 1-Year

Extension to their Attainment Date

2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area Date of Request Signatory Party Satisfies

CAA §181(a)(5)

Criteria

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH February 20, 2015 with March 19, 2015 (supplemental letter) Craig W. Butler, Director, Ohio

Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA); supplemental letter signed by Bob Hodanbosi, Chief, Ohio EPA,

DAPC Yes



### Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX February 27, 2015 with May 22, 2015 (supplemental letter) Richard Hyde, TCEQ Executive

Director Yes



### Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, NJ June 17, 2015 Bob Martin, Commissioner,

State of New Jersey, Department of

Environmental

Protection Yes



### Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA July 8, 2015 John Quigley, Secretary, Department of

Environmental

Protection Yes



### Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, MD August 3, 2015 George (Tad) S. Aburn, Jr., Director, Air and

Radiation Management Administration, Maryland Department of the

Environment Yes



### Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, DE Not Applicable Not Applicable Yes



### Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA April 20, 2015 Jayme Graham, Manager, Air quality Program, County of Allegheny Yes

### 16



### Table 2: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas Requesting a 1-Year

Extension to their Attainment Date

2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area Date of Request Signatory Party Satisfies

CAA §181(a)(5)

Criteria

San Luis Obispo County (Eastern part), CA June 1, 2015 referencing District’s May 19, 2015 letter Richard W.

Corey, Executive
Director, CARB Yes



### Sheboygan, WI May 12, 2015 Bart Sonseller,

Air Division
Director, WDNR Yes



### St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO May 22, 2015 Kyra L. Moore, Director, MDNR Yes



### St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, IL May 29, 2015 Lisa Bonnett, Director, Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency Yes

Washington, DC May 14, 2015 Thomas Wells, Director, District Department of the

Environment Yes

Washington, MD July 14, 2015 George (Tad) S. Aburn, Jr., Director, Air and

Radiation Management Administration, Maryland Department of the

Environment Yes

Washington, VA May 13, 2015 David K. Paylor, Director, Department of

Environmental Quality Yes



### EPA has interpreted CAA section 181(a)(5)(B), which was written for an exceedance-based standard, for purposes of a violation-based standar d such as the 2008 ozone NAAQS to mean that an area meets the requirement if all of the ar ea’s monitors record a fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average of 0.075 ppm or less for the attainment year. Because the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015 is in the middle o f the 2015 ozone season, the definition of “attainment year” as provided in 40 CFR 51.1100(h) is considered the year, and ozone season,

### 17



### immediately preceding this date. Thus, the EPA has evaluated the certified air quality data for 2014 for purposes of considering an area’s eligibil ity for a 1-year attainment date extension. Table 3, “2014 4 th 

### Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Average Concentration for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Eligible for an Extended Attainment Date to July 20, 2016, identifies the 8 areas that were not attaining the 2008 ozone standard based on 2012-2014 data but that meet the section 181(a)(5)(B) require ment because the 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value for each area monitor shown in Table 3 has not exceeded the

standard. The EPA notes that some monitors in the r elevant areas had data completeness issues for calculating a valid design value in 2014. See f ootnotes 2-6 to Table 3. We have evaluated each of those monitors and provided rationale for t he data issues in the footnotes. Therefore, we do not believe that the missing or invalid data fro m these monitors undermines our proposal to find that the fourth highest daily maximum value fo r these areas was less than or equal to 0.075

ppm.

The EPA has evaluated the information submitted by the states for each area and the air quality

data for the areas and has determined that the stat es have met the CAA section 181(a)(5) criteria. The EPA is therefore proposing to grant 1-year exte nsions of the attainment date for these areas.

Table 3: 2014 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Aver age Concentration for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Eligible f or an Extended Attainment Date to July 20, 2016

AQS Monitoring Site

ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily Max

8-hr Average

Value (ppm)(1) 2012-2014

Design

Value (ppm) (1)



## Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH

391530020 Summit Ohio 0.058 0.062
391331001 Portage Ohio 0.061 0.064
390350060 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.066 0.065

391030004 Medina Ohio 0.064 0.067
390350064 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.059 0.068

390930018 Lorain Ohio 0.067 0.069
390550004 Geauga Ohio 0.065 0.070
390355002 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.061 0.071

390850007 Lake Ohio 0.062 0.071

390071001 Ashtabula Ohio 0.069 0.072
390350034 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.071 0.075

390850003 Lake Ohio 0.075 0.078



## Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX

480391016 Brazoria Texas 0.061 0.066

482011015 Harris Texas 0.059 0.066

### 18



### Table 3: 2014 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Aver age Concentration for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Eligible f or an Extended Attainment Date to July 20, 2016

AQS Monitoring Site

ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily Max

8-hr Average

Value (ppm)(1) 2012-2014

Design

Value (ppm) (1)

482010026 Harris Texas 0.064 0.067

482011035 Harris Texas 0.058 0.068

482010046 Harris Texas 0.062 0.069

481671034 Galveston Texas 0.071 0.072

482010024 Harris Texas 0.068 0.072

482011034 Harris Texas 0.066 0.072

482011039 Harris Texas 0.063 0.072

482011050 Harris Texas 0.065 0.072

482010047 Harris Texas 0.064 0.074

482010062 Harris Texas 0.065 0.074

482010416 Harris Texas 0.066 0.074

482010029 Harris Texas 0.063 0.075

482010051 Harris Texas 0.067 0.075

482010055 Harris Texas 0.067 0.075

482010066 Harris Texas 0.070 0.076
483390078 Montgomery Texas 0.072 0.076

480391004 Brazoria Texas 0.071 0.080
482010070 Harris Texas (2) (2)
482011017 Harris Texas 0.067 (2)


## Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE

421010004 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.058 0.056
340010006 Atlantic New Jersey 0.061 0.069
340110007 Cumberland New Jersey 0.067 0.070

100031007 New Castle Delaware 0.071 0.071

100031013 New Castle Delaware 0.069 0.071
100032004 New Castle Delaware 0.068 (3)
420910013 Montgomery Pennsylvania 0.072 0.072
340070002 Camden New Jersey 0.068 0.073
340210005 Mercer New Jersey 0.071 0.073
340219991 Mercer New Jersey 0.071 0.073
420290100 Chester Pennsylvania 0.071 0.073
420450002 Delaware Pennsylvania 0.073 0.074

### 19



### Table 3: 2014 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Aver age Concentration for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Eligible f or an Extended Attainment Date to July 20, 2016

AQS Monitoring Site

ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily Max

8-hr Average

Value (ppm)(1) 2012-2014

Design

Value (ppm) (1)

340290006 Ocean New Jersey 0.072 0.075
420170012 Bucks Pennsylvania 0.071 0.075
421010024 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.072 0.075
340071001 Camden New Jersey 0.068 0.076
340150002 Gloucester New Jersey 0.070 0.076
240150003 Cecil Maryland 0.074 0.077
100031010 New Castle Delaware 0.075 (4) 0.072 (4) 421010048 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.068 (5)
421011002 Philadelphia Pennsylvania (6)



## Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA

421250005 Washington Pennsylvania 0.065 0.068
421255001 Washington Pennsylvania 0.064 0.068
421250200 Washington Pennsylvania 0.064 0.069
421290008 Westmoreland Pennsylvania 0.064 0.069
420030067 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.065 0.070
420070014 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.066 0.070
420070002 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.069 0.071
420030008 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.065 0.073
420050001 Armstrong Pennsylvania 0.068 0.074
420070005 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.070 0.075
420031008 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.071 0.077
420030010 Allegheny Pennsylvania (7)
421255200 Washington Pennsylvania 0.062 (8)
421290006 Westmoreland Pennsylvania 0.053 (7)


## San Luis Obispo County (Eastern part), CA

060798006 San Luis Obispo California 0.068 0.070
060798005 San Luis Obispo California 0.073 0.076



## Sheboygan, WI

551170006 Sheboygan Wisconsin 0.072 0.081


## St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL

### 20



### Table 3: 2014 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Aver age Concentration for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Areas Eligible f or an Extended Attainment Date to July 20, 2016

AQS Monitoring Site

ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily Max

8-hr Average

Value (ppm)(1) 2012-2014

Design

Value (ppm) (1)

171630010 Saint Clair Illinois 0.067 0.072

291890005 Saint Louis Missouri 0.065 0.072
295100085 St. Louis City Missouri 0.066 0.073

171199991 Madison Illinois 0.068 0.074

171193007 Madison Illinois 0.070 0.075

290990019 Jefferson Missouri 0.072 0.075

171190008 Madison Illinois 0.072 0.076

171191009 Madison Illinois 0.070 0.076

291831004 Saint Charles Missouri 0.072 0.076

291890014 Saint Louis Missouri 0.072 0.077

291831002 Saint Charles Missouri 0.072 0.078



## Washington, DC-MD-VA

511530009 Prince William Virginia 0.062 0.066
511071005 Loudoun Virginia 0.063 0.067
240313001 Montgomery Maryland 0.064 0.068
240210037 Frederick Maryland 0.063 0.070
240330030 Prince George's Maryland 0.065 0.070
240170010 Charles Maryland 0.067 0.071
510590030 Fairfax Virginia 0.065 0.072

110010043 District of Columbia District Of

Columbia 0.068 0.073
240090011 Calvert Maryland 0.070 0.073
510130020 Arlington Virginia 0.071 0.074
240338003 Prince George's Maryland 0.069 0.076

110010041 District of Columbia District Of Columbia 0.047 (7)

110010050 District of Columbia District Of Columbia 0.069 (5)
240339991 Prince George's Maryland 0.069 (9)
515100009 Alexandria City Virginia (6)

### 21



### (1) The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is 0.075 p arts per million (ppm). The design value is the 3-year average of the annual fourth hi ghest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration. Each area’s design value is de termined by the highest design value among monitors with valid design values. The desig n values shown here are computed using Federal Reference Method or equivalent data r eported by State, Tribal, and Local monitoring agencies to EPA's Air Quality System (AQ S) as of July 20, 2015. Individual 8-hour concentrations that were flagged by State, T ribal, or Local monitoring agencies as having been affected by an exceptional event (e.g., wildfire, volcanic eruption) and received concurrence from the associated EPA Region al Office are not included in these

calculations. (2) Site 482010070 monitor was moved to site 482011017 in June 2012. Therefore, neither

site collected sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. Site 482011017

monitor has sufficient data to determine that the 2 014 fourth highest daily maximum 8- hour average value did not exceed the level of the NAAQS. (3) Monitor did not collect sufficient monitoring data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value, which requires an average percent of days wi th valid data in the designated ozone monitoring season of at least 90 percent. However, because other monitors in the area had valid 2012-2014 design values that violated the NAA QS, the 2012-2014 design value is

not needed to determine that the area violated. The monitor did collect sufficient data (i.e., at least 75 percent of the designated sampli ng days) to determine a valid 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value adequate to determine if the area qualifies for a 1-year attainment date extension

. 

### (4) Monitor did not collect sufficient data in 2014. We substituted missing values for this site with the highest corresponding values from the othe r three New Castle County monitoring sites, which created a complete data set to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value and a 2014 fourth highest daily maximum value (see Exhibit 2 in the Appendix to this TSD). (5) Monitor began operation after the beginning of the 2013 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collected sufficient data to calculate a valid 3-year design value. However,

this monitor has sufficient data to determine a val id 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value to determine if the area meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-year attainment date extension. (6) Monitor shut down prior to the 2014 ozone monitorin g season and did not collect

sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 desi gn value. The monitor shut down was approved by EPA through the annual monitoring netwo rk plan review process (see 40 CFR 58.10). (7) Monitor shut down prior to the end of the 2014 ozon e monitoring season and did not

collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2 014 design value. Monitor previously attained the NAAQS based on 2011-2013 data. The mo nitor shut down was approved by EPA through the annual monitoring network plan revi ew process (see 40 CFR 58.10). (8) Monitor began operation after the beginning of the 2012 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collected sufficient data to calculate a valid 3-year design value. However,

this monitor has sufficient data to determine a val id 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value to determine if the area meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-year attainment date extension.

### 22



### (9) Monitor did not collect sufficient data to calculat e a valid 2012-2014 design value. However, this monitor has sufficient data to determ ine a valid 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value to determine if the ar ea meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-year attainment date extension.

Exhibit 1 in the Appendix to this TSD provides the data comp leteness of each monitor. We have determined that the 2014 fourth highest daily maxim um 8-hour average values included in Table 3 meet the data completeness requirements of Append ix P, with the exception of one monitoring site in New Castle County, DE (AQS site ID 10003101 0). That site had 73% data completeness in 2014, which does not meet the 75% requirement fo r annual data completeness. In this case, EPA performed an analysis where missing daily maxim um 8-hour average ozone readings at the deficient site were substituted with the highest of the corresponding daily maximum 8-hour average values from three other monitoring sites in New Castle County, DE. This resulted in a 2014 fourth highest value of 0.075 ppm at the defic ient site, thus EPA believes that it is appropriate to grant a 1-year attainment date exten sion for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area. For an in-depth explanation of EPA’s ana lysis, see Exhibit 2 in the Appendix to this

TSD.

C. EPA’s Determinations of Failure to Attain by the Attainment Date and to Reclassify Certain Nonattainment Areas to Moderate for the 200 8 Ozone NAAQS

The EPA is proposing to determine that eleven areas failed to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment deadline of July 20, 2015 . As shown in Table 4 below, at least one

monitor in each of these areas had a 2012-2014 desi gn value greater than 0.075 ppm. The EPA further proposes to determine that these areas did not meet the air quality requirement under section 181(a)(5)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1107, necessary to grant a 1-year extension of the attainment date, because at least one monitor in ea ch area had a 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average that was greater than 0.075 ppm. The EPA is therefore proposing to

find that these eleven areas failed to attain the 2 008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment date pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), and thus the areas must be reclassified to “Moderate” by operation of law.

Table 4: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas That Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone Standard as of July 20, 2015 Attainment Date and Requiring Reclassification

AQS Site

ID County Name State 4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr Avg Value (ppm) 

### 2012-

2014 Design

Value (ppm) (1) 2012 2013 2014



## Atlanta, GA

130770002 Coweta Georgia 0.062 0.053 0.067 0.060

132230003 Paulding Georgia 0.072 0.062 0.059 0.064

130970004 Douglas Georgia 0.073 0.063 0.065 0.067

130890002 DeKalb Georgia 0.085 0.062 0.070 0.072

131350002 Gwinnett Georgia 0.080 0.069 0.068 0.072

### 23



### Table 4: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas That Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone Standard as of July 20, 2015 Attainment Date and Requiring Reclassification

AQS Site

ID County Name State 4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr Avg Value (ppm) 

### 2012-

2014 Design

Value (ppm) (1) 2012 2013 2014

131210055 Fulton Georgia 0.087 0.069 0.073 0.076

131510002 Henry Georgia 0.088 0.070 0.075 0.077

132470001 Rockdale Georgia 0.081 0.071 0.079 0.077

130670003 Cobb Georgia 0.075 0.067 0.066 (2)



## Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI

171971011 Will Illinois 0.071 0.061 0.064 0.065

181270026 Porter Indiana 0.067 0.063 0.067 0.065

170436001 DuPage Illinois 0.074 0.063 0.064 0.067

170890005 Kane Illinois 0.075 0.064 0.066 0.068

170310001 Cook Illinois 0.079 0.064 0.066 0.069

170314002 Cook Illinois 0.083 0.063 0.063 0.069

170314007 Cook Illinois 0.073 0.067 0.069 0.069

171110001 McHenry Illinois 0.077 0.065 0.067 0.069

180890022 Lake Indiana 0.078 0.064 0.067 0.069

180890030 Lake Indiana 0.081 0.062 0.065 0.069

170310076 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.062 0.067 0.070

170311601 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.064 0.070 0.071

170314201 Cook Illinois 0.087 0.069 0.065 0.073

181270024 Porter Indiana 0.081 0.069 0.071 0.073

170310032 Cook Illinois 0.091 0.071 0.067 0.076

170317002 Cook Illinois 0.093 0.069 0.072 0.078

170971007 Lake Illinois 0.093 0.072 0.073 0.079

550590019 Kenosha Wisconsin 0.092 0.075 0.076 0.081

170310064 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.058 (2)

170311003 Cook Illinois 0.079 0.066 0.065 (2)

170313103 Cook Illinois 0.062 0.063 (2)

180892008 Lake Indiana 0.077 0.063 0.067 (2)



## Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Fort Collins-Loveland, CO

080310002 Denver Colorado 0.068 0.067 0.061 0.065

080050006 Arapahoe Colorado 0.074 0.073 0.067 0.071

080013001 Adams Colorado 0.077 0.077 0.067 0.073

080590013 Jefferson Colorado 0.077 0.077 0.065 0.073

080691004 Larimer Colorado 0.074 0.074 0.072 0.073

### 24



### Table 4: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas That Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone Standard as of July 20, 2015 Attainment Date and Requiring Reclassification

AQS Site

ID County Name State 4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr Avg Value (ppm) 

### 2012-

2014 Design

Value (ppm) (1) 2012 2013 2014

080690007 Larimer Colorado 0.079 0.074 0.069 0.074

081230009 Weld Colorado 0.080 0.073 0.070 0.074

080130011 Boulder Colorado 0.076 0.079 0.070 0.075

080590005 Jefferson Colorado 0.079 0.080 0.066 0.075

080690011 Larimer Colorado 0.080 0.082 0.074 0.078

080590011 Jefferson Colorado 0.081 0.084 0.076 0.080

080350004 Douglas Colorado 0.086 0.083 0.074 0.081

080590006 Jefferson Colorado 0.084 0.085 0.077 0.082

080050002 Arapahoe Colorado 0.080 0.079 (2)

080310014 Denver Colorado 0.077 0.044 (2)

080310025 Denver Colorado 0.073 (2)

080310026 Denver Colorado 0.071 0.066 (2)

080590002 Jefferson Colorado 0.041 (2)

080690012 Larimer Colorado 0.071 0.066 (2)



## Greater Connecticut, CT

090050005 Litchfield Connecticut 0.073 0.068 0.066 0.069

090159991 Windham Connecticut 0.075 0.069 0.067 0.070

090031003 Hartford Connecticut 0.077 0.077 0.077 0.077

090110124 New London Connecticut 0.087 0.085 0.065 0.079

090131001 Tolland Connecticut 0.083 0.081 0.077 0.080


## Imperial County, CA

060254004 Imperial California 0.070 0.072 0.069 0.070

060250005 Imperial California 0.080 0.078 0.078 0.078

060251003 Imperial California 0.084 0.080 0.078 0.080

060254003 Imperial California 0.069 (2)



## Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA

60290011 Kern California 0.082 0.081 0.089 0.084


## Mariposa County, CA

060430003 Mariposa California 0.081 0.073 0.077 0.077

060430006 Mariposa California 0.081 0.077 0.077 0.078



## Nevada County (Western part), CA

### 25



### Table 4: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas That Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone Standard as of July 20, 2015 Attainment Date and Requiring Reclassification

AQS Site

ID County Name State 4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr Avg Value (ppm) 

### 2012-

2014 Design

Value (ppm) (1) 2012 2013 2014

060570007 Nevada California 0.084 0.065 0.078 0.075

060570005 Nevada California 0.077 0.078 0.082 0.079



## New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT

340410007 Warren New Jersey 0.069 0.061 0.060 0.063

360610135 New York New York 0.074 0.062 0.065 0.067

340315001 Passaic New Jersey 0.073 0.069 0.065 0.069

360050133 Bronx New York 0.076 0.068 0.070 0.071

361030009 Suffolk New York 0.079 0.074 0.062 0.071

340190001 Hunterdon New Jersey 0.078 0.073 0.065 0.072

340250005 Monmouth New Jersey 0.083 0.071 0.064 0.072

340273001 Morris New Jersey 0.076 0.073 0.068 0.072

360810124 Queens New York 0.082 0.071 0.063 0.072

360870005 Rockland New York 0.079 0.069 0.068 0.072

340130003 Essex New Jersey 0.080 0.069 0.070 0.073

360850067 Richmond New York 0.078 0.071 0.072 0.073

361030002 Suffolk New York 0.083 0.072 0.066 0.073

340230011 Middlesex New Jersey 0.082 0.070 0.071 0.074

361030004 Suffolk New York 0.083 0.078 0.064 0.075

361192004 Westchester New York 0.079 0.072 0.074 0.075

090090027 New Haven Connecticut 0.081 0.075 0.072 0.076

090011123 Fairfield Connecticut 0.084 0.076 0.074 0.078

090070007 Middlesex Connecticut 0.081 0.082 0.080 0.081

090099002 New Haven Connecticut 0.090 0.085 0.069 0.081

090010017 Fairfield Connecticut 0.088 0.082 0.078 0.082

090013007 Fairfield Connecticut 0.090 0.090 0.074 0.084

090019003 Fairfield Connecticut 0.089 0.086 0.081 0.085

340030006 Bergen New Jersey 0.076 0.074 0.069 (2)

340170006 Hudson New Jersey 0.074 0.066 0.072 (2)

360050110 Bronx New York 0.068 0.071 0.071 (2)


## Phoenix-Mesa, AZ

040134011 Maricopa Arizona 0.068 0.060 0.060 0.062

040213001 Pinal Arizona 0.076 0.069 0.066 0.070

040134004 Maricopa Arizona 0.074 0.070 0.070 0.071

### 26



### Table 4: 2008 Ozone NAAQS Marginal Nonattainment Ar eas That Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone Standard as of July 20, 2015 Attainment Date and Requiring Reclassification

AQS Site

ID County Name State 4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr Avg Value (ppm) 

### 2012-

2014 Design

Value (ppm) (1) 2012 2013 2014

040134005 Maricopa Arizona 0.073 0.071 0.071 0.071

040134010 Maricopa Arizona 0.073 0.074 0.070 0.072

040139706 Maricopa Arizona 0.072 0.073 0.073 0.072

040137024 Maricopa Arizona 0.074 0.074 0.071 0.073

040131010 Maricopa Arizona 0.069 0.077 0.076 0.074

040132001 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.074 0.071 0.074

040133002 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.071 0.074

040134008 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.072 0.074 0.074

040137020 Maricopa Arizona 0.076 0.074 0.073 0.074

040133003 Maricopa Arizona 0.080 0.074 0.072 0.075

040134003 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.075 0.073 0.075

040137022 Maricopa Arizona 0.075 0.075 0.076 0.075

040139508 Maricopa Arizona 0.079 0.073 0.074 0.075

040139702 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.074 0.075

040137021 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.080 0.077

040139997 Maricopa Arizona 0.076 0.079 0.077 0.077

040130019 Maricopa Arizona 0.083 0.076 0.076 0.078

040132005 Maricopa Arizona 0.079 0.077 0.080 0.078

040131004 Maricopa Arizona 0.083 0.079 0.078 0.080

040131003 Maricopa Arizona 0.044 0.079 0.078 (2)

040139704 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.070 0.068 (2)


## San Diego County, CA

060731011 San Diego California 0.018 0.027 (2)

060731010 San Diego California 0.052 0.052 0.068 0.057

060730001 San Diego California 0.065 0.059 0.063 0.062

060731008 San Diego California 0.062 0.062 0.071 0.065

060731016 San Diego California 0.067 0.066 0.070 0.067

060731002 San Diego California 0.068 0.072 0.076 0.072

060731006 San Diego California 0.080 0.078 0.080 0.079

060730003 San Diego California 0.068 0.068 0.048 (2)

060731001 San Diego California 0.061 0.062 0.073 (2)

060731014 San Diego California 0.063 (2)

060731018 San Diego California 0.064 (2)

060732007 San Diego California 0.057 0.059 0.049 (2)

### 27



### (1) The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is 0.075 p arts per million (ppm). The design value is determined by the 3-year average of the an nual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration. Each area’s design val ue is the highest design value among monitors with valid design values. The design valu es shown here are computed using Federal Reference Method or equivalent data reporte d by State, Tribal, and Local monitoring agencies to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) as of Ju ly 20 

### , 2015. Individual 8-hour concentrations flagged by State, Tribal, or Local m onitoring agencies as having been affected by an exceptional event (e.g., wildfire, volcanic e ruption) and 

### received concurrence by the associated EPA Regional Office are not included in these calculations. (2) 

### Monitor did not collect sufficient data to calculat e a valid 2012-2014 design value. However, since other monitor(s) in the area had 201 2-2014 design values that violated the NAAQS, the area qualifies for reclassification to Moderate. Also, at least one monitor in the area reported a 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value greater than the NAAQS; therefore the area does not qualify for a 1-year attainment date

extension

.2829APPENDIXExhibit 1:Monitor Level Design Value Data for 2012-2014 for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Data CompletenessAQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA420958000 Northampton Pennsylvania 0.073 0.064 0.066 0.067 98 83 90 90420770004 Lehigh Pennsylvania 0.075 0.068 0.068 0.070 96 100 96 97420950025 Northampton Pennsylvania 0.073 0.065 0.067 0.068 99 81 98 93Atlanta, GA130770002 Coweta Georgia 0.062 0.053 0.067 0.060 9998 98 98132230003 Paulding Georgia 0.072 0.062 0.059 0.06499 98 96 98130970004 Douglas Georgia 0.073 0.063 0.065 0.067 96 98 96 97130890002 DeKalb Georgia 0.085 0.062 0.070 0.072 100 100 99 100131350002 Gwinnett Georgia 0.080 0.069 0.068 0.07299 100 100 100131210055 Fulton Georgia 0.087 0.069 0.073 0.076 9999 96 98131510002 Henry Georgia 0.088 0.070 0.075 0.077 10097 100 99132470001 Rockdale Georgia 0.081 0.071 0.079 0.07799 100 99 99130670003 Cobb Georgia 0.075 0.067 0.066 (2) 100 9833 77Baton Rouge, LA220470009 Iberville Louisiana 0.074 0.061 0.061 0.065 98 100 98 9930AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014221210001West BatonRouge Louisiana 0.070 0.060 0.066 0.065 97 100 10099220330013East BatonRouge Louisiana 0.070 0.062 0.068 0.066 93 99 96 96220050004 Ascension Louisiana 0.071 0.062 0.069 0.067 98 99 98 98220330009East BatonRouge Louisiana 0.072 0.066 0.070 0.069 98 100 99 99220470012 Iberville Louisiana 0.073 0.068 0.068 0.069 97 98 96 97220630002 Livingston Louisiana 0.071 0.069 0.073 0.071 98 100 100 99220330003East BatonRouge Louisiana 0.075 0.067 0.075 0.072 97 98 97 97Calaveras County, CA060090001 Calaveras California 0.076 0.067 0.071 0.071 98 99 98 98Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC371191005 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.073 0.062 0.063 0.066 99 100 100 100371090004 LincolnNorthCarolina 0.076 0.064 0.064 0.068 100 100 97 99371590021 RowanNorthCarolina 0.080 0.062 0.064 0.068 100 98 100 99371790003 UnionNorthCarolina 0.075 0.062 0.067 0.068 100 94 100 98371190041 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.080 0.067 0.065 0.070 99 99 100 9931AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014371191009 MecklenburgNorthCarolina 0.085 0.066 0.068 0.073 100 100 98 99371590022 RowanNorthCarolina 0.077 0.063 (3) 98 99 66Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI171971011 Will Illinois 0.071 0.061 0.064 0.065 10094 88 94181270026 Porter Indiana 0.067 0.063 0.067 0.065 84100 98 94170436001 DuPage Illinois 0.074 0.063 0.064 0.067 100 87 90 92170890005 Kane Illinois 0.075 0.064 0.066 0.068 9090 100 93170310001 Cook Illinois 0.079 0.064 0.066 0.069 9991 94 95170314002 Cook Illinois 0.083 0.063 0.063 0.069 9698 96 97170314007 Cook Illinois 0.073 0.067 0.069 0.069 9899 98 98171110001 McHenry Illinois 0.077 0.065 0.067 0.06998 96 100 98180890022 Lake Indiana 0.078 0.064 0.067 0.069 98 93 96 96180890030 Lake Indiana 0.081 0.062 0.065 0.069 96 99 99 98170310076 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.062 0.067 0.070 9395 91 93170311601 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.064 0.070 0.071 9395 97 95170314201 Cook Illinois 0.087 0.069 0.065 0.073 9988 93 93181270024 Porter Indiana 0.081 0.069 0.071 0.073 9197 96 95170310032 Cook Illinois 0.091 0.071 0.067 0.076 99100 97 99170317002 Cook Illinois 0.093 0.069 0.072 0.078 9399 96 96170971007 Lake Illinois 0.093 0.072 0.073 0.079 10095 100 98550590019 Kenosha Wisconsin 0.092 0.075 0.076 0.08199 100 100 100170310064 Cook Illinois 0.081 0.058 (2) 98 96 6532AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014170311003 Cook Illinois 0.079 0.066 0.065 (2) 88 8793 89170313103 Cook Illinois 0.062 0.063 (2) 88 95 61180892008 Lake Indiana 0.077 0.063 0.067 (2) 70 9895 88Chico (Butte County), CA060070008 Butte California 0.065 0.062 0.066 0.06496 99 98 98060070007 Butte California 0.078 0.071 0.074 0.07497 96 99 97Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN210150003 Boone Kentucky 0.074 0.059 0.062 0.065 100 100 100 100391650007 Warren Ohio 0.080 0.067 0.071 0.072 100 99 100 100390170004 Butler Ohio 0.083 0.068 0.070 0.073 100 98 99 99390170018 Butler Ohio 0.084 0.068 0.069 0.073 95 100 99 98390271002 Clinton Ohio 0.086 0.064 0.070 0.073 10099 99 99390610010 Hamilton Ohio 0.083 0.064 0.073 0.073 8797 100 95390610040 Hamilton Ohio 0.082 0.069 0.069 0.073 10099 100 100390179991 Butler Ohio 0.085 0.069 0.069 0.074 93 9494 94210373002 Campbell Kentucky 0.084 0.072 0.071 0.07599 100 99 99390250022 Clermont Ohio 0.091 0.066 0.068 0.075 100100 98 99390610006 Hamilton Ohio 0.087 0.069 0.070 0.075 9695 96 96Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH391530020 Summit Ohio 0.070 0.060 0.058 0.062 100 100 100 100391331001 Portage Ohio 0.074 0.058 0.061 0.064 95 98 99 97390350060 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.073 0.057 0.066 0.065 9895 97 97391030004 Medina Ohio 0.074 0.065 0.064 0.067 98 100 100 9933AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014390350064 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.083 0.064 0.059 0.068 9897 97 97390930018 Lorain Ohio 0.081 0.060 0.067 0.069 97 100 99 99390550004 Geauga Ohio 0.082 0.065 0.065 0.070 100 100 100 100390355002 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.087 0.065 0.061 0.071 9999 99 99390850007 Lake Ohio 0.083 0.068 0.062 0.071 99 100100 100390071001 Ashtabula Ohio 0.079 0.070 0.069 0.072 98100 100 99390350034 Cuyahoga Ohio 0.085 0.069 0.071 0.075 9898 99 98390850003 Lake Ohio 0.089 0.070 0.075 0.078 100 100100 100Columbus, OH390490081 Franklin Ohio 0.076 0.065 0.068 0.069 10099 100 100390830002 Knox Ohio 0.074 0.067 0.066 0.069 100 100100 100390890005 Licking Ohio 0.077 0.065 0.066 0.069 99 100 100 100390410002 Delaware Ohio 0.077 0.070 0.066 0.071 9998 100 99390970007 Madison Ohio 0.078 0.066 0.069 0.071 10099 95 98390490037 Franklin Ohio 0.081 0.070 0.069 0.073 98100 100 99390490029 Franklin Ohio 0.082 0.073 0.070 0.075 99100 100 100Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Fort Collins-Loveland, CO080310002 Denver Colorado 0.068 0.067 0.061 0.065 99 98 99 99080050006 Arapahoe Colorado 0.074 0.073 0.067 0.07199 99 99 99080013001 Adams Colorado 0.077 0.077 0.067 0.073 8992 97 93080590013 Jefferson Colorado 0.077 0.077 0.065 0.073 95 97 99 97080691004 Larimer Colorado 0.074 0.074 0.072 0.07393 99 99 97080690007 Larimer Colorado 0.079 0.074 0.069 0.07498 99 87 9534AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014081230009 Weld Colorado 0.080 0.073 0.070 0.074 9889 96 94080130011 Boulder Colorado 0.076 0.079 0.070 0.07599 98 99 99080590005 Jefferson Colorado 0.079 0.080 0.066 0.075 98 99 97 98080690011 Larimer Colorado 0.080 0.082 0.074 0.07897 99 97 98080590011 Jefferson Colorado 0.081 0.084 0.076 0.080 99 97 99 98080350004 Douglas Colorado 0.086 0.083 0.074 0.08197 98 97 97080590006 Jefferson Colorado 0.084 0.085 0.077 0.082 95 97 99 97080050002 Arapahoe Colorado 0.080 0.079 (2) 92 9763080310014 Denver Colorado 0.077 0.044 (2) 99 033080310025 Denver Colorado 0.073 (2) 76 25080310026 Denver Colorado 0.071 0.066 (2) 95 9965080590002 Jefferson Colorado 0.041 (2) 0 0080690012 Larimer Colorado 0.071 0.066 (2) 80 5545Dukes County, MA250070001 Dukes Massachusetts0.082 0.065 0.059 0.068 97 97 95 96Greater Connecticut, CT090050005 Litchfield Connecticut 0.073 0.068 0.0660.069 95 92 95 94090159991 Windham Connecticut 0.075 0.069 0.067 0.070 98 97 99 98090031003 Hartford Connecticut 0.077 0.077 0.077 0.077 85 91 98 91090110124 New London Connecticut 0.087 0.085 0.0650.079 90 93 98 94090131001 Tolland Connecticut 0.083 0.081 0.077 0.080 96 91 93 93Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX480391016 Brazoria Texas 0.071 0.067 0.061 0.066 9599 98 9735AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014482011015 Harris Texas 0.075 0.064 0.059 0.066 98 99 99 99482010026 Harris Texas 0.077 0.061 0.064 0.067 86 96 100 94482011035 Harris Texas 0.081 0.067 0.058 0.068 99 98 98 98482010046 Harris Texas 0.075 0.070 0.062 0.069 95 98 99 97481671034 Galveston Texas 0.081 0.064 0.071 0.072 99 96 96 97482010024 Harris Texas 0.075 0.074 0.068 0.072 98 100 95 98482011034 Harris Texas 0.083 0.069 0.066 0.072 98 99 97 98482011039 Harris Texas 0.085 0.069 0.063 0.072 99 99 97 98482011050 Harris Texas 0.086 0.067 0.065 0.072 98 96 98 97482010047 Harris Texas 0.081 0.079 0.064 0.074 98 95 100 98482010062 Harris Texas 0.085 0.074 0.065 0.074 99 99 98 99482010416 Harris Texas 0.077 0.079 0.066 0.074 97 97 96 97482010029 Harris Texas 0.082 0.080 0.063 0.075 97 96 96 96482010051 Harris Texas 0.079 0.079 0.067 0.075 99 99 99 99482010055 Harris Texas 0.077 0.081 0.067 0.075 10090 96 95482010066 Harris Texas 0.081 0.077 0.070 0.076 10098 96 98483390078 Montgomery Texas 0.082 0.075 0.072 0.07697 99 99 98480391004 Brazoria Texas 0.087 0.084 0.071 0.080 9097 99 95482010070 Harris Texas 0.075 (4) 45 15482011017 Harris Texas 0.071 0.061 0.067 (4) 55 7385 71Imperial County, CA060254004 Imperial California 0.070 0.072 0.069 0.070 98 88 93 93060250005 Imperial California 0.080 0.078 0.078 0.078 98 94 90 94060251003 Imperial California 0.084 0.080 0.078 0.080 99 96 99 9836AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014060254003 Imperial California 0.069 (2) 9431Jamestown, NY360130006 Chautauqua New York 0.081 0.066 0.066 0.071 97 95 97 96360130011 Chautauqua New York 0.081 (5) 9431Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA060290011 Kern California 0.082 0.081 0.089 0.084 99 97 92 96Knoxville, TN470090102 Blount Tennessee 0.064 0.059 0.058 0.06099 100 99 99470930021 Knox Tennessee 0.073 0.057 0.060 0.063 9998 98 98470090101 Blount Tennessee 0.075 0.064 0.064 0.06797 98 99 98470931020 Knox Tennessee 0.078 0.061 0.063 0.067 100 96 98 98Lancaster, PA420710012 Lancaster Pennsylvania 0.079 0.063 0.0630.068 99 100 100 100420710007 Lancaster Pennsylvania 0.081 0.066 0.0660.071 100 99 100 100Mariposa County, CA060430003 Mariposa California 0.081 0.073 0.077 0.077 98 95 96 96060430006 Mariposa California 0.081 0.077 0.077 0.078 92 92 82 89Memphis, TN-MS-AR280330002 DeSoto Mississippi 0.075 0.065 0.067 0.069 98 100 99 99471571004 Shelby Tennessee 0.084 0.063 0.065 0.07088 98 100 9537AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014050350005 Crittenden Arkansas 0.079 0.067 0.067 0.071 99 99 99 99471570021 Shelby Tennessee 0.083 0.069 0.067 0.073100 98 100 99471570075 Shelby Tennessee 0.086 0.069 0.066 0.07399 100 98 99Nevada County (Western part), CA060570007 Nevada California 0.084 0.065 0.078 0.07599 93 96 96060570005 Nevada California 0.077 0.078 0.082 0.07999 99 99 99New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT340410007 Warren New Jersey 0.069 0.061 0.060 0.06395 99 98 97360610135 New York New York 0.074 0.062 0.065 0.06795 97 99 97340315001 Passaic New Jersey 0.073 0.069 0.065 0.069 95 94 97 95360050133 Bronx New York 0.076 0.068 0.070 0.071 100 100 100 100361030009 Suffolk New York 0.079 0.074 0.062 0.07185 93 91 90340190001 Hunterdon New Jersey 0.078 0.073 0.065 0.072 97 100 100 99340250005 Monmouth New Jersey 0.083 0.071 0.064 0.072 93 99 97 96340273001 Morris New Jersey 0.076 0.073 0.068 0.07298 98 96 97360810124 Queens New York 0.082 0.071 0.063 0.072 96 94 92 94360870005 Rockland New York 0.079 0.069 0.068 0.07297 98 100 98340130003 Essex New Jersey 0.080 0.069 0.070 0.07398 100 98 99360850067 Richmond New York 0.078 0.071 0.072 0.07398 100 95 98361030002 Suffolk New York 0.083 0.072 0.066 0.07398 99 99 99340230011 Middlesex New Jersey 0.082 0.070 0.071 0.074 94 99 96 96361030004 Suffolk New York 0.083 0.078 0.064 0.07592 96 95 94361192004 Westchester New York 0.079 0.072 0.074 0.075 100 98 99 9938AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014090090027 New Haven Connecticut 0.081 0.075 0.072 0.076 98 95 93 95090011123 Fairfield Connecticut 0.084 0.076 0.074 0.078 91 92 92 92090070007 Middlesex Connecticut 0.081 0.082 0.080 0.081 95 96 97 96090099002 New Haven Connecticut 0.090 0.085 0.069 0.081 79 96 98 91090010017 Fairfield Connecticut 0.088 0.082 0.078 0.082 93 98 96 96090013007 Fairfield Connecticut 0.090 0.090 0.074 0.084 93 96 95 95090019003 Fairfield Connecticut 0.089 0.086 0.081 0.085 98 97 95 97340030006 Bergen New Jersey 0.076 0.074 0.069 (2) 59 99 96 85340170006 Hudson New Jersey 0.074 0.066 0.072 (2) 95 67 98 87360050110 Bronx New York 0.068 0.071 0.071 (2) 34 94 95 74Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE421010004 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.065 0.047 0.058 0.056 99 100 98 99340010006 Atlantic New Jersey 0.076 0.070 0.061 0.069 95 95 99 96340110007 Cumberland New Jersey 0.084 0.061 0.067 0.070 99 96 99 98100031007 New Castle Delaware 0.082 0.062 0.071 0.071 94 95 94 94100031013 New Castle Delaware 0.078 0.067 0.069 0.071 94 88 99 94100032004 New Castle Delaware 0.080 0.067 0.068 (6)96 83 80 86420910013 Montgomery Pennsylvania 0.075 0.069 0.0720.072 98 100 99 99340070002 Camden New Jersey 0.086 0.065 0.068 0.07388 100 100 96340210005 Mercer New Jersey 0.080 0.070 0.071 0.07399 100 99 99340219991 Mercer New Jersey 0.081 0.069 0.071 0.07394 92 99 95420290100 Chester Pennsylvania 0.081 0.068 0.071 0.073 93 100 93 95420450002 Delaware Pennsylvania 0.081 0.069 0.073 0.074 95 100 97 97340290006 Ocean New Jersey 0.085 0.070 0.072 0.07597 100 100 9939AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014420170012 Bucks Pennsylvania 0.082 0.073 0.071 0.075 98 98 98 98421010024 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.085 0.068 0.072 0.075 97 98 96 97340071001 Camden New Jersey 0.092 0.068 0.068 0.07693 93 100 95340150002 Gloucester New Jersey 0.087 0.073 0.070 0.076 94 98 83 92240150003 Cecil Maryland 0.087 0.072 0.074 0.077 9698 95 96100031010 New Castle Delaware 0.078 0.063 0.075 (7)0.072(7) 86 76 100 78421010048 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.036 0.068 (8) 6 93 33421011002 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.083 0.071 (9) 87 82 56Phoenix-Mesa, AZ040134011 Maricopa Arizona 0.068 0.060 0.060 0.062100 96 100 99040213001 Pinal Arizona 0.076 0.069 0.066 0.070 97100 97 98040134004 Maricopa Arizona 0.074 0.070 0.070 0.071100 100 100 100040134005 Maricopa Arizona 0.073 0.071 0.071 0.071100 100 99 100040134010 Maricopa Arizona 0.073 0.074 0.070 0.072100 99 100 100040139706 Maricopa Arizona 0.072 0.073 0.073 0.07297 100 98 98040137024 Maricopa Arizona 0.074 0.074 0.071 0.07398 98 96 97040131010 Maricopa Arizona 0.069 0.077 0.076 0.074100 100 100 100040132001 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.074 0.071 0.074100 100 100 100040133002 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.071 0.074100 100 100 100040134008 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.072 0.074 0.074100 100 100 100040137020 Maricopa Arizona 0.076 0.074 0.073 0.07485 99 98 94040133003 Maricopa Arizona 0.080 0.074 0.072 0.075100 100 100 100040134003 Maricopa Arizona 0.078 0.075 0.073 0.07598 100 99 9940AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014040137022 Maricopa Arizona 0.075 0.075 0.076 0.07599 98 97 98040139508 Maricopa Arizona 0.079 0.073 0.074 0.075100 97 100 99040139702 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.074 0.07599 99 98 99040137021 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.075 0.080 0.07795 100 98 98040139997 Maricopa Arizona 0.076 0.079 0.077 0.07795 94 99 96040130019 Maricopa Arizona 0.083 0.076 0.076 0.078100 99 100 100040132005 Maricopa Arizona 0.079 0.077 0.080 0.07847 99 98 81040131004 Maricopa Arizona 0.083 0.079 0.078 0.080100 100 100 100040131003 Maricopa Arizona 0.044 0.079 0.078 (2) 0100 99 66040139704 Maricopa Arizona 0.077 0.070 0.068 (2) 9964 61 75Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA421250005 Washington Pennsylvania 0.076 0.064 0.0650.068 100 98 100 99421255001 Washington Pennsylvania 0.071 0.071 0.0640.068 100 100 98 99421250200 Washington Pennsylvania 0.077 0.067 0.0640.069 100 98 98 99421290008 WestmorelandPennsylvania 0.075 0.070 0.064 0.069 99 97 99 98420030067 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.080 0.066 0.0650.070 100 99 99 99420070014 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.079 0.066 0.066 0.070 94 89 99 94420070002 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.074 0.072 0.069 0.071 97 98 96 97420030008 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.085 0.070 0.0650.073 100 98 100 99420050001 Armstrong Pennsylvania 0.078 0.078 0.0680.074 100 95 100 98420070005 Beaver Pennsylvania 0.083 0.072 0.070 0.075 99 96 95 97420031008 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.085 0.076 0.0710.077 100 98 100 99420030010 Allegheny Pennsylvania 0.077 0.075 (3)90 100 63421255200 Washington Pennsylvania 0.056 0.063 0.062(10) 45 99 99 8141AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014421290006 WestmorelandPennsylvania 0.081 0.067 0.053 (3) 100 98 38 79Reading, PA420110006 Berks Pennsylvania 0.075 0.061 0.063 0.066 99 100 95 98420110011 Berks Pennsylvania 0.078 0.068 0.068 0.071 98 99 98 98San Diego County, CA060731010 San Diego California 0.052 0.052 0.068 0.057 96 95 92 94060731011 San Diego California 0.018 0.027 (2) 4897 48060730001 San Diego California 0.065 0.059 0.063 0.062 97 97 97 97060731008 San Diego California 0.062 0.062 0.071 0.065 96 97 96 96060731016 San Diego California 0.067 0.066 0.070 0.067 96 96 96 96060731002 San Diego California 0.068 0.072 0.076 0.072 88 95 91 91060731006 San Diego California 0.080 0.078 0.080 0.079 96 95 95 95060730003 San Diego California 0.068 0.068 0.048 (2) 94 92 15 67060731001 San Diego California 0.061 0.062 0.073 (2) 81 73 91 82060731014 San Diego California 0.063 (2) 3110060731018 San Diego California 0.064 (2) 227060732007 San Diego California 0.057 0.059 0.049 (2) 93 96 66 85San Francisco Bay Area, CA060010009 Alameda California 0.040 0.046 0.057 0.047 95 98 98 97060010011 Alameda California 0.046 0.045 0.051 0.047 96 95 98 96060750005 San Francisco California 0.047 0.043 0.052 0.047 95 97 97 96060131004 Contra Costa California 0.049 0.052 0.0550.052 98 98 98 98060410001 Marin California 0.049 0.057 0.064 0.05698 98 98 9842AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014060811001 San Mateo California 0.050 0.056 0.064 0.056 97 97 98 97060550003 Napa California 0.058 0.055 0.062 0.058 97 97 98 97060950004 Solano California 0.056 0.055 0.064 0.05896 99 97 97060850005 Santa Clara California 0.057 0.060 0.0650.060 95 94 96 95060012001 Alameda California 0.052 0.059 0.072 0.061 100 100 100 100060950005 Solano California 0.067 0.061 0.063 0.06398 99 96 98060130002 Contra Costa California 0.070 0.057 0.0670.064 98 98 98 98060851001 Santa Clara California 0.063 0.062 0.0690.064 98 100 100 99060850002 Santa Clara California 0.066 0.063 0.0710.066 94 99 99 97060131002 Contra Costa California 0.072 0.062 0.0690.067 99 76 96 90060132007 Contra Costa California 0.065 0.065 0.0720.067 98 98 98 98060852006 Santa Clara California 0.070 0.067 0.0730.070 100 100 100 100060010007 Alameda California 0.071 0.069 0.076 0.072 98 98 99 98060852009 Santa Clara California 0.061 0.063 (3)99 93 64060970003 Sonoma California 0.042 0.055 (3) 98 9564060970004 Sonoma California 0.054 (11) 95 32San Luis Obispo County (Eastern part), CA060798006San LuisObispo California 0.075 0.067 0.068 0.070 98 99 9698060798005San LuisObispo California 0.081 0.075 0.073 0.076 98 98 9898Seaford, DE100051002 Sussex Delaware 0.084 0.065 0.063 0.070 100 93 100 98100051003 Sussex Delaware 0.085 0.072 0.067 0.074 92 97 97 9543AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014Sheboygan, WI551170006 Sheboygan Wisconsin 0.093 0.078 0.072 0.081 97 100 98 98St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL171630010 Saint Clair Illinois 0.083 0.066 0.067 0.072 98 97 98 98291890005 Saint Louis Missouri 0.085 0.067 0.065 0.072 100 100 100 100295100085 St. Louis City Missouri 0.087 0.066 0.0660.073 100 100 99 100171199991 Madison Illinois 0.083 0.071 0.068 0.07483 100 94 92171193007 Madison Illinois 0.087 0.069 0.070 0.07599 98 98 98290990019 Jefferson Missouri 0.085 0.069 0.072 0.075 100 100 100 100171190008 Madison Illinois 0.084 0.072 0.072 0.07673 99 99 90171191009 Madison Illinois 0.084 0.075 0.070 0.07695 98 91 95291831004 Saint Charles Missouri 0.086 0.071 0.0720.076 100 100 100 100291890014 Saint Louis Missouri 0.090 0.070 0.072 0.077 100 100 99 100291831002 Saint Charles Missouri 0.092 0.071 0.0720.078 100 86 100 95Tuscan Buttes, CA061030004 Tehama California 0.077 0.072 0.076 0.075100 98 98 99Upper Green River Basin, WY560350101 Sublette Wyoming 0.067 0.061 0.057 0.061100 98 94 97560350099 Sublette Wyoming 0.065 0.061 0.060 0.06293 97 94 95560350700 Sublette Wyoming 0.065 0.064 0.060 0.06394 98 96 96560350100 Sublette Wyoming 0.067 0.063 0.062 0.064100 98 97 98560351002 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.064 0.062 0.064100 100 98 9944AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014560350097 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.059 (12) 97 9865560359991 Sublette Wyoming 0.066 0.066 0.062 (13) 74 91 91 85Washington, DC-MD-VA511530009PrinceWilliam Virginia 0.072 0.066 0.062 0.066 99 100 100100511071005 Loudoun Virginia 0.073 0.066 0.063 0.06799 100 99 99240313001 Montgomery Maryland 0.073 0.069 0.064 0.068 98 98 99 98240210037 Frederick Maryland 0.078 0.069 0.063 0.070 92 97 96 95240330030PrinceGeorge's Maryland 0.079 0.068 0.065 0.070 100 100 99 100240170010 Charles Maryland 0.084 0.064 0.067 0.07190 90 97 92510590030 Fairfax Virginia 0.084 0.067 0.065 0.07298 99 91 96110010043District ofColumbiaDistrict OfColumbia 0.087 0.066 0.068 0.073 100 99 99 99240090011 Calvert Maryland 0.082 0.067 0.070 0.07398 99 100 99510130020 Arlington Virginia 0.084 0.067 0.071 0.074 92 94 100 95240338003PrinceGeorge's Maryland 0.090 0.069 0.069 0.076 97 100 9898110010041District ofColumbiaDistrict OfColumbia 0.076 0.062 0.047 (3) 98 99 0 66110010050District ofColumbiaDistrict OfColumbia 0.066 0.069 (8) 42 100 47240339991PrinceGeorge's Maryland 0.084 0.072 0.069 (9) 88 82 86 8545AQS Site IDCountyNameState4th Highest Daily Max 8-hr AvgValue (ppm)2012-2014DesignValue(ppm)(1)Percent Complete2012-2014AveragePercentComplete2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014515100009AlexandriaCity Virginia 0.086 (14) 64 21(1) The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is 0.075 parts per million (ppm). The design value is determined by the 3-year average of theannual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour averageozone concentration. Each area’s design value is determined by the highest design valueamong monitors with valid design values. The designvalues shown here are computed using Federal Reference Method or equivalent data reportedby State, Tribal, and Local monitoring agencies toEPA's Air Quality System (AQS) as of July 20,2015.Individual 8-hour concentrations thatwere flagged by State, Tribal, or Local monitoringagencies as having been affected by an exceptionalevent (e.g., wildfire, volcanic eruption) andreceived concurrence from the associated EPA Regional Office are not included in these calculations.(2) Monitor did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. However, since other monitor(s) in the area had 2012-2014design values that violated the NAAQS, the area qualifies for reclassification to Moderate. Also, atleast one monitor in the area reported a 2014fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value greater than the NAAQS; therefore the area does notqualify for a 1-year attainment dateextension.(3) Monitor shut down prior to the end of the 2014ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014design value. Monitor previously attained the NAAQSbased on 2011-2013 data. The monitor shut down was approved by EPA through theannual monitoring network plan review process (see40 CFR 58.10).(4) Site 482010070 monitor was moved to site 482011017 in June, 2012. Therefore, neither site collected sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. Site 482011017 monitor has sufficient data to determine that the 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value didnot exceed the level of the NAAQS.(5) Monitor shut down January 1, 2013 and did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. The previous DV for themonitor recorded a violation in 2010-2012 (0.076 ppm), but the remaining site in the nonattainment area always had the highest DV in the area.The monitor shut down was approved by EPA through the annual monitoring network plan review process (see 40 CFR 58.10).(6) Monitor did not collect sufficient monitoring data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value, which requires an average percent of days withvalid data in the designated ozone monitoring season of at least 90 percent. However, because other monitors in the area had valid 2012-2014design values that violated the NAAQS, the 2012-2014 design value is not needed to determine that thearea violated. The monitor did collect46sufficient data (i.e., at least 75 percent of the designated sampling days) to determine a valid 2014fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour averagevalue adequate to determine if the area qualifies for a 1-year attainment date extension.(7) Monitor did not collect sufficient data in 2014. We substituted missing values for this site withthe highest corresponding values from the otherthree New Castle County monitoring sites, which created a complete data set to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value and a 2014 fourth highestdaily maximum value (seeExhibit 2in the Appendix to this TSD).(8) Monitor began operation after the beginning ofthe 2013 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collected sufficient data to calculate a valid3-year design value. However, this monitor has sufficient data to determine a valid 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value todetermine if the area meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-year attainment date extension.(9) Monitor did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value. However, thismonitor has sufficient data to determine avalid 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value to determine if the area meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-yearattainment date extension.(10) Monitor began operation after the beginning ofthe 2012 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collected sufficient data to calculate a valid3-year design value. However, this monitor has sufficient data to determine a valid 2014 fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average value todetermine if the area meets the air quality criteria pertaining to a 1-year attainment date extension.(11) Monitor began operation at the beginning of the 2014 ozone monitoring season and has not yet collected sufficient data to calculate a valid 3-year design value.(12) Monitor shut down at the end of the 2013 ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficientdata to calculate a valid 2012-2014 designvalue. Monitor previously attained the NAAQS basedon 2011-2013 data. The monitor was designated a Special Purpose monitor in AQS and inthe Wyoming Annual Monitoring Network Plan. 40 CFRSection 58.20(f) states that “Prior approval from EPA is not required for discontinuanceof an SPM.”(13) CASTNET monitor started 6/1/2011, and had incomplete data in 2012 so that a valid design value could not be calculated. Since inception in2011, and with complete data through March 2015 with the exception of missing June and July 2012 data,the monitor has recorded no readingsthat have exceeded the ozone standard of 0.075 ppm.(14) Monitor shut down prior to the 2014 ozone monitoring season and did not collect sufficient data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value.The monitor shut down was approved by EPA through the annual monitoring network plan review process (see 40 CFR 58.10).

### 47 

# Exhibit 2:

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Nonattainment Area (PA-NJ-MD-DE)

1-Year Attainment Date Extension – Delaware Monitor ing Data Substitution

Introduction:

As part of its proposals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS M arginal nonattainment areas, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing a 1-ye ar attainment date extension for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area (“Philad elphia area”). This “extension year” is allowed under CAA section 181(a)(5) for areas that did not attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2015 attainment date, but were otherwise i n compliance with their SIPs and whose fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average did not exceed the ozone NAAQS in the year preceding the extension year (i.e., 2014). For the 4-state Philadelphia area (PA-NJ-MD-DE), three of the four states have requested the 1-year attainment date extension, with the exception of the state of Delaware. In 2014, all of the four Del aware monitoring sites (in New Castle County) reported fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour averag e ozone concentrations less than or equal to the 0.075 ppm standard level; however, one monit oring site (ID 100031010, or Site 1010) did not satisfy the EPA’s data completeness guidelines. 4 

### The EPA is proposing to substitute maximum readings from the other New Castle County m onitoring sites for missing daily values from the deficient monitoring site to meet the data completeness guidelines for the 2014 air quality data.

Discussion

As illustrated in Table 1, all monitoring sites forthe Philadelphia area reported 2014 fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentr ations less than the 0.075 ppm standard

level.

Table 1: 2014 4 th 

### Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Average Concentration s for the Philadelphia Nonattainment Area

AQS Monitoring

Site ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily

Max 8-hr Average Value (ppm)

420170012 Bucks Pennsylvania 0.071

420290100 Chester Pennsylvania 0.071

4 Note that Site ID100032004 did not collect suffici ent monitoring data to calculate a valid 2012-2014 design value, which requires an average percent of days with vali d data in the designated ozone monitoring season of at least 90 percent. However, because other monitors in the are a had valid 2012-2014 design values that violated t he NAAQS, the 2012-2014 design value is not needed to determi ne that the area violated. The monitor did collect sufficient data (i.e., at least 75 percent of the designated sampli ng days) to determine a valid 2014 fourth highest d aily maximum 8- hour average value (0.068 ppm), adequate to determi ne if the area qualifies for a 1-year attainment da te extension.

### 48



### AQS Monitoring

Site ID County Name State 2014 4th Highest Daily

Max 8-hr Average Value (ppm)

420450002 Delaware Pennsylvania 0.073

420910013 Montgomery Pennsylvania 0.072

421010004 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.058

421010024 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.072

421010048 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 0.068

340010006 Atlantic New Jersey 0.061

340070002 Camden New Jersey 0.068

340071001 Camden New Jersey 0.068

340110007 Cumberland New Jersey 0.067

340150002 Gloucester New Jersey 0.07

340210005 Mercer New Jersey 0.071

340219991 Mercer New Jersey 0.071

340290006 Ocean New Jersey 0.072

240150003 Cecil Maryland 0.074

100031007 New Castle Delaware 0.071

100031010 New Castle Delaware 0.074

100031013 New Castle Delaware 0.069

100032004 New Castle Delaware 0.068



### The data handling and ambient air quality monitorin g data completeness requirements for the 8- hour ozone NAAQS are given in 40 CFR 50, Appendix I . Specifically, section 2.3(b) requires a minimum data completeness in any one year of at lea st 75 percent of the days in the designated ozone monitoring season. For the Philadelphia area, the ozone monitoring season extends from April 1 through October 31, for a total of 214 days . In 2014, one of the four New Castle County monitoring sites (ID 100031010, or Site 1010) had m onitoring data for only 157 days (73 percent) of the ozone monitoring season, which is i nsufficient to judge compliance with the

standard.

To remedy this deficiency, we propose to substitute the missing daily maximum 8-hour average ozone readings for Site 1010 with the highest of th e corresponding daily values from the other three New Castle County monitoring sites. 5 

### This approach provides reasonable estimates of worst-case readings for Site 1010 where data were m issing and generates sufficient data completeness (in this case, 100 percent). In total, we substituted 57 values for Site 1010, and only one of those values was needed to determine th e four highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations.

5 Site 1010 is located within approximately five mil es of New Castle County monitoring sites 100031013 and 100032004, and within approximately 20 miles of New Castle County monitoring site 100031007.

### 49



### Table 2 illustrates how the EPA used available maxi mum values from other New Castle County monitoring sites to substitute for missing daily ma ximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations at Site 1010. For illustration purposes, the table pre sents the 10 days of highest values for Site 1010 in descending order, compared with corresponding va lues for the other three monitoring sites. Within the four highest values, only one substitute reading was used (0.083 ppm from Site 1013 and Site 2004 on July 11, 2014), resulting in a fou rth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration of 0.075 ppm for Site 1010. Not e that, using this approach, the fourthhighest value would remain the same, even if a high er substitute value were used for the missing July 11, 2014 reading.

Table 2: Illustration of Data Substitution Used to Determine 2014 4 th 

### -highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Average Ozone Concentration for Dela ware (New Castle County) Monitoring Site 1010

Monitoring

Date Daily Maximum 8-hour Average Ozone Concentration (p pm) by Monitoring Site 1

ORIGINAL WITH SUBSTITUTION 2

1007 1010 1013 2004 1007 1010 1013 2004

7/11/2014 0.081 NO DATA 0.083 0.083 0.081 0.083 0.083 0.083

8/27/2014 0.071 0.081 0.081 0.079 0.071 0.081 0.081 0.079

7/8/2014 0.078 0.078 NO

DATA 0.067 0.078 0.078 NO

DATA 0.067

7/7/2014 0.075 0.075 0.068 0.068 0.075 0.075 (4 th highest) 0.068 0.068

8/26/2014 0.066 0.074 (4 th highest) 0.073 0.070 0.066 0.074 0.073 0.070

6/16/2014 NO

DATA 0.072 0.063 0.067 NO

DATA 0.072 0.063 0.067

6/17/2014 NO

DATA 0.071 0.069 0.066 NO

DATA 0.071 0.069 0.066

5/26/2014 0.051 0.069 0.066 0.064 0.051 0.069 0.066 0.064

5/20/2014 0.053 0.068 0.067 0.059 0.053 0.068 0.067 0.059

6/28/2014 0.052 NO DATA 0.066 0.063 0.052 0.066 0.066 0.063

1 Monitoring site IDs are truncated (100031007, 1000 31010, 100031013, 100032004).

2 Data substitution not applied for Site 1007 and Si te 1013, which satisfied the EPA’s data completenes s guidelines

for 2014.



### Comparing Tables 1 and 2, the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration for Site 1010 changes from 0.074 ppm (based on incomplete data) to 0.075 ppm (based on complete data with substitution).

Conclusions

The four Delaware monitoring sites (in New Castle C ounty) reported 2014 fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations less th an the 0.075 ppm standard level. One site

### 50



### (Site 1010) did not satisfy the EPA’s data complete ness guidelines. The fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration for Site 1010 (0.074 ppm) was therefore not valid. We substituted missing values for Site 1010 with the highest corresponding values from the other three New Castle County monitoring sites, which created a complete data set for Site 1010. The EPA used data substitution to develop the 2014 data for Site 1010 that meets the data handling and ambient air quality monitoring data co mpleteness requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hou r average ozone concentration for Site 1010 is 0.075 ppm in 2014.