1

Technical Support Document (TSD)

for the Revisions to the Transport Rule

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491

Significant Contribution Assessment TSD

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation

October 2011
2

This Technical Support Document (TSD) demonstrates EPA’s analysis to quantify the

SO2 emissions that significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in downwind states for the Revisions to the 

Transport Rule. The proposed increases in state SO2 budgets for 2014 and thereafter, which 

could result in increased emissions in 2014, were investigated for Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin. New Jersey was not investigated in this assessment because its proposed SO2 budget

would increase for 2012 through 2013 and not for 2014 and thereafter. For purposes of 

investigating the impact of the state budget increases, EPA assumed that the emissions in each 

state involved would equal the proposed amount of the increased state budget. Therefore, this 

TSD refers to the “proposed emission increases” assumed to result from the proposed budget 

increases and analyzes the impact of these emission increases. This TSD is organized as follows:

A. Background on EPA’s Analysis to Quantify Emissions that Significantly Contribute to 

Nonattainment or Interfere with Maintenance

B. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from Texas Using the Air Quality 

Assessment Tool (AQAT)

C. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from New York Using the Air Quality 

Assessment Tool (AQAT)

D. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from Wisconsin Using the Air 

Quality Assessment Tool (AQAT)

E. Presentation of Proposed Annual and Ozone-Season NOx Emission Increases Relative to 

Annual and Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions

A. Background on EPA’s Analysis to Quantify Emissions that Significantly Contribute to 

Nonattainment or Interfere with Maintenance

Sections V and VI of the final Transport Rule (TR) preamble (Federal Implementation 

Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP 

Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011)) describe EPA’s approach to identify upwind states’ 

emissions that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment or interfere with downwind 

maintenance of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the 1997 ozone NAAQS. This is further 

described in the related Significant Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD

(EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4456). As described in the preamble for the final TR, the approach 

uses air quality modeling to identify monitoring sites with projected nonattainment and 

maintenance problems (receptors) for the PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS as well as upwind states 

whose contributions to these receptors meet or exceed specified threshold amounts. See sections 

V.C and V.D in the TR preamble and the associated TR Air Quality Modeling Final Rule TSD

(EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4140) for a detailed discussion of these air quality analyses.
3

As described in TR preamble section VI, after identifying upwind-to-downwind linkages, 

EPA uses a multi-step process to quantify each state’s significant contribution to nonattainment

and interference with maintenance. First, EPA identifies the power sector emissions projected to 

remain at ascending cost thresholds of emissions reductions for each state. See section B in the 

Significant Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD for discussion of this 

analysis. Next, EPA uses an air quality assessment tool (AQAT) to estimate the air quality 

impact of the upwind emission reductions at each cost threshold on downwind receptors with 

problems attaining and maintaining the applicable NAAQS. See section C in the Significant 

Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD for discussion of the development 

and use of AQAT.

The analysis in this TSD uses the annual PM2.5 and 24-hour PM2.5 AQAT on a case-bycase and state-by-state basis to estimate the impacts of the proposed SO2 emission increases on 

downwind air quality in the context of the air quality portions of the determination of significant 

contribution in 2014 followed by an estimate of the net effect on the “remedy” control scenario

in 2014. The proposed emission increases were investigated in a state-specific manner to show 

the estimated air quality impacts from that state’s proposed emission increase on the downwind 

monitors to facilitate public comment on each emission increase. For example, this means that 

we examined the effects of the proposed emission increase for Texas, without simultaneously 

applying the proposed emission increases for New York and Wisconsin (and visa-versa). For 

each state, there were two assessments:

• Significant Contribution Assessment: Following the methodology and using the 

emissions for the air quality assessment of significant contribution and interference 

with maintenance from the final TR, we assess whether the proposed SO2 emission 

increases in Texas, New York, or Wisconsin have the potential to change the patterns 

of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance projected at the $500/ton and 

$2,300/ton cost threshold levels for annual PM2.5 and for 24-hour PM.25 (compared 

with the AQAT analysis from the final TR). Specifically, we investigate if their 

significant contribution and interference with maintenance is resolved at $500/ton 

and/or $2,300/ton to the receptor(s) to which they are linked (as was concluded in the 

multi-factor assessment for the final TR)? In this assessment, only states that are 

“linked” to a particular receptor make emission reductions, all other states are held at 

base case emission levels.

• “Remedy” Control Scenario Assessment: In this case, we estimate the resulting air 

quality and patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance when the 

emissions from all states are at the level from the 2014 remedy control scenario for 

the final TR (except for, on a case-by-case basis, emissions from Texas, New York, 

or Wisconsin, where their emissions are increased).

This analysis reaches the same conclusion as EPA’s assessment of significant 

contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance from the final TR. There are 

no estimated changes in the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance at the 

$500/ton cost threshold level for either Texas, New York, or Wisconsin. Therefore, Texas’ 

significant contribution and interference with maintenance is the amount of emissions that can be 

removed at the $500/ton cost threshold. Furthermore, there are no estimated changes in the 

patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance at the $2,300/ton cost threshold level for 
4

either New York, or Wisconsin (relative to the analysis from the final TR). Thus, EPA 

concludes that for these three states, their significant contribution and interference with 

maintenance is the amount of emissions that can be removed at the $2,300/ton cost threshold. 

In addition, there are no estimated changes in the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, 

and maintenance in the 2014 “remedy” control scenario for any of the proposed individual 

emission changes for Texas, New York, or Wisconsin. 

In addition to the state-by-state and case-by-case analysis presented in this TSD, EPA 

also assessed the cumulative air quality impacts in the $500/ton cost threshold and $2300/ton 

cost threshold scenarios used in the significant contribution/interference with maintenance

assessment as well as on the 2014 “remedy” control scenario. For these scenarios, we assumed

that all three states (Texas, New York, and Wisconsin), simultaneously, were to make the 

proposed emission increases. As seen in the tables in Appendix B (Tables B-1 through B-4), 

while there were small changes in concentrations at some receptors, there were no changes in the 

patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance for either of the two cost threshold 

scenarios or for the 2014 “remedy” control scenario. 

Based on the results of the analyses presented in this TSD (which showed small changes 

in concentrations at downwind receptors, no changes in the patterns of attainment, 

nonattainment, and maintenance at the two cost threshold levels, and no changes in the “remedy” 

control scenario) under any of the combinations assessed (either emission increases for each of 

the states individually or simultaneous emission increases for all three states), EPA concludes 

that the proposed SO2 emission increases for each state, as well as collectively for all three states, 

would not substantially affect the air quality portion of the multifactor test and thus would not 

affect EPA’s conclusions in the final TR identifying $500/ton and $2,300/ton as the appropriate 

SO2 cost thresholds for “Group 1” and “Group 2” states..
5

B. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from Texas Using the Air Quality 

Assessment Tool (AQAT)

Using the calibrated AQAT (as described in section C of the Significant Contribution and 

State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD), EPA examined the annual PM2.5 and 24-hour PM2.5 

air quality impacts to receptors in 2014 using the 2014 base case and 2014 $500/ton cost 

threshold emission estimates. This analysis directly follows the analysis from the final TR cost 

threshold analysis. Appendix A of this document lists a number of the AQAT input and output 

workbooks from the TR that were used in this assessment as well as a number of additional 

AQAT input, intermediate, and output workbooks created specifically for this assessment.

To assess the impacts of emission increases under this revisions proposal to the $500/ton 

cost threshold, states whose contributions were greater than or equal to the 1% contribution 

threshold in the 2012 base case modeling had emissions at the $500/ton cost threshold level, 

while states whose contributions were below the threshold had emissions at the 2014 base case 

values. For Texas, emissions were assessed using the adjusted 2014 $500/ton cost threshold 

emissions level (with an additional 70,067 tons of additional SO2) or the 2014 base case emission

level, depending whether the contribution from Texas exceeded the 1% contribution threshold, or 

not, respectively. This was compared to the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold analysis from the final 

TR (where the additional tons were not added to Texas emissions).

To assess the impact of emissions increases under this revisions proposal to the final TR 

remedy, EPA estimated the air quality impacts of the additional SO2 emissions for Texas 

(70,067 tons) in the 2014 “remedy” control scenario and compared this with the 2014 control 

scenario from the final TR. In these cases, all states, regardless of whether they were “linked”, 

or included in the TR, were assumed to make the SO2 emission reductions or were assumed to 

experience the SO2 emission increases as modeled in the final TR control scenario (except, of 

course, for Texas). 

The all fossil and biomass SO2 emissions for each state modeled in the 2012 base case 

CAMx source-apportionment air quality modeling are shown in Table 1 for each of the cases 

involving Texas that were investigated using AQAT. Note that the emissions for each of the 

states is constant for the two general scenarios $500/ton and control scenario (with the exception 

of Texas) which had emissions of 0 tons or 70,067 tons added to the values used in the final TR 

assessment. Note that the “0 ton” case for Texas is identical to the values used in the final TR 

assessment. For the $500/ton cost threshold assessment, the 2014 base case emissions were used 

for states that were “not linked” (Table 1).

Only a single cost threshold level ($500/ton) was investigated in this assessment, the 

appropriate cost threshold for “Group 2” states, as determined in the final TR. Following the 

analysis of this cost threshold level with the adjustment in SO2 emissions made for Texas, no 

additional nonattainment/maintenance areas were present beyond those areas identified at 

$500/ton in the final TR AQAT assessment (see the Significant Contribution and State 

Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD for discussion of this analysis). Since Texas is not “linked” 

to any of the receptors with residual nonattainment or maintenance problems at the 2014 

$500/ton level in the TR AQAT assessment, Texas’s emissions were assessed at the 2014 base 

case level for these receptors, and, thus, no changes in estimated air quality were present at these 

receptors in this assessment relative to the TR assessment. Changes in estimated concentrations 

were seen at the Madison County receptor (ID #171191007 ) to which Texas was “linked”. 

However, the resulting change in concentration was not sufficient to alter the conclusion that this 
6

receptor would likely be in attainment and would not be a maintenance receptor at the $500/ton 

cost threshold level in 2014. Thus, EPA concludes that assessment of alternative cost threshold 

levels (for example, the Group 1 cost threshold level of $2,300/ton) were unnecessary. The 

estimates of average and maximum design values (DV) for the $500/ton assessment for the two 

scenarios (incremental emissions of 0 tons or 70,067 tons to Texas) for annual and 24-hour 

PM2.5 can be found in Tables 2,3,4, and 5.

As described previously, using AQAT, EPA also assessed how the SO2 emission levels 

for Texas impact the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance areas for the 2014 

TR “remedy” control scenario, EPA found that, while there were small changes in average and 

maximum design values, the patterns were not likely to change. Areas were projected to retain 

the same status as estimated in the TR using AQAT.

C. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from New York Using the Air Quality 

Assessment Tool (AQAT)

Using the calibrated annual PM2.5 and 24-hour PM2.5 versions of AQAT (as described 

in section C of the Significant Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD), EPA 

examined the air quality impacts to receptors in 2014 using the 2014 base case and 2014 

$500/ton and $2,300/ton cost threshold emission estimates. As was the case for the assessment 

of Texas emissions, this analysis directly follows the analysis from the final TR cost threshold 

analysis. As stated in section B of this TSD, Appendix A of this document lists a number of the 

AQAT input and output workbooks from the TR that were used in this assessment.

To assess the impacts of emission increases under this revisions proposal to the $500/ton 

and $2,300/ton cost thresholds, states whose contributions were greater than or equal to the 1% 

contribution threshold in the 2012 base case modeling were assessed at the $500/ton or 

$2,300/ton cost threshold levels (depending on the assessment), while states whose contributions 

were below the threshold had emissions at the 2014 base case values. For New York, emissions 

were assessed at the adjusted 2014 $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold emissions levels to 

account for the increase in SO2 emissions from this corrections proposal (with either 0 tons or 

3,527 tons of additional SO2) or the 2014 base case level, depending whether the contribution 

from New York exceeded the 1% contribution threshold, or not, respectively.

To assess the impact of emissions increases under this corrections proposal to the final 

TR remedy control scenario, EPA estimated the air quality impacts of the additional SO2 

emission levels for New York (0 tons or 3,527 tons) in the 2014 control scenario. In these cases, 

all states, regardless of whether they were “linked”, or included in the TR, were assumed to 

make the SO2 emission reductions or were assumed to experience the SO2 emission increases as 

modeled in the final TR control scenario (except for New York). 

The 2014 all fossil and biomass SO2 emissions for each state modeled in the 2012 base 

case CAMx source-apportionment air quality modeling are shown in Table 6 for each of the 

cases involving New York investigated using AQAT. Note that the emissions for each of the 

states is constant for the three general scenarios $500/ton, $2,300/ton, and control scenario (with 

the exception of New York) which had emissions of 0 tons or 3,527 tons added to the values 

used in the final TR assessment. Notably, for the New York assessment, emissions from Texas, 

and Wisconsin were not simultaneously adjusted (i.e., the proposed adjustment was not added to 

the relevant emissions for these states). For the $500/ton and $2,300/ton cost threshold 

assessments, the 2014 base case emissions were used for states that were “not linked” (Table 6).
7

Two cost threshold levels ($500/ton and $2,300/ton) were investigated in this assessment, 

the appropriate cost threshold for “Group 2” states and the cost threshold for “Group 1” states as 

determined in the final TR. Following the analysis of this cost threshold level with the 

adjustment in SO2 emissions made for New York, no additional nonattainment/maintenance 

areas were present beyond those areas identified at $500/ton and $2,300/ton in the final TR 

AQAT assessments (see the Significant Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule 

TSD for discussion of this analysis). Since New York is “linked” to at least one of the 24-hour 

PM2.5 receptors with residual nonattainment or maintenance problems at the 2014 $500/ton 

level in the TR AQAT assessment that remains in nonattainment and/or maintenance at 

$2,300/ton, New York is classified as a “Group 1” state. Minor changes in estimated 

concentrations were seen at the receptors to which New York was “linked” (see the preamble for 

the final TR). The monitors for 24-hour PM2.5 to which New York was linked in the TR were: 

261470005; 261610008; 261630016; 261630019; 261630033; 390350045; 390350060; 

390350065; 420710007; and 421330008. The monitors for annual PM2.5 to which New York 

was linked in the TR were: 390350038; 390350045; 390350060; 390350065; and 420030064.

However, the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to 

alter the conclusions about the status of these receptors at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost 

threshold levels in 2014. Thus, EPA concludes that assessment of alternative cost threshold 

levels were unnecessary. The estimates of average and maximum design values for the $500/ton

and $2,300/ton assessments for the three scenarios (incremental emissions of 0 tons or 3,527 tons

to New York) for annual and 24-hour PM2.5 can be found in Tables 7,8,9, and 10.

As described previously, using AQAT, EPA also assessed how the SO2 emission levels 

for New York impact the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and maintenance areas for the 

2014 TR “remedy” control scenario, EPA found that, while there were modest changes in 

average and maximum design values, the patterns were not likely to change. Areas were 

projected to retain the same status as estimated in the TR using AQAT.

D. Analysis of Significant Contribution for SO2 Emissions from Wisconsin Using the Air Quality 

Assessment Tool (AQAT)

For the assessment of the SO2 emissions from Wisconsin, EPA, EPA followed the same 

methodology as for New York (in section C of this TSD), examining the impacts of emission 

increases under this revisions proposal to the $500/ton and $2,300/ton cost thresholds. Wisconsin 

emissions were assessed at the adjusted 2014 $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold emissions 

levels (7,757 tons of additional SO2) when the state was contributing to a receptor at or above the 

1% contribution threshold. The results are compared with the estimates from the TR cost 

threshold analysis. EPA also estimated the air quality impacts of the additional SO2 emission 

level for Wisconsin (7,757 tons) in the 2014 control scenario.

In particular, EPA examined the average and maximum DV estimates in the adjusted 

scenarios for Milwaukee, Wisconsin, since these would likely see the largest changes in value.

The 2014 all fossil and biomass SO2 emissions for each state for the two cost thresholds 

($500/ton and $2,300/ton) as well as the “remedy” control scenario from the TR analysis are 

shown in Table 6 along with the proposed upward revision of 7,757 tons for Wisconsin. Note 

that in the assessment of the effects of the proposed revision for Wisconsin, none of the proposed 

emission revisions for other states were simultaneously investigated.
8

For both cost threshold levels where Wisconsin emissions were adjusted, no additional 

nonattainment/maintenance areas were present beyond those areas identified at $500/ton and 

$2,300/ton in the final TR AQAT assessments for both annual PM2.5 and 24-hour PM2.5 

(including the Milwaukee receptors). Minor changes in estimated concentrations were seen at 

the receptors to which Wisconsin was “linked” (see the preamble for the final TR). We have 

included receptors located in Wisconsin in the following lists. The receptors for 24-hour PM2.5 

to which Wisconsin was linked in the TR were: 170311016, 180890022, 261630016, 261630033, 

390350038, 390350045, 390350060, 390811001, 420030064, 420030093, 420710007, and 

540090011. The receptors for annual PM2.5 to which Wisconsin was linked in the TR were:

171191007, 180970081, 180970083, 261630033, 390350038, 390350045, 390350060, 

390350065, 390610014, 390617001, and 390618001.

However, the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to 

alter the conclusions about the status of these receptors at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost 

threshold levels in 2014. Thus, EPA concludes that assessment of alternative cost threshold 

levels were unnecessary, and Wisconsin maintains its classification as a “Group 1” state. The 

estimates of average and maximum design values for the $500/ton and $2,300/ton assessments 

for the scenarios (incremental emissions of 0 tons or 7,757 tons) for annual and 24-hour PM2.5 

can be found in Tables 11,12,13, and 14.

As described previously for New York, and Texas, using AQAT, EPA also assessed how 

the adjusted SO2 emission levels for Wisconsin impact the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, 

and maintenance areas for the 2014 TR “remedy” control scenario, EPA found that, while there 

were modest changes in average and maximum design values, the patterns were not likely to 

change. Areas were projected to retain the same status as estimated in the TR.

E. Presentation of Proposed Annual and Ozone-Season NOx Emission Increases Relative to 

Annual and Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions .

The proposed revisions to state budgets for annual and ozone-season NOx represent very 

limited shares of the total NOx emissions from all source-sectors in each affected state, as 

modeled in the air quality projections under the final Transport Rule “remedy” control scenario 

analysis in 2014. Tables 15 and 16 illustrate the relationship of the proposed state budget 

revisions to each state’s total emissions (from all sources) for annual NOx and ozone-season 

NOX, respectively. The proposed state budget revisions represent small percentages of each 

state’s total emissions; therefore, EPA believes that the impact of these revisions would be 

limited to comparatively small changes to the 2014 ozone design values projected in the final 

Transport Rule air quality analysis. 
9

Table 1. SO2 EGU Emissions From Fossil and Biomass Units Used in AQAT (tons of SO2) in 

2014 – Considering Additional Texas Emissions.

Base 

Case

$500/ton 

Cost 

Threshold

$500/ton Cost 

Threshold

(With 

Additional 

Emissions 

from Texas)

“Remedy” 

Control 

Scenario

“Remedy” 

Control 

Scenario (With 

Additional 

Emissions 

from Texas)

Additional Emissions 

Added to Texas (tons) 0 0 70,067 0 70,067

State

Alabama 417,340 200,905 200,905 173,566 173,566

Arkansas 99,411 103,431 103,431 106,685 106,685

Connecticut 3,774 3,883 3,883 3,883 3,883

Delaware 2,172 2,088 2,088 2,172 2,172

District of Columbia 0 0 0 0 0

Florida 143,601 137,705 137,705 148,069 148,069

Georgia 170,288 94,691 94,691 93,208 93,208

Illinois 141,606 138,815 138,815 132,647 132,647

Indiana 727,786 262,386 262,386 195,045 195,045

Iowa 133,083 117,830 117,830 83,827 83,827

Kansas 69,819 55,308 55,308 45,740 45,740

Kentucky 488,006 160,582 160,582 116,927 116,927

Louisiana 118,231 135,803 135,803 139,204 139,204

Maine 2,355 2,355 2,355 2,355 2,355

Maryland 42,926 32,187 32,187 30,368 30,368

Massachusetts 13,365 13,364 13,364 13,363 13,363

Michigan 269,434 210,163 210,163 162,632 162,632

Minnesota 70,937 47,720 47,720 49,622 49,622

Mississippi 30,972 32,454 32,454 32,109 32,109

Missouri 390,287 221,689 221,689 186,898 186,898

Nebraska 73,073 69,466 69,466 71,340 71,340

New Hampshire 6,453 7,100 7,100 6,742 6,742

New Jersey 38,857 7,069 7,069 6,243 6,243

New York 42,887 23,181 23,181 15,160 15,160

North Carolina 126,048 109,612 109,612 69,377 69,377

North Dakota 103,633 102,816 102,816 103,624 103,624

Ohio 851,199 313,193 313,193 178,975 178,975

Oklahoma 137,981 137,981 137,981 138,072 138,072

Pennsylvania 509,650 296,596 296,596 125,545 125,545

Rhode Island 0 0 0 0 0

South Carolina 213,281 96,504 96,504 100,787 100,787

South Dakota 29,711 29,711 29,711 29,711 29,711

Tennessee 284,468 82,159 82,159 64,721 64,721

Texas 453,332 281,298 351,365 266,648 336,715

Vermont 263 263 263 263 263

Virginia 77,256 71,505 71,505 51,144 51,144

West Virginia 498,507 158,445 158,445 84,344 84,344

Wisconsin 130,538 57,418 57,418 50,136 50,136

*Source: Integrated Planning Model run by EPA, 2011. See Appendix A in the TR Significant 

Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD for list and description of the IPM 

$500/ton cost threshold and control scenario IPM runs. Emissions are shown for all fossil and 

biomass units. These “final cost curve” runs have NOx and ozone season NOx cost thresholds at 

$500/ton (all years), SO2 Group 2 at $500/ton (all years), and SO2 Group 1 (2012-2013) at 

$500/ton. 
10

Table 2. Average Annual PM2.5 Design Values (DV) (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission 

Scenarios Assessed Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average Annual PM2.5 Design 

Values (μg/m3

).

$500/ton

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

$500/ton 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 14.86 14.86

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.51 13.51

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 13.89 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.54 13.54 12.96 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.35 14.35 13.77 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.75 13.75 13.16 13.16

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.70 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.40 12.97 12.97 12.36 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.83 13.85 13.39 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.23 13.23 12.64 12.64

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.68 12.68 12.24 12.24

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.07 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.71 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.19 12.19

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.53 12.53 12.09 12.09

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

Table 3. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum Annual PM2.5 Design 

Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.25 15.25

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.18 14.18

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.20 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.86 13.86 13.28 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.94 14.94 14.36 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.26 14.26 13.67 13.67

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.92 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.73 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.10 14.12 13.66 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.70 13.70 13.11 13.11

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.98 12.98 12.54 12.54

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.10 13.38 13.38 13.10 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.10 12.66 12.66 12.07 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.10 13.22 13.22 12.62 12.62

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.88 12.88 12.44 12.44

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
11

Table 4. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average 24-hour PM2.5 Design 

Values (μg/m3

).

$500/ton

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.45 45.45

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 29.88 29.88

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.46 33.46

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.88 33.88

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.50 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.13 34.13 32.95 32.96

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.31 36.31 34.74 34.75

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.79 32.79 32.31 32.31

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 28.83 28.83

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 35.98 35.19 35.19 34.87 34.87

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.69 26.23 26.23

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.57 25.57

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.27 35.27 34.87 34.88

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.65 27.65 25.95 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.35 30.36

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.39 27.39

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.27 24.78 24.78

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.93 31.10 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.48 30.48 30.08 30.08

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.13 27.13

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.67 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.49 32.49 31.80 31.81

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.91 30.49 30.49

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.44 27.30 27.30

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.10 28.10

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.92 29.94 29.32 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.50 31.50 30.83 30.83

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.47 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.02 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.47 24.48

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.47 28.47

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.84 29.84 29.50 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.11 30.11 29.69 29.69

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 30.92 30.92

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.02 31.02

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 30.62 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 25.96 25.96

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.41 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 24.96 24.96

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.09 23.09

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
12

Table 5. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 2012 

Base Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Design 

Values (μg/m3

).

$500/ton

Without 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Texas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.52 48.53

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.28 34.29

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.93 35.39 35.39

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.20 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.69 33.69 32.94 32.94

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.40 37.40 36.40 36.41

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.59 34.95 34.96

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.00 37.00 36.30 36.31

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 29.63 29.64

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 38.37 37.43 37.43 37.08 37.08

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.48 29.48 27.43 27.43

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 27.76 27.76

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.20 36.20 35.74 35.75

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.79 28.79 26.81 26.82

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.70 32.70

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.49 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.63 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 31.57 31.58

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.54 33.54 33.10 33.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.76 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.29 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.22 34.22 33.92 33.92

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.67 33.39 33.39

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.83 27.54 27.54

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.19 31.21 30.64 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.47 33.47 33.13 33.14

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.29 27.29

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.09 35.09 34.45 34.46

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.38 25.39

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.26 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.21 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.20 30.20

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.55 34.55 33.79 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.91 31.91

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.23 31.46 31.46

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.64 26.64

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.41 29.44

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 25.85 25.85

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 25.99 24.54 24.54

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
13

Table 6. SO2 EGU Emissions From Fossil and Biomass Units* Used in AQAT (tons of SO2) in 

2014 in the Final TR as well as the Additional Emission Increases Examined in the Revisions 

Proposal.

2014 Base 

Case

$500/ton 

Cost 

Threshold

$2,300/ton 

Cost 

Threshold

“Remedy” 

Control 

Scenario

Emission 

Increase 

Examined 

in AQAT

State

Alabama 417,340 200,905 213,593 173,566 

Arkansas 99,411 103,431 103,431 106,685 

Connecticut 3,774 3,883 3,883 3,883 

Delaware 2,172 2,088 2,088 2,172 

District of Columbia 0 0 0 0 

Florida 143,601 137,705 136,825 148,069 

Georgia 170,288 94,691 95,834 93,208 

Illinois 141,606 138,815 128,997 132,647 

Indiana 727,786 262,386 179,539 195,045 

Iowa 133,083 117,830 81,137 83,827 

Kansas 69,819 55,308 60,870 45,740 

Kentucky 488,006 160,582 106,299 116,927 

Louisiana 118,231 135,803 139,204 139,204 

Maine 2,355 2,355 2,355 2,355 

Maryland 42,926 32,187 28,203 30,368 

Massachusetts 13,365 13,364 13,363 13,363

Michigan 269,434 210,163 148,232 162,632 

Minnesota 70,937 47,720 50,213 49,622 

Mississippi 30,972 32,454 32,455 32,109 

Missouri 390,287 221,689 175,480 186,898 

Nebraska 73,073 69,466 71,475 71,340 

New Hampshire 6,453 7,100 7,199 6,742 

New Jersey 38,857 7,069 6,611 6,243 

New York 42,887 23,181 14,404 15,160 3,527

North Carolina 126,048 109,612 63,577 69,377 

North Dakota 103,633 102,816 103,633 103,624 

Ohio 851,199 313,193 166,691 178,975 

Oklahoma 137,981 137,981 138,072 138,072 

Pennsylvania 509,650 296,596 114,431 125,545 

Rhode Island 0 0 0 0 

South Carolina 213,281 96,504 107,114 100,787 

South Dakota 29,711 29,711 29,711 29,711 

Tennessee 284,468 82,159 58,838 64,721 

Texas 453,332 281,298 284,132 266,648 70,067

Vermont 263 263 263 263 

Virginia 77,256 71,505 47,639 51,144 

West Virginia 498,507 158,445 76,778 84,344 

Wisconsin 130,538 57,418 46,205 50,136 7,757

*Source: Integrated Planning Model run by EPA, 2011. See Appendix A in the TR Significant 

Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final Rule TSD for list and description of the IPM 

$500/ton and $2,300/ton cost threshold and control scenario IPM runs. Emissions are shown for 

all fossil and biomass units. These “final cost curve” runs have NOx and ozone season NOx cost 

thresholds at $500/ton (all years), SO2 Group 2 at $500/ton (all years), and SO2 Group 1 (2012-

2013) at $500/ton. 
14

Table 7. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

New York 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.86 14.86

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.51 13.51

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.89 13.89

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.54 13.54 13.01 13.01 12.96 12.96

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.35 14.35 13.87 13.87 13.77 13.77

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.75 13.75 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.16

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.70 12.70

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.40 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.36 12.36

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.83 13.83 13.56 13.56 13.39 13.39

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.23 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.64 12.64

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.68 12.68 12.26 12.26 12.24 12.24

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.07 13.07

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.71 11.71

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.19 12.19

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.53 12.53 12.11 12.11 12.09 12.09

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

Table 8. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

New York 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.25 15.25

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.18 14.18

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.20 14.20

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.86 13.86 13.33 13.33 13.28 13.28

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.94 14.94 14.46 14.46 14.36 14.36

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.26 14.26 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.67

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.92 12.92

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.73 12.73

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.10 14.10 13.83 13.83 13.66 13.66

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.70 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.11 13.11

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.98 12.98 12.56 12.56 12.54 12.54

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.10 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.10 13.10

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.10 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.07 12.07

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.10 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.62 12.62

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.88 12.88 12.46 12.46 12.44 12.44

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
15

Table 9. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

New York 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.54 45.54 45.45 45.45

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.88

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.51 33.51 33.46 33.46

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.93 33.88 33.88

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.50 30.60 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.13 34.13 33.13 33.13 32.95 32.95

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.31 36.31 35.00 35.00 34.74 34.75

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.79 32.79 32.38 32.38 32.31 32.31

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.83 28.83

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 35.98 35.19 35.19 34.95 34.95 34.87 34.87

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.69 26.30 26.30 26.23 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.27 35.28 34.93 34.93 34.87 34.88

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.65 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.95 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.35 30.35

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.39 27.39

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.27 24.88 24.88 24.78 24.78

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.93 31.61 31.61 31.10 31.10

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.48 30.48 30.15 30.15 30.08 30.08

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.13 27.13

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.67 32.67

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.49 32.49 31.85 31.85 31.80 31.80

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.91 30.52 30.52 30.49 30.49

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.44 27.35 27.35 27.30 27.30

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.13 28.13 28.10 28.10

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.92 29.92 29.32 29.32 29.32 29.32

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.50 31.50 30.82 30.82 30.83 30.83

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.47 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.02 32.02

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.47 24.48

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.54 28.55 28.47 28.47

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.84 29.84 29.58 29.58 29.50 29.50

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.11 30.11 29.78 29.78 29.69 29.69

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.92 30.92

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.02

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 31.10 31.10 30.62 30.62

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.96

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.41 28.41

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.96 24.96

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.09 23.09

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.13

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
16

Table 10. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

New York 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

New 

York 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.63 48.52 48.53

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.28 34.29

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.93 35.41 35.41 35.39 35.39

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.20 35.65 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.69 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.94 32.94

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.40 37.40 36.54 36.54 36.40 36.40

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.59 35.23 35.23 34.95 34.96

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.00 37.00 36.51 36.51 36.30 36.30

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.63 29.63

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 38.37 37.43 37.43 37.18 37.18 37.08 37.08

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.48 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.43 27.43

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.76

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.20 36.21 35.83 35.83 35.74 35.74

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.79 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.81 26.82

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.84 32.84 32.70 32.70

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.49 28.49

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.63 28.63

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.57

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.54 33.54 33.21 33.21 33.10 33.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.76 27.76

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.29 33.29

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.22 34.22 33.92 33.92 33.92 33.92

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.67 33.37 33.37 33.39 33.39

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.83 27.59 27.59 27.54 27.54

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.19 31.19 30.66 30.66 30.64 30.64

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.47 33.47 33.13 33.13 33.13 33.13

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.29 27.29

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.09 35.09 34.82 34.82 34.45 34.45

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.38 25.39

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.26 29.26

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.33 32.33 32.21 32.21

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.31 30.31 30.20 30.20

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.55 34.56 33.91 33.92 33.79 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.91 31.91

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.23 31.91 31.91 31.46 31.46

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.73 26.73 26.64 26.64

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.41 29.41

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.85 25.85

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 25.99 24.62 24.62 24.54 24.54

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.13

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
17

Table 11. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Wisconsin Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.86 14.86

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.51 13.51

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.89 13.89

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.54 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.96 12.96

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.35 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.77 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.75 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.16

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.70 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.40 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.36 12.36

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.83 13.84 13.56 13.57 13.39 13.39

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.23 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.64 12.64

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.68 12.69 12.26 12.27 12.24 12.24

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.07 13.07

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.71 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.19 12.19

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.53 12.54 12.11 12.12 12.09 12.09

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

Table 12. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Wisconsin Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.25 15.25

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.18 14.18

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.20 14.20

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.86 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.28 13.28

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.94 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.36 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.26 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.67

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.92 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.73 12.73

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.10 14.11 13.83 13.84 13.66 13.66

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.70 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.11 13.11

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.98 12.99 12.56 12.57 12.54 12.54

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.10 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.10 13.10

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.10 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.07 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.10 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.62 12.62

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.88 12.89 12.46 12.47 12.44 12.44

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
18

Table 13. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Wisconsin Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.54 45.54 45.45 45.45

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.88

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.51 33.51 33.46 33.46

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.93 33.88 33.88

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.50 30.60 30.60 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.13 34.14 33.13 33.14 32.95 32.96

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.31 36.31 35.00 35.00 34.74 34.75

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.79 32.80 32.38 32.39 32.31 32.31

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.83 28.83

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 35.98 35.19 35.19 34.95 34.95 34.87 34.87

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.69 26.30 26.30 26.23 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.27 35.28 34.93 34.93 34.87 34.88

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.65 27.65 26.11 26.11 25.95 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.35 30.35

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.39 27.39

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.27 24.88 24.88 24.78 24.78

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.93 31.61 31.61 31.10 31.10

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.48 30.51 30.15 30.18 30.08 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.13 27.13

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.67 32.67

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.49 32.53 31.85 31.89 31.80 31.84

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.91 30.52 30.52 30.49 30.49

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.44 27.35 27.35 27.30 27.30

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.13 28.13 28.10 28.10

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.92 29.92 29.32 29.32 29.32 29.32

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.50 31.54 30.82 30.86 30.83 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.47 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.02 32.03

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.47 24.48

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.54 28.54 28.47 28.47

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.84 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.50 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.11 30.12 29.78 29.79 29.69 29.69

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.92 30.92

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.02

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 31.10 31.10 30.62 30.62

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.96

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.41 28.41

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.96 24.96

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.09 23.09

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
19

Table 14. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Wisconsin Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Wisconsin 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.63 48.52 48.53

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.28 34.29

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.93 35.41 35.41 35.39 35.39

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.20 35.65 35.65 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.69 33.69 33.04 33.04 32.94 32.94

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.40 37.41 36.54 36.55 36.40 36.40

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.59 35.23 35.23 34.95 34.96

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.00 37.01 36.51 36.51 36.30 36.30

540090011 West

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.63 29.64

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 38.37 37.43 37.43 37.18 37.18 37.08 37.08

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.48 29.48 27.60 27.60 27.43 27.43

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.76

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.20 36.21 35.83 35.83 35.74 35.74

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.79 28.79 27.00 27.00 26.81 26.82

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.84 32.85 32.70 32.70

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.49 28.49

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.63 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.57

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.54 33.57 33.21 33.24 33.10 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.76 27.76

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.29 33.29

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.22 34.26 33.92 33.96 33.92 33.95

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.67 33.37 33.37 33.39 33.39

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.83 27.59 27.59 27.54 27.54

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.19 31.19 30.66 30.66 30.64 30.65

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.47 33.50 33.13 33.16 33.13 33.16

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.29 27.29

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.09 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.45 34.45

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.38 25.39

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.26 29.26

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.33 32.34 32.21 32.21

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.31 30.32 30.20 30.20

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.55 34.55 33.91 33.91 33.79 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.91 31.91

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.23 31.91 31.91 31.46 31.46

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.73 26.73 26.64 26.64

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.41 29.42

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.85 25.85

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 25.99 24.62 24.62 24.54 24.54

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
20

Table 15. The Percentage of the Proposed Annual NOx Emission Increase (tons) as a Function of 

Total Annual NOx Emissions from all Source Sectors (tons).

State

2014 “Remedy” 

Control Scenario Total 

Annual NOx Emissions

Proposed 

Annual NOx

Emission

Increase

Proposed Annual NOx

Emission Increase as a

Percentage of 2014

“Remedy” Total 

Emissions

Alabama 315,155 

Arkansas 194,964 

Connecticut 80,793 

Delaware 31,744 

District of Columbia 9,773 

Florida 616,154 

Georgia 395,764 

Illinois 540,361 

Indiana 424,250 

Iowa 217,221 

Kansas 240,384 

Kentucky 286,806 

Louisiana 466,098 

Maine 61,657 

Maryland 181,533 

Massachusetts 175,316 

Michigan 442,544 5,228 1.2%

Minnesota 338,438 

Mississippi 216,224 

Missouri 352,631 

Nebraska 169,571 3,599 2.1%

New Hampshire 47,482 

New Jersey 209,841 112 0.1%

New York 457,927 3,485 0.8%

North Carolina 317,230 

North Dakota 127,127 

Ohio 508,054 

Oklahoma 305,859 

Pennsylvania 514,563 

Rhode Island 18,808 

South Carolina 202,118 

South Dakota 65,500 

Tennessee 293,339 

Texas 1,368,612 1,375 0.1%

Vermont 22,824 

Virginia 333,985 

West Virginia 155,245 

Wisconsin 254,989 2,473 1.0%
21

Table 16. The Percentage of the Proposed Ozone-Season NOx Emission Increase (tons) as a 

Function of Total Ozone-Season NOx Emissions from all Source Sectors (tons).

State

2014 “Remedy” Control 

Scenario Total OzoneSeason NOx Emissions

Proposed OzoneSeason NOx Emission 

Increase

Proposed OzoneSeason NOx

Emission Increase 

as a Percentage of 

2014 “Remedy” 

Total Emissions

Alabama 126,382 

Arkansas 87,920 

Connecticut 31,133 

Delaware 13,693 

District of 

Columbia 3,805 

Florida 261,497 

Georgia 161,301 

Illinois 221,011 

Indiana 176,143 

Iowa 97,478 

Kansas 97,635 

Kentucky 117,179 

Louisiana 195,346 4,231 2.2%

Maine 24,427 

Maryland 74,401 

Massachusetts 68,324 

Michigan 180,549 

Minnesota 144,960 

Mississippi 89,326 2,136 2.4%

Missouri 149,213 

Nebraska 74,095 

New Hampshire 18,785 

New Jersey 83,761 195 0.2%

New York 182,812 1,911 1.0%

North Carolina 130,132 

North Dakota 59,336 

Ohio 208,281 

Oklahoma 125,457 

Pennsylvania 208,800 

Rhode Island 7,251 

South Carolina 83,215 

South Dakota 31,739 

Tennessee 119,966 

Texas 576,926 1,375 0.2%

Vermont 8,796 

Virginia 136,976 

West Virginia 63,770 

Wisconsin 104,890 
22

Appendix A.

Documents, worksheets, and workbooks from the final TR used in this analysis (with the 

relevant document identification number) as well as a list of additional files created for this 

assessment. In addition, a list of abbreviations along with brief descriptions of the various 

AQAT simulations used in this assessment is included at the end of this appendix. 

Annual and Quarterly Emissions for all AQAT Simulations. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4530

AQAT_emissions_rev.xlsx contains the emissions and fraction of emissions for the scenario 

relative to the total emissions in the 2012 base case from the final TR.

These files contain the 24-hour PM2.5 2012 base case and 2014 AQAT Calibration Scenario 

contributions. Additional copies of these files have been created and used for this assessment.

QTR1_base_and_AQAT_calibration_scenario_contributions.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-

4531

QTR2_base_and_AQAT_calibration_scenario_contributions.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-

4532

QTR3_base_and_AQAT_calibration_scenario_contributions.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-

4533

QTR4_base_and_AQAT_calibration_scenario_contributions.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-

4534

The annual PM2.5 and 24-hour PM2.5 calibration factors can be found in the respective files. 

Additional copies of these files have been created and used for this assessment.

Annual PM Calibration Factors.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4535

Daily PM Calibration Factors.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4464

These files contain the quarterly contributions and calibrated Relative Response Factors (RRFs) 

for selected 24-hour PM2.5 simulations (CT refers to cost threshold). The files from the final TR 

are listed here (along with their docket identification numbers), as well as the additional files that 

have been created and used for this assessment. The file name identifies whether the file is a 

cost threshold (CT) or a “remedy” control scenario (rem) and identifies which states, if any, are 

being adjusted.

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-

4492

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300CT.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-

0491-4488

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300_remedy.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-

0491-4487

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT.xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300CT.xlsx (recreating the final TR 

file)

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300rem.xlsx (recreating the final TR 

file)

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300CT_TXNYWI.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT_TXNYWI.xlsx
23

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300rem_TXNYWI.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300rem_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300CT_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300rem_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300CT_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300rem_TX.xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500CT_TX.xlsx

dailyPM_allyears_high_quarters_rev.xlsx. This file contains a summary of the estimated 98th 

percentile values and resulting average and maximum design values for all 24-hour PM2.5 

AQAT cost threshold level, variability analyses, and remedy simulations. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-

0491-4502. In the TR, this file was referred to as “dailyPM_allyears_high_quarters.xlsx”

These files apply the RRFs to each of the 32 days per year for each of the 5 years of available 

receptor estimates. The result is the estimated 24-hour PM2.5 concentration for that day. The 

98th percentile day is also identified in these files. They are in 2014.

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_base_500CT.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4540

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_base_2300CT.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4505

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy.xlsx EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4569

The additional files in this assessment are:

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500_CT.xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_CT.xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy.xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_CT_TX.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy_TX.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500_CT_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_CT_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500_CT_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_CT_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy_NY.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500_CT_TX_NY_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_CT_TX_NY_WI.xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300_remedy_TX_NY_WI.xlsx

The file annualPM25 AQAT.xlsx file EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4458

contains the base contributions, AQAT calibration scenario contributions, calibrated 

contributions, and estimated design values for all annual PM2.5 AQAT simulations. A new file, 

containing the annual AQAT estimates for this assessment is called “annualPM25 

AQAT_rev.xlsx”
24

A list of the abbreviations, used throughout the excel workbooks, which identify specific AQAT 

simulations used in this assessment: 

2300 rem TX NY WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 "remedy" control scenario with the 

emission revisions made for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin.

2300 rem WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 "remedy" control scenario with the emission 

revisions made for Wisconsin.

2300 rem NY. This is a simulation of the 2014 "remedy" control scenario with the emission 

revisions made for New York.

2300 rem TX. This is a simulation of the 2014 "remedy" control scenario with the emission 

revisions made for Texas.

2300 rem. This is a simulation of the 2014 "remedy" control scenario with emissions from the 

final Transport Rule.

2300 CT TX NY WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 $2,300/ton cost threshold scenario with 

the emission revisions made for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin.

2300 CT WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 $2,300/ton cost threshold scenario with the 

emission revisions made for Wisconsin.

2300 CT NY. This is a simulation of the 2014 $2,300/ton cost threshold scenario with the 

emission revisions made for New York.

2300 CT. This is a simulation of the 2014 $2,300/ton cost threshold scenario with emissions 

from the final Transport Rule.

500 CT TX NY WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold scenario with the 

emission revisions made for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin.

500 CT WI. This is a simulation of the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold scenario with the emission 

revisions made for Wisconsin.

500 CT NY. This is a simulation of the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold scenario with the emission 

revisions made for New York.

500 CT TX. This is a simulation of the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold scenario with the emission 

revisions made for Texas.

500 CT. This is a simulation of the 2014 $500/ton cost threshold scenario with emissions from 

the final Transport Rule.
25

Appendix B.

In addition to the state-by-state and case-by-case analysis presented in this TSD, EPA also 

assessed the cumulative air quality impact in the $500/ton cost threshold and $2300/ton cost 

threshold scenarios used in the significant contribution/interference with maintenances

assessment as well as the 2014 “remedy” control scenario assuming that all three states (Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin) made the emission increases proposed in 2014. As shown in Tables 

B-1 through B-4 for the average and maximum design values for annual PM2.5 and 24-hour 

PM2.5, changes in concentration are small, and the patterns of attainment, nonattainment, and 

maintenance do not change (relative to the AQAT estimates of the final TR $500/ton cost 

threshold, $2300/ton cost threshold, and the “remedy” control scenarios).
26

Table B-1. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Emissions Concurrently in Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$500/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.86 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.51 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.89 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.54 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.96 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.35 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.77 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.75 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.70 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.40 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.36 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.83 13.85 13.56 13.58 13.39 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.23 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.64 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.68 12.69 12.26 12.27 12.24 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.07 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.71 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.19 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.53 12.54 12.11 12.12 12.09 12.10

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

Table B-2. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Emissions Concurrently in Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum Annual PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$500/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.25 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.18 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.20 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.86 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.28 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.94 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.36 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.26 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.92 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.73 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.10 14.12 13.83 13.85 13.66 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.70 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.11 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.98 12.99 12.56 12.57 12.54 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.10 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.10 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.10 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.07 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.10 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.62 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.88 12.89 12.46 12.47 12.44 12.45

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
27

Table B-3. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Emissions Concurrently in Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Average 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$500/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.54 45.54 45.45 45.46

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.88

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.51 33.51 33.46 33.47

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.93 33.88 33.88

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.50 30.60 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.13 34.14 33.13 33.14 32.95 32.97

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.31 36.32 35.00 35.01 34.74 34.76

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.79 32.80 32.38 32.39 32.31 32.32

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.83 28.84

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 35.98 35.19 35.19 34.95 34.95 34.87 34.87

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.69 26.30 26.30 26.23 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.27 35.28 34.93 34.93 34.87 34.88

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.65 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.95 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.35 30.37

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.39 27.40

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.27 24.88 24.88 24.78 24.79

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.93 31.61 31.61 31.10 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.48 30.51 30.15 30.18 30.08 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.13 27.14

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.67 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.49 32.53 31.85 31.89 31.80 31.84

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.91 30.52 30.52 30.49 30.49

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.44 27.35 27.35 27.30 27.30

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.13 28.13 28.10 28.10

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.92 29.94 29.32 29.35 29.32 29.35

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.50 31.54 30.82 30.86 30.83 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.47 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.02 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.47 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.54 28.55 28.47 28.48

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.84 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.50 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.11 30.12 29.78 29.79 29.69 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.92 30.93

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.02

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 31.10 31.10 30.62 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.97

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.41 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.96 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.09 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
28

Table B-4. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (μg/m3

) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Emissions Concurrently in Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(μg/m3

)

AQAT 2014 Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3).

$500/ton

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$500/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Budget 

Increases 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Wisconsin (tons) 0 7,757 0 7,757 0 7,757

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 3,527 0 3,527 0 3,527

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 70,067 0 70,067 0 70,067

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.63 48.52 48.53

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.28 34.29

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.93 35.41 35.41 35.39 35.40

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.20 35.65 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.69 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.94 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.40 37.41 36.54 36.55 36.40 36.42

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.59 35.23 35.23 34.95 34.97

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.00 37.01 36.51 36.51 36.30 36.31

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.63 29.64

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 38.37 37.43 37.43 37.18 37.18 37.08 37.08

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.48 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.43 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.20 36.21 35.83 35.83 35.74 35.75

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.79 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.81 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.84 32.85 32.70 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.49 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.63 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.58

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.54 33.57 33.21 33.24 33.10 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.76 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.29 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.22 34.26 33.92 33.96 33.92 33.96

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.67 33.37 33.37 33.39 33.39

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.83 27.59 27.59 27.54 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.19 31.21 30.66 30.68 30.64 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.47 33.50 33.13 33.16 33.13 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.29 27.30

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.09 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.45 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.38 25.40

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.26 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.33 32.34 32.21 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.31 30.32 30.20 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.55 34.56 33.91 33.92 33.79 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.91 31.92

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.23 31.91 31.91 31.46 31.46

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.73 26.73 26.64 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.41 29.44

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.85 25.86

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 25.99 24.62 24.62 24.54 24.54

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.13 26.14

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 μg/m3 at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).