Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

1

Technical Support Document (TSD)

for the Revisions to the Transport Rule

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

Final Revisions Rule Significant Contribution Assessment TSD

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation

January 2012
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

2

This Technical Support Document (TSD) presents quantitative assessments of the 

relationship between final revisions to the Transport Rule and the original analysis conducted for 

the final Transport Rule informing the Rule’s determination of emissions that significantly

contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) in downwind states. As conducted for the final Transport Rule, EPA reiterated its analysis of the downwind air quality impacts resulting from the rule’s projected SO2

emission reductions using the Air Quality Assessment Tool (AQAT) and taking the finalized 

revisions into account. In this document, EPA also assesses the relationship between the NOx

emission inventories in each affected state and the finalized revisions to annual NOx and ozoneseason NOx budgets under the Transport Rule programs.

This technical support document presents results separately for the revisions described in 

the final revisions rule1, as well as those revisions described in the direct final revisions rule.2 

The final revisions rule includes increases to 2014 SO2 budgets for Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin. In the proposed revisions rule, EPA assessed the emission increases on a state-bystate as well as a collective basis. For the final revisions rule, EPA has assessed the collective 

impact of all of the revisions being finalized. The direct final revisions rule includes increases to 

2014 SO2 budgets for Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina. 

For the direct final revisions rule, EPA has assessed the emission increases on a state-by-state 

basis, as well as collectively, for the remedy scenario, the $500/ton cost threshold scenario, and

the $2,300/ton cost threshold scenario.

For purposes of assessing the impact of state SO2 budget increases under the final 

revisions rule and the direct final revisions rule in AQAT, EPA assumed that the state SO2

budget increases would result in an equivalent, ton for ton, increase in 2014 SO2 emissions 

(beyond the level previously projected in the final Transport Rule). Therefore, this TSD refers to 

the “final emission increases” assumed to result from the final budget increases and analyzes the 

impact of these emission increases. 

This TSD is organized as follows:

A. Summary of EPA’s Analysis to Quantify Emissions that Significantly Contribute to 

Nonattainment or Interfere with Maintenance for the Final Revisions Rule and Direct Final 

Revisions Rule.

B. Analysis of Significant Contribution and Interference with Maintenance for SO2 Emissions 

from Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Using the Air Quality Assessment Tool (AQAT) for 

the Final Revisions Rule.

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

Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions for the Final Revisions Rule.

D. Analysis of Significant Contribution and Interference with Maintenance for SO2 Emissions 

from Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina (on a Stateby-State Basis as well as Collectively) Using AQAT for the Direct Final Rule.

 

1

 See preamble to the “Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate 

Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone”

2

 See preamble to the “Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate 

Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone: Part II”
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

3

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

Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions for the Direct Final Rule.

A. Summary of EPA’s Analysis to Quantify Emissions that Significantly Contribute to 

Nonattainment or Interfere with Maintenance for the Final Revisions Rule and Direct Final 

Revisions Rule.

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 fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(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.

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 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 to estimate 

the impacts of the final SO2 emission increases on downwind air quality in the context of the air 

quality component of the determination of significant contribution in 2014; it also provides an 

estimate of the effect of these final SO2 budget revisions on the “remedy” control scenario

analyzed for the final Transport Rule in 2014. For the final revisions rule, the final budget 

increases were investigated in a collective manner to show the estimated air quality impacts from 

all of the state’s emissions following the finalization of the revisions rule on the downwind 

monitors. For the direct final rule, the emission increases for each state were examined 

independently of the emission changes from other states, as well as collectively, where emissions 

for all affected states are assumed to increase simultaneously. For each of the two rules, two 

assessments were performed:
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

4

 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 SO2 emission increases 

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 PM2.5 in 2014 (compared with the AQAT analysis from the 

final TR). Specifically, we investigate if each state’s 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). For each cost threshold level analyzed, on a receptor-by-receptor 

basis, the emissions reductions for each upwind state are associated with one of two 

cost threshold levels (either the 2014 base case emissions level or the particular 

threshold cost level being analyzed) depending on whether the upwind state is 

“linked” to that receptor or if the receptor is located within the state. States that are 

contributing above the respective air quality threshold (i.e., greater than or equal to 1 

percent contribution of total sulfate and nitrate for the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 to 

the monitor), as well as the state containing the monitor, make SO2 emissions 

reductions available at the particular cost threshold level. The emissions for all other 

states are at the 2014 base case level.

 “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

(regardless of whether or not they are linked to a particular receptor). Emissions are 

at the level for the final TR remedy control scenario except for emissions from the 

states affected by the final revisions rule or the direct final rule, where their emissions 

are increased by the amount of the related revisions.

For the final revisions rule, 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 any receptors linked to 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 any receptors linked to New York or Wisconsin (relative to 

the analysis from the final TR). Thus, EPA concludes that for these two 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 

final individual emission changes for Texas, New York, or Wisconsin. 

EPA concludes that the SO2 emission budget increases in the final revisions rule would 

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

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

SO2 cost thresholds for “Group 1” and “Group 2” states, respectively.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

5

EPA also conducted AQAT significant contribution and remedy assessments of the SO2

budget increases in 2014 for the direct final rule. EPA assessed emission changes for Georgia, 

Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina. EPA examined these

estimated emission increases on a state-by-state basis, where the emission adjustment was 

assessed for each state independently of the emission adjustments for the other states, as well as 

collectively, where all states affected by the direct final simultaneously increased emissions. The 

emissions from the final revisions rule are included in the direct final assessment (i.e., the direct 

final emissions are added incrementally to the emissions assessed for the final revisions rule). 

For the direct final rule, 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 as well as on the 2014 “remedy” control scenario. For 

these scenarios, we assumed that all states (Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, 

Ohio, and South Carolina), simultaneously, were to make the final emission increases outlined in 

the direct final rule. 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, EPA concludes that the final

SO2 emission budget increases in the direct final rule (added incrementally to the final revisions 

rule emissions) would not substantially affect the air quality component of the multifactor test 

and thus would not affect EPA’s conclusions in the final TR identifying $2,300/ton and $500/ton 

as the appropriate SO2 cost thresholds for “Group 1” and “Group 2” states, respectively, and 

would not change each state’s designation as either “Group 1” or “Group 2” as was made in the 

final TR.

B. Analysis of Significant Contribution and Interference with Maintenance for SO2 Emissions 

from Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Using the Air Quality Assessment Tool (AQAT) for the 

Final Revisions Rule.

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. This analysis directly follows the 

methodology of the same analysis conducted for 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.

The 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 for 

the final revisions rule that were investigated using AQAT. Note that the emissions for each of 

the states whose 2014 SO2 budget is not affected by the final revisions rule are unchanged from

the respective emissions level from the July 2011 final TR analysis, while the emissions for

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin are assessed at their emissions level from the final TR (for 

comparison) and at an increased level accounting for their budget increases contained in the final 

revisions rule. Consequently, for comparison with the final TR, for each assessment scenario, 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

6

we present the resulting estimates from the final TR analysis along with the resulting estimates 

where the emissions from Texas, New York, and Wisconsin have been increased..

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

Contribution Assessment, the appropriate cost threshold for “Group 2” states and the cost 

threshold for “Group 1” states, respectively, as determined in the final TR. Following the 

analysis of these cost threshold levels with the adjustments in SO2 emissions made for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin, there were small changes in estimated average and maxium design 

values, and no additional nonattainment/maintenance areas were present compared with 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 (see the Significant Contribution and State Emissions Budgets Final 

Rule TSD for discussion of this analysis). See Tables 2 and 3 for estimated average and 

maximum design values for annual PM2.5 and Tables 4 and 5 for average and maximum design 

values for 24-hour PM2.5.

For the significant contribution assessment, minor changes in estimated concentrations 

were seen at the receptors to which Texas, New York, and Wisconsin were “linked”. The 

monitor for annual PM2.5 to which Texas was linked in the TR was: 171191007. 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. The receptors for 24-hour 

PM2.5 to which Wisconsin was linked3in 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. The resulting changes in 

concentration at these receptors were 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. Texas maintains its 

classification as a “Group 2” state, and New York and Wisconsin maintain their classifications as 

“Group 1” states. 

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

the final revisions rule, collectively, for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin 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 attainment status as 

estimated in the TR using AQAT.

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

Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions for the Final Revisions Rule.

The final 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 

 

3 We have included receptors located in Wisconsin in the following lists of receptors. 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

7

analysis in 2014. Tables 6 and 7 illustrate the relationship of the final state budget revisions to 

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

respectively. The final 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. 

D. Analysis of Significant Contribution and Interference with Maintenance for SO2 Emissions 

from Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina (on a Stateby-State Basis as well as Collectively) Using AQAT for the Direct Final Rule.

EPA assessed the impacts of the SO2 budget changes in the direct final rule on a state-bystate basis, as well as collectively. The total budget changes are presented in Table 8 (see the 

preamble of the direct final rule for details about the emission changes). The states that EPA 

investigated were Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina. 

The budget changes were assessed using the 2014 $500/ton and $2,300 cost threshold scenarios 

and the “remedy” control emissions scenario. All of these scenarios included the emission 

increases from the final revisions rule. Note that the 2014 base case emissions were also used 

and that, for this case, EPA assumed no emission increases would be made to account for the 

final revisions rule.

As described in section A, EPA performed two assessments, a Significant Contribution 

Assessment and a “Remedy” Control Scenario Assessment. For each scenario for the two 

assessments, for comparison to see the affect of the emissions in the direct final revision rule, 

EPA also presents the results of the AQAT assessment from the final revisions rule.

Georgia: Georgia was “linked” to the 24-hour PM2.5 receptors 10730023 and 10732003

in Jefferson County, Alabama and to the same receptors for annual PM2.5. There is also a 

receptor located in Georgia, identification number 131210039. As seen in Tables 9 and 10 for 

annual PM2.5 average and maximum design values and for Tables 11 and 12 for 24-hour PM2.5

average and maximum design values, the resulting change in concentration at these receptors 

was not sufficient to alter the conclusions about the status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be 

in attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels 

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

and Georgia maintains its classification as a “Group 2” state. Similarly, under the remedy

assessment, the estimated patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were 

unchanged relative to the final TR assessment (including the final revisions rule). 

Indiana: Indiana contributed above the threshold to all 24-hour PM2.5 receptors with 

base case maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 g/m3(except for receptor 

420710007 in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania). Indiana also contributed at or above the 

threshold to all of the annual PM2.5 receptors with 2012 base case design values greater than or 

equal to 12.05 g/m3. As seen in Tables 13 and 14 for annual PM2.5 average and maximum 

design values and for Tables 15 and 16 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and maximum design values, 

the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to alter the conclusions 

about the status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in attainment, maintenance, or 

nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014. EPA concludes that 

assessment of alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and Indiana maintains its 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

8

classification as a “Group 1” state. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the estimated 

patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the final TR 

assessment (including the final revisions rule).

Kansas: Kansas 24-hour PM2.5 receptors identification numbers 550790010, 

550790026, 171191007, 170316005, and 170310052 in Wisconsin and Illinois. Kansas did not 

contribute to any of the annual PM2.5 receptors with 2012 base case design values greater than 

or equal to 12.05 g/m3. As seen in Tables 17 and 18 for annual PM2.5 average and maximum 

design values and for Tables 19 and 20 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and maximum design values, 

the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to alter the conclusions 

about the status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in attainment, maintenance, or 

nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014. EPA concludes that 

assessment of alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and Kansas maintains its 

classification as a “Group 2” state. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the estimated 

patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the final TR 

assessment (including the final revisions rule).

Nebraska: Nebraska 24-hour PM2.5 receptors 550790010 and 550790026 in Wisconsin.

Nebraska did not contribute to any of the annual PM2.5 receptors with 2012 base case design 

values greater than or equal to 12.05 g/m3. As seen in Tables 21 and 22 for annual PM2.5

average and maximum design values and for Tables 23 and 24 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and 

maximum design values, the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not 

sufficient to alter the conclusions about the status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in 

attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 

2014. EPA concludes that assessment of alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and 

Nebraska maintains its classification as a “Group 2” state. Similarly, under the remedy 

assessment, the estimated patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were 

unchanged relative to the final TR assessment (including the final revisions rule).

New York: 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. 

As seen in Tables 25 and 26 for annual PM2.5 average and maximum design values and for 

Tables 27 and 28 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and maximum design values, the resulting change 

in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to alter the conclusions about the status of 

these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment) at the 

$500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014. EPA concludes that assessment of 

alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and New York maintains its classification as a 

“Group 1” state. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the estimated patterns of attainment, 

maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the final TR assessment (including 

the final revisions rule).

Ohio: Ohio contributed above the threshold to all 24-hour PM2.5 receptors with base 

case maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 g/m3. Ohio also contributed at or 

above the threshold to all of the annual PM2.5 receptors with 2012 base case design values 

greater than or equal to 12.05 g/m3. As seen in Tables 29 and 30 for annual PM2.5 average and 

maximum design values and for Tables 31 and 32 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and maximum 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

9

design values, the resulting change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to alter 

the conclusions about the status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in attainment, 

maintenance, or nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014. EPA 

concludes that assessment of alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and Ohio 

maintains its classification as a “Group 1” state. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the 

estimated patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the 

final TR assessment (including the final revisions rule).

South Carolina: South Carolina did not contribute above the threshold to any of the 24-

hour PM2.5 receptors identified in the TR (i.e., it was not “linked”. Thus, its emissions were 

assessed using 2014 base case emission levels for all receptors, and consequently, no changes in 

concentration were observed in 24-hour PM2.5 at any of the recptors at the $500/ton or 

$2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014 (relative to the TR including the final revisions rule). 

For annual PM2.5, South Carolina was “linked” to receptor 131210039 in Fulton County, 

Georgia. As seen in Tables 33 and 34 for annual PM2.5 average and maximum design values and 

for Tables 35 and 36 for 24-hour PM2.5 average and maximum design values, the resulting 

change in concentration at these receptors was not sufficient to alter the conclusions about the 

status of these receptors (i.e., estimated to be in attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment) at 

the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 2014. EPA concludes that assessment of 

alternative cost threshold levels were unnecessary, and South Carolina maintains its 

classification as a “Group 2” state. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the estimated 

patterns of attainment, maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the final TR 

assessment (including the final revisions rule).

Collective Assessment: As described above, EPA also used AQAT to estimate the air 

quality impacts in the significant contribution and remedy assessments when all states included 

in the direct final simultaneously increased their emissions. As seen in Tables 37 and 38 for 

annual PM2.5 average and maximum design values and for Tables 39 and 40 for 24-hour PM2.5

average and maximum design values, the resulting change in concentration at each of the TR

receptors was not sufficient to alter the conclusions about its status (i.e., estimated to be in 

attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment) at the $500/ton or $2,300/ton cost threshold levels in 

2014. Similarly, under the remedy assessment, the estimated patterns of attainment, 

maintenance, and nonattainment were unchanged relative to the final TR assessment (including 

the final revisions rule).

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

Ozone-Season Total NOx Emissions for the Direct Final Rule.

The direct final rule revises the state budgets for annual and ozone-season NOx. These 

changes 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, and very limited shares of the total NOx emissions from all 

source-sectors in each affected state (when the final revisions rule is also considered). Tables 41 

and 42 illustrate the relationship of the direct final state budget revisions to each state’s total 

emissions (from all sources) for annual NOx and ozone-season NOx respectively. The total 

emissions include the NOx from the final revisions rule (assuming that there is a one-to-one 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

10

correlation between the budget increase and an increase in emissions. The state budget revisions 

in the direct final rule 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.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

11

Table 1. 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 50,517

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. 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

12

Table 2. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Emissions from the 

Final Revisions Rule.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 50,517 0 50,517 0 50,517

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

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 14.87

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 13.16

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.70 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.36 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.83 13.85 13.56 13.57 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 3. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Emissions from the 

Final Revisions Rule.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

$500/ton 

With 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 50,517 0 50,517 0 50,517

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

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 15.26

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 13.67

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 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.10 14.12 13.83 13.84 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 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.10 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.07 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 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
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

13

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

Table 4. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Emissions from the 

Final Revisions Rule.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 50,517 0 50,517 0 50,517

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

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 45.46

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 32.31

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 30.36

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 24.78

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 29.34 29.32 29.34

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 28.47

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 29.70

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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

14
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

15

Table 5. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT – Considering Additional Texas, New York, and Wisconsin Emissions from the 

Final Revisions Rule.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With TX, 

NY, and 

WI Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

TX, NY, 

and WI 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Texas (tons) 0 50,517 0 50,517 0 50,517

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

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 35.66 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 36.41

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 27.76

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 26.82

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 31.57

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 27.77

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 33.95

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 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.19 31.20 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 29.43

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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

16

Table 6. The Percentage of the Final Annual NOx Emission Increase (tons) in 2014 as a Function 

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

State

2014 “Remedy” 

Control Scenario Total 

Annual NOx Emissions

Final Annual 

NOx Emission

Increase

Final 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 209,841 679 0.3%

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%
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

17

Table 7. The Percentage of the Final Ozone-Season NOx Emission Increase (tons) in 2014 as a 

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

State

2014 “Remedy” Control 

Scenario Total OzoneSeason NOx Emissions

Final Ozone-Season 

NOx Emission 

Increase

Final 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 4,594 2.4%

Maine 24,427 

Maryland 74,401 

Massachusetts 68,324 

Michigan 180,549 

Minnesota 144,960 

Mississippi 89,326 2,154 2.4%

Missouri 149,213 

Nebraska 74,095 

New Hampshire 18,785 

New Jersey 83,761 349 0.4%

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 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

18

Wisconsin 104,890 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

19

Table 8. SO2 EGU Emissions From Fossil and Biomass Units* Used in AQAT (tons of SO2) in 

2014 in the Final TR Including the Emissions in the Final Revisions Rule as well as the 

Additional Emission Increases in the Direct Final Rule.

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 40,334

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

Indiana 727,786 262,386 179,539 195,045 4,333

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

Kansas 69,819 55,308 60,870 45,740 268

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 3,800

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

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

New York** 42,887 26,708 17,931 18,687 5,448

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 15,963

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 8,013

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

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

Texas** 453,332 331,815 334,649 317,165

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 65,175 53,962 57,893

*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.

** Emission estimates at the $500/ton cost threshold, $2,300/ton cost threshold, and “remedy”

control scenario include emissions from the Final Revisions Rule (assessed in the first section of 

this TSD). 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

20

Table 9. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Georgia Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.35 14.31 14.33 13.90 13.92

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.98

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.71 12.72

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.37 12.38

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.57 13.40 13.41

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.58 13.52 13.54 13.13 13.16

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.27 12.25 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.42 13.20 13.27 13.08 13.15

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.72 11.73

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.54 12.12 12.12 12.10 12.10

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 10. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Georgia Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.66 14.62 14.64 14.21 14.23

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.30

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.93 12.94

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.74 12.75

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.84 13.67 13.68

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.06 14.00 14.02 13.61 13.64

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.57 12.55 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.45 13.23 13.30 13.11 13.18

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.08 12.09

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.89 12.47 12.47 12.45 12.45

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

21

Table 11. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Georgia Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.89

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

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.93 33.88 33.89

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.50 30.61 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.14 33.14 33.14 32.97 32.98

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.77

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.84 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 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.58

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.97

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.36 30.37

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 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 31.99 31.61 31.67 31.11 31.16

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.51 30.18 30.18 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.14 27.15

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.68 32.69

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.53 31.89 31.89 31.84 31.85

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 27.31

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.13 28.13 28.10 28.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.34 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.48 26.49

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.04 32.05

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.49

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.93 30.93

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.03

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.47 31.10 31.15 30.63 30.68

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.97 25.99

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.10 23.12

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 26.15

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

22

Table 12. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Georgia Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Georgia

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.63 48.53 48.54

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.29 34.31

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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.41 36.55 36.55 36.41 36.42

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.59 35.23 35.23 34.97 34.98

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.01 37.01 36.51 36.51 36.31 36.32

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.64 29.65

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.82 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.57 32.12 32.18 31.57 31.62

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.57 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.77 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.30 33.31

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 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 27.55 27.56

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.12

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.20 30.68 30.68 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.50 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.30 27.31

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.47 34.48

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.40 25.41

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.27 29.28

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.34 32.34 32.22 32.23

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.81

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.92 31.93

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.27 31.91 31.96 31.46 31.51

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.73 26.73 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.43 29.44

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.86 25.86

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 25.99 24.62 24.62 24.54 24.57

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 26.15

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

23

Table 13. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Indiana Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.26 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.30 12.75 12.76 12.71 12.72

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.98 12.44 12.45 12.37 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.58 13.40 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.74 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.28 12.25 12.26

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.31 11.76 11.77 11.72 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.29 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.55 12.12 12.13 12.10 12.11

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 14. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Indiana Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.77 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.52 12.97 12.98 12.93 12.94

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.35 12.81 12.82 12.74 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.85 13.67 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.21 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.58 12.55 12.56

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.67 12.12 12.13 12.08 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.72 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.90 12.47 12.48 12.45 12.46

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

24

Table 15. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Indiana Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.58 45.54 45.54 45.46 45.46

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.26 29.88 29.89

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.51 33.51 33.47 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 31.51 30.61 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.15 33.14 33.15 32.97 32.98

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.76

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.80 32.81 32.39 32.39 32.31 32.32

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.08 28.84 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 26.31 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.80 25.57 25.58

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.12 25.96 25.97

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.12 30.54 30.55 30.36 30.37

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 27.40

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.28 24.88 24.89 24.78 24.79

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.94 31.61 31.61 31.11 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.51 30.18 30.18 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.67 27.16 27.19 27.14 27.16

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.36 32.78 32.79 32.68 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.54 31.89 31.89 31.84 31.85

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.92 30.52 30.53 30.49 30.50

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.46 27.35 27.37 27.30 27.33

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.25 28.13 28.16 28.10 28.13

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.35 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.87

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.08 26.49 26.50 26.48 26.49

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.73 32.41 32.42 32.04 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.96 24.69 24.70 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.41 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.48

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.52

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.04 30.93 30.93

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.03

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 31.10 31.10 30.63 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.64 26.11 26.12 25.97 25.98

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.24 28.49 28.50 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.17 25.21 25.22 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.41 23.15 23.16 23.10 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.98 26.34 26.34 26.14 26.15

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

25

Table 16. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Indiana Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Indiana

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.64 48.53 48.54

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.86 34.80 34.81 34.29 34.30

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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.05 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.42 36.55 36.56 36.41 36.43

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.60 35.23 35.24 34.97 34.97

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.01 37.03 36.51 36.53 36.31 36.33

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.24 30.02 30.03 29.64 29.65

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.61 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.28 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.80 27.00 27.01 26.82 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.37 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.47 28.70 28.71 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.74 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.58

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.58 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.03 27.82 27.84 27.77 27.79

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.17 33.38 33.39 33.30 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 33.96

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.68 33.37 33.38 33.39 33.40

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.85 27.59 27.62 27.55 27.57

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.43 29.13 29.16 29.11 29.14

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.21 30.68 30.69 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.51 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.34 27.30 27.31

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.83 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.16 25.62 25.63 25.40 25.41

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.21 29.33 29.34 29.27 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.72 32.34 32.35 32.22 32.23

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.63 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.05 31.99 31.99 31.92 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 28.24 26.73 26.73 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.24 29.50 29.51 29.43 29.44

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.06 26.15 26.16 25.86 25.86

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 26.01 24.62 24.63 24.54 24.55

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.98 26.34 26.34 26.14 26.15

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

26

Table 17. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Kansas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.16

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.71 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.37 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.57 13.40 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.27 12.25 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.72 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.54 12.12 12.12 12.10 12.10

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 18. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Kansas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.67

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.93 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.74 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.84 13.67 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.57 12.55 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.08 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.89 12.47 12.47 12.45 12.45

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

27

Table 19. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Kansas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.54 45.54 45.46 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 33.47 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 30.61 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.14 33.14 33.14 32.97 32.97

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.76

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.84 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 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.36 30.36

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 27.40

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 31.11 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.51 30.18 30.18 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.14 27.14

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.68 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.53 31.89 31.89 31.84 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 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.34 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.48 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.04 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.47

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.93 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 30.63 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.97 25.97

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.10 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

28

Table 20. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Kansas Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Kansas 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.29 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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.41 36.55 36.55 36.41 36.41

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

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.64 29.64

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.76

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.82 26.82

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.57

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.57 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.77 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.30 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 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 27.55 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.20 30.68 30.68 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.50 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.30 27.30

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.40 25.40

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.27 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.34 32.34 32.22 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.92 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 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.43 29.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.86 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 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

29

Table 21. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Nebraska Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.71 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.37 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.57 13.40 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.27 12.25 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.72 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.54 12.12 12.12 12.10 12.10

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 22. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Nebraska Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.93 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.74 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.84 13.67 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.57 12.55 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.08 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.89 12.47 12.47 12.45 12.45

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

30

Table 23. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Nebraska Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.57 45.54 45.54 45.46 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 33.47 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 30.61 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.14 33.14 33.14 32.97 32.97

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.76

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.84 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 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.36 30.36

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 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 31.11 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.52 30.18 30.19 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.14 27.14

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.68 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.53 31.89 31.89 31.84 31.85

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 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.34 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.87

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.48 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.04 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.47

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.93 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 30.63 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.97 25.97

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.10 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

31

Table 24. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Nebraska Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario

With 

Nebraska 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.29 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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.41 36.55 36.55 36.41 36.42

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

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.64 29.64

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.82 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.57

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.58 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.15

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.77 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.30 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 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 27.55 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.20 30.68 30.68 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.51 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.30 27.30

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.40 25.40

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.27 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.34 32.34 32.22 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.92 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 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.43 29.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.86 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 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

32

Table 25. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

AQAT 2014 Average Annual PM2.5 Design Values (g/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 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.79 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.11 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.26 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.71 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.37 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.57 13.40 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.74 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.27 12.25 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.72 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.29 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.54 12.12 12.12 12.10 12.10

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 26. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

AQAT 2014 Maximum Annual PM2.5 Design Values (g/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 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.18 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.78 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.77 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.93 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.74 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.84 13.67 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.21 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.57 12.55 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.08 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.72 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.89 12.47 12.47 12.45 12.45

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

33

Table 27. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

AQAT 2014 Average 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (g/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 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.89

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

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.93 33.88 33.89

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.51 30.61 30.62 30.51 30.52

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.14 33.14 33.14 32.97 32.97

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.76

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.84 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 26.31 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.58

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.12 25.96 25.97

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.36 30.36

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 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 31.11 31.11

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.51 30.18 30.18 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.14 27.14

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.36 32.78 32.79 32.68 32.69

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.53 31.89 31.89 31.84 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 27.31

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.22 28.13 28.13 28.10 28.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.34 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.48 26.49

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.04 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.41 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.48

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.61 31.03 31.04 30.93 30.93

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.23 31.10 31.10 31.02 31.03

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.42 31.10 31.10 30.63 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.97 25.97

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.10 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

34

Table 28. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional New York Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

AQAT 2014 Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Design Values (g/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 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.72 48.63 48.63 48.53 48.54

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.29 34.30

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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.05 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.41 36.55 36.55 36.41 36.42

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.60 35.23 35.24 34.97 34.97

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.64 29.65

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.61 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.81 27.00 27.01 26.82 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.58

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.57 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.77 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.17 33.38 33.39 33.30 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 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 27.55 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.12

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.20 30.68 30.68 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.50 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.30 27.30

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.40 25.40

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.21 29.33 29.34 29.27 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.34 32.34 32.22 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.81

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.92 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 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.43 29.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.86 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 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

35

Table 29. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Ohio Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.80 15.03 15.04 14.87 14.88

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.13 13.60 13.63 13.52 13.54

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.57 13.01 13.03 12.97 12.99

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.37 13.87 13.88 13.78 13.79

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.78 13.25 13.28 13.16 13.19

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.32 12.75 12.77 12.71 12.73

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 13.00 12.44 12.47 12.37 12.39

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.58 13.40 13.41

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.27 12.73 12.76 12.65 12.67

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.70 12.27 12.28 12.25 12.26

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.32 11.76 11.78 11.72 11.74

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.82 12.28 12.31 12.20 12.22

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.55 12.12 12.13 12.10 12.11

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 30. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional Ohio Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.19 15.42 15.43 15.26 15.27

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.80 14.27 14.30 14.19 14.21

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.89 13.33 13.35 13.29 13.31

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.96 14.46 14.47 14.37 14.38

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.29 13.76 13.79 13.67 13.70

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.54 12.97 12.99 12.93 12.95

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.37 12.81 12.84 12.74 12.76

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.85 13.67 13.68

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.74 13.20 13.23 13.12 13.14

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 13.00 12.57 12.58 12.55 12.56

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.68 12.12 12.14 12.08 12.10

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.25 12.71 12.74 12.63 12.65

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.90 12.47 12.48 12.45 12.46

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

36
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

37

Table 31. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Ohio Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.62 45.54 45.58 45.46 45.50

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.23 30.25 30.30 29.88 29.93

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.21 33.51 33.55 33.47 33.51

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.42 33.93 33.94 33.88 33.89

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.57 30.61 30.66 30.51 30.55

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.17 33.14 33.16 32.97 33.01

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.35 35.01 35.04 34.76 34.79

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.80 32.81 32.39 32.39 32.31 32.32

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.65 29.07 29.13 28.84 28.90

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.78 26.30 26.34 26.24 26.27

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.70 25.79 25.86 25.57 25.64

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.28 35.29 34.93 34.94 34.88 34.89

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.74 26.11 26.19 25.96 26.04

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.13 30.54 30.56 30.36 30.38

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.33 27.59 27.62 27.40 27.43

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.31 24.88 24.91 24.78 24.81

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 31.95 31.61 31.62 31.11 31.12

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.52 30.18 30.19 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.67 27.16 27.19 27.14 27.17

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.37 32.78 32.80 32.68 32.70

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.55 31.89 31.90 31.84 31.86

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.92 30.52 30.53 30.49 30.50

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.46 27.35 27.38 27.30 27.33

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.25 28.13 28.16 28.10 28.13

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.94 29.96 29.34 29.36 29.34 29.35

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.55 30.86 30.87 30.86 30.87

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.13 26.49 26.54 26.48 26.54

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.73 32.41 32.42 32.04 32.05

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 27.01 24.69 24.74 24.49 24.54

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.45 28.55 28.56 28.47 28.48

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.52

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.61 31.03 31.04 30.93 30.93

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.26 31.10 31.11 31.02 31.04

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.43 31.10 31.11 30.63 30.64

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.71 26.11 26.16 25.97 26.04

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.26 28.49 28.51 28.43 28.44

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.22 25.21 25.26 24.97 25.02

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.46 23.15 23.18 23.10 23.12

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 28.02 26.34 26.38 26.14 26.19

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

38

Table 32. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional Ohio Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With Ohio 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.77 48.63 48.67 48.53 48.57

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.90 34.80 34.85 34.29 34.34

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.96 35.41 35.44 35.39 35.43

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.20 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.62

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.75 33.04 33.09 32.95 32.98

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.43 36.55 36.57 36.41 36.45

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.63 35.23 35.27 34.97 35.00

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.01 37.02 36.51 36.53 36.31 36.33

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.31 30.02 30.10 29.64 29.72

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.59 27.60 27.67 27.44 27.47

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.35 28.03 28.11 27.76 27.84

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.21 36.22 35.83 35.84 35.75 35.76

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.90 27.00 27.09 26.82 26.91

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.37 32.85 32.86 32.71 32.72

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.52 28.70 28.74 28.50 28.53

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.78 28.81 28.85 28.64 28.69

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.52 32.12 32.13 31.57 31.59

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.58 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.15

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.03 27.82 27.84 27.77 27.79

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.20 33.38 33.39 33.30 33.31

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.27 33.96 33.96 33.95 33.96

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.67 33.37 33.37 33.39 33.40

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.85 27.59 27.62 27.55 27.58

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.43 29.13 29.16 29.11 29.15

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.21 30.68 30.70 30.67 30.68

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.51 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.76 27.33 27.38 27.30 27.35

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.83 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.22 25.62 25.69 25.40 25.47

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.25 29.33 29.34 29.27 29.28

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.72 32.34 32.35 32.22 32.23

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.63 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.81

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.07 31.99 32.00 31.92 31.93

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.24 31.91 31.92 31.46 31.47

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.31 26.73 26.78 26.65 26.70

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.26 29.50 29.52 29.43 29.45

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.11 26.15 26.19 25.86 25.90

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 26.04 24.62 24.66 24.54 24.58

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 28.02 26.34 26.38 26.14 26.19

*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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

39

Table 33. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.78 15.03 15.03 14.87 14.87

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.10 13.60 13.60 13.52 13.52

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.33 14.31 14.31 13.90 13.90

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.55 13.01 13.01 12.97 12.97

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.36 13.87 13.87 13.78 13.78

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.76 13.25 13.25 13.16 13.17

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.29 12.75 12.75 12.71 12.71

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 12.97 12.44 12.44 12.37 12.37

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.57 13.40 13.40

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.55 13.52 13.52 13.13 13.13

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.24 12.73 12.73 12.65 12.65

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.69 12.27 12.27 12.25 12.25

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.35 13.20 13.20 13.08 13.08

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.30 11.76 11.76 11.72 11.72

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.79 12.28 12.28 12.20 12.20

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.54 12.12 12.12 12.10 12.10

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.

Table 34. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering Additional South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.17 15.42 15.42 15.26 15.26

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.77 14.27 14.27 14.19 14.19

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.64 14.62 14.62 14.21 14.21

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.87 13.33 13.33 13.29 13.29

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.95 14.46 14.46 14.37 14.37

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.27 13.76 13.76 13.67 13.68

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.51 12.97 12.97 12.93 12.93

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.34 12.81 12.81 12.74 12.74

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.84 13.67 13.67

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.03 14.00 14.00 13.61 13.61

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.71 13.20 13.20 13.12 13.12

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 12.99 12.57 12.57 12.55 12.55

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.38 13.23 13.23 13.11 13.11

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.66 12.12 12.12 12.08 12.08

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.22 12.71 12.71 12.63 12.63

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.89 12.47 12.47 12.45 12.45

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

40
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

41

Table 35. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.19 30.25 30.25 29.88 29.89

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.18 33.51 33.51 33.47 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 30.61 30.61 30.51 30.51

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.14 33.14 33.14 32.97 32.97

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.32 35.01 35.01 34.76 34.76

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.60 29.07 29.07 28.84 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 26.24 26.24

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.64 25.79 25.79 25.57 25.57

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.66 26.11 26.11 25.96 25.96

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.11 30.54 30.54 30.36 30.36

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.28 27.59 27.59 27.40 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 31.11 31.12

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.51 30.18 30.18 30.11 30.11

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.64 27.16 27.16 27.14 27.14

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.35 32.78 32.78 32.68 32.68

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.53 31.89 31.89 31.84 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 29.94 29.94 29.34 29.34 29.34 29.34

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.54 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.07 26.49 26.49 26.48 26.48

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.72 32.41 32.41 32.04 32.04

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 26.95 24.69 24.69 24.49 24.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.40 28.55 28.55 28.47 28.48

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.58 29.51 29.51

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.70

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.60 31.03 31.03 30.93 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 30.63 30.63

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.63 26.11 26.11 25.97 25.97

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.23 28.49 28.49 28.43 28.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.16 25.21 25.21 24.97 24.97

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.40 23.15 23.15 23.10 23.10

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 27.97 26.34 26.34 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

42

Table 36. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering Additional South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$500/ton 

With 

South

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

$2,300/ton 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase 

$2,300/ton 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Control 

Scenario 

With 

South 

Carolina 

Budget 

Increase

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

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

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.85 34.80 34.80 34.29 34.30

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 35.66 35.66 35.61 35.61

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.70 33.04 33.04 32.95 32.95

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.41 36.55 36.55 36.41 36.42

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

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

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.23 30.02 30.02 29.64 29.64

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

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.49 27.60 27.60 27.44 27.44

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.27 28.03 28.03 27.76 27.77

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

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.80 27.00 27.00 26.82 26.83

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.36 32.85 32.85 32.71 32.71

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.46 28.70 28.70 28.50 28.50

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.73 28.81 28.81 28.64 28.64

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.50 32.12 32.12 31.57 31.58

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.57 33.24 33.24 33.14 33.14

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.00 27.82 27.82 27.77 27.77

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.16 33.38 33.38 33.30 33.30

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.26 33.96 33.96 33.95 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 27.55 27.55

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.40 29.13 29.13 29.11 29.11

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.20 30.68 30.68 30.67 30.67

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.50 33.16 33.16 33.17 33.17

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.71 27.33 27.33 27.30 27.30

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.82 34.47 34.47

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.15 25.62 25.62 25.40 25.40

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.20 29.33 29.33 29.27 29.27

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.71 32.34 32.34 32.22 32.22

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.62 30.32 30.32 30.21 30.21

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.92 33.80 33.80

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.04 31.99 31.99 31.92 31.92

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.23 31.91 31.91 31.46 31.47

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.23 26.73 26.73 26.65 26.65

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.23 29.50 29.50 29.43 29.43

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.05 26.15 26.15 25.86 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 26.14 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 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

43

Table 37. Average Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering the Cumulative Effects of Additional Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, 

Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$500/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 17.94 15.78 15.80 15.03 15.05 14.87 14.89

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.99 14.10 14.13 13.60 13.63 13.52 13.55

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.15 14.33 14.36 14.31 14.34 13.90 13.93

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.01 13.55 13.57 13.01 13.04 12.97 13.01

261630033 Michigan Wayne 15.73 14.36 14.37 13.87 13.88 13.78 13.80

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.67 13.76 13.79 13.25 13.28 13.16 13.20

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.76 13.29 13.32 12.75 12.78 12.71 12.75

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.4 12.97 13.00 12.44 12.47 12.37 12.41

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.46 13.85 13.85 13.57 13.58 13.40 13.42

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.16 13.55 13.58 13.52 13.55 13.13 13.16

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.14 13.24 13.27 12.73 12.76 12.65 12.68

180970081 Indiana Marion 14.86 12.69 12.70 12.27 12.29 12.25 12.27

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.07 13.35 13.43 13.20 13.28 13.08 13.16

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 14.74 12.30 12.33 11.76 11.79 11.72 11.76

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 14.67 12.79 12.82 12.28 12.31 12.20 12.23

180970083 Indiana Marion 14.71 12.54 12.56 12.12 12.14 12.10 12.12

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

44

Table 38. Maximum Annual PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT** – Considering the Cumulative Effects of Additional Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, 

Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$500/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064 Pennsylvania Allegheny 18.33 16.17 16.19 15.42 15.44 15.26 15.28

390350038 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.66 14.77 14.80 14.27 14.30 14.19 14.22

10730023 Alabama Jefferson 16.46 14.64 14.67 14.62 14.65 14.21 14.24

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 16.33 13.87 13.89 13.33 13.36 13.29 13.33

261630033 Michigan Wayne 16.32 14.95 14.96 14.46 14.47 14.37 14.39

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 16.18 14.27 14.30 13.76 13.79 13.67 13.71

390610014 Ohio Hamilton 15.98 13.51 13.54 12.97 13.00 12.93 12.97

390610042 Ohio Hamilton 15.77 13.34 13.37 12.81 12.84 12.74 12.78

171191007 Illinois Madison 15.73 14.12 14.12 13.84 13.85 13.67 13.69

10732003 Alabama Jefferson 15.64 14.03 14.06 14.00 14.03 13.61 13.64

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.61 13.71 13.74 13.20 13.23 13.12 13.15

180970081 Indiana Marion 15.16 12.99 13.00 12.57 12.59 12.55 12.57

131210039 Georgia Fulton 15.1 13.38 13.46 13.23 13.31 13.11 13.19

390617001 Ohio Hamilton 15.1 12.66 12.69 12.12 12.15 12.08 12.12

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 15.1 13.22 13.25 12.71 12.74 12.63 12.66

180970083 Indiana Marion 15.06 12.89 12.91 12.47 12.49 12.45 12.47

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

**Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

45

Table 39. Average 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering the Cumulative Effects of Additional Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, 

Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$500/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and

SC Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 56.71 47.57 47.63 45.54 45.59 45.46 45.52

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 39.11 32.19 32.24 30.25 30.30 29.88 29.95

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 39.46 34.18 34.21 33.51 33.55 33.47 33.52

261630016** Michigan Wayne 38.99 34.42 34.43 33.93 33.94 33.88 33.90

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.78 31.50 31.58 30.61 30.67 30.51 30.56

170311016** Illinois Cook 37.58 34.14 34.17 33.14 33.17 32.97 33.04

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.48 36.32 36.36 35.01 35.05 34.76 34.82

180890022** Indiana Lake 34.94 32.80 32.83 32.39 32.40 32.31 32.34

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 37.57 30.60 30.66 29.07 29.13 28.84 28.91

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 35.98 35.19 35.19 34.95 34.95 34.87 34.88

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.80 27.69 27.79 26.30 26.35 26.24 26.28

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 34.56 27.64 27.71 25.79 25.86 25.57 25.65

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.34 35.28 35.29 34.93 34.94 34.88 34.90

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 34.91 27.66 27.75 26.11 26.20 25.96 26.05

170313301 Illinois Cook 34.97 31.11 31.13 30.54 30.56 30.36 30.40

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 36.21 29.28 29.34 27.59 27.62 27.40 27.44

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 32.40 26.27 26.31 24.88 24.92 24.78 24.82

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 36.96 31.93 32.00 31.61 31.68 31.11 31.18

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 33.62 30.51 30.52 30.18 30.19 30.11 30.12

180970043 Indiana Marion 35.76 28.64 28.70 27.16 27.22 27.14 27.21

261470005 Michigan St Clair 36.23 33.35 33.38 32.78 32.81 32.68 32.72

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.21 32.53 32.56 31.89 31.91 31.84 31.87

180890026 Indiana Lake 34.08 30.91 30.92 30.52 30.54 30.49 30.51

180970081 Indiana Marion 35.85 28.44 28.48 27.35 27.40 27.30 27.36

180970066 Indiana Marion 35.73 29.22 29.27 28.13 28.19 28.10 28.16

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.59 29.94 29.97 29.34 29.36 29.34 29.36

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 35.47 31.54 31.56 30.86 30.88 30.86 30.88

390170003 Ohio Butler 34.40 28.07 28.15 26.49 26.55 26.48 26.57

170316005 Illinois Cook 34.12 32.72 32.73 32.41 32.42 32.04 32.06

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.04 26.95 27.02 24.69 24.75 24.49 24.56

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 35.05 29.40 29.47 28.55 28.56 28.47 28.51

170312001 Illinois Cook 33.62 29.85 29.85 29.58 29.59 29.51 29.53

170310052 Illinois Cook 34.94 30.12 30.12 29.79 29.79 29.70 29.71

421330008 Pennsylvania York 33.38 31.60 31.61 31.03 31.04 30.93 30.94

261630015 Michigan Wayne 35.55 32.23 32.26 31.10 31.12 31.02 31.06

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.31 31.42 31.48 31.10 31.16 30.63 30.70

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.29 27.63 27.72 26.11 26.17 25.97 26.07

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.11 29.23 29.27 28.49 28.51 28.43 28.45

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33.95 27.16 27.22 25.21 25.27 24.97 25.04

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 33.68 24.40 24.47 23.15 23.18 23.10 23.15

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 28.03 26.34 26.39 26.14 26.20

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

46

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

47

Table 40. Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 DVs (g/m3) in 2014 for SO2 Emission Scenarios Assessed 

Using AQAT*** – Considering the Cumulative Effects of Additional Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, 

Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and South Carolina Emissions.

Monitor 

Identification 

Number*

State County

CAMx 

2012 

Base 

Case 

(g/m3)

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

$500/ton

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$500/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

$2,300/ton 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

Without 

GA, IN, 

KS, NE, 

NY, OH, 

and SC 

Budget 

Increases

Control 

Scenario 

With GA, 

IN, KS, 

NE, NY, 

OH, and 

SC Budget 

Increases

Additional Emissions Added to Georgia (tons) 0 40,334 0 40,334 0 40,334

Additional Emissions Added to Indiana (tons) 0 4,333 0 4,333 0 4,333

Additional Emissions Added to Kansas (tons) 0 268 0 268 0 268

Additional Emissions Added to Nebraska (tons) 0 3,800 0 3,800 0 3,800

Additional Emissions Added to New York (tons) 0 5,448 0 5,448 0 5,448

Additional Emissions Added to Ohio (tons) 0 15,963 0 15,963 0 15,963

Additional Emissions Added to South Carolina (tons) 0 8,013 0 8,013 0 8,013

420030064** Pennsylvania Allegheny 59.93 50.72 50.78 48.63 48.68 48.53 48.59

420030093** Pennsylvania Allegheny 44.40 36.85 36.91 34.80 34.86 34.29 34.37

390350038** Ohio Cuyahoga 41.84 35.93 35.96 35.41 35.44 35.39 35.44

261630016** Michigan Wayne 41.28 36.20 36.21 35.66 35.67 35.61 35.63

390350060 Ohio Cuyahoga 40.85 33.70 33.76 33.04 33.11 32.95 33.00

170311016** Illinois Cook 40.44 37.41 37.44 36.55 36.58 36.41 36.48

261630033** Michigan Wayne 39.81 36.59 36.64 35.23 35.28 34.97 35.03

180890022** Indiana Lake 39.58 37.01 37.04 36.51 36.54 36.31 36.36

540090011 West 

Virginia Brooke 38.39 32.23 32.32 30.02 30.11 29.64 29.75

420710007** Pennsylvania Lancaster 38.37 37.43 37.44 37.18 37.18 37.08 37.09

390350045 Ohio Cuyahoga 38.13 29.49 29.60 27.60 27.68 27.44 27.48

390811001 Ohio Jefferson 37.88 30.27 30.36 28.03 28.11 27.76 27.86

261630019** Michigan Wayne 37.83 36.21 36.22 35.83 35.85 35.75 35.77

390350065 Ohio Cuyahoga 37.67 28.80 28.91 27.00 27.10 26.82 26.93

170313301 Illinois Cook 37.67 33.36 33.38 32.85 32.86 32.71 32.73

420070014 Pennsylvania Beaver 37.42 30.46 30.52 28.70 28.74 28.50 28.55

420033007 Pennsylvania Allegheny 37.40 30.73 30.78 28.81 28.86 28.64 28.70

010730023 Alabama Jefferson 37.33 32.50 32.59 32.12 32.20 31.57 31.64

550790026 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.24 33.57 33.58 33.24 33.25 33.14 33.16

180970043 Indiana Marion 37.20 29.00 29.06 27.82 27.86 27.77 27.82

261470005 Michigan St Clair 37.14 34.16 34.21 33.38 33.40 33.30 33.32

550790043 Wisconsin Milwaukee 37.10 34.26 34.27 33.96 33.96 33.95 33.97

180890026 Indiana Lake 37.06 33.67 33.68 33.37 33.38 33.39 33.40

180970081 Indiana Marion 36.96 28.83 28.88 27.59 27.65 27.55 27.62

180970066 Indiana Marion 36.92 30.40 30.46 29.13 29.19 29.11 29.19

171191007 Illinois Madison 36.83 31.20 31.22 30.68 30.71 30.67 30.69

550790010 Wisconsin Milwaukee 36.71 33.50 33.51 33.16 33.17 33.17 33.18

390170003 Ohio Butler 36.59 28.71 28.77 27.33 27.39 27.30 27.38

170316005 Illinois Cook 36.42 35.10 35.10 34.82 34.83 34.47 34.49

420031008 Pennsylvania Allegheny 36.35 28.15 28.23 25.62 25.70 25.40 25.49

261610008 Michigan Washtenaw 36.32 30.20 30.27 29.33 29.35 29.27 29.30

170312001 Illinois Cook 36.12 32.71 32.72 32.34 32.36 32.22 32.25

170310052 Illinois Cook 36.07 30.62 30.63 30.32 30.33 30.21 30.22

421330008 Pennsylvania York 36.06 34.56 34.56 33.92 33.93 33.80 33.82

261630015 Michigan Wayne 36.00 33.04 33.08 31.99 32.01 31.92 31.94

010732003 Alabama Jefferson 35.94 32.23 32.29 31.91 31.98 31.46 31.53

390618001 Ohio Hamilton 35.85 28.23 28.32 26.73 26.79 26.65 26.72

171190023 Illinois Madison 35.81 30.23 30.27 29.50 29.52 29.43 29.46

420031301 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.65 28.05 28.12 26.15 26.20 25.86 25.91

391130032 Ohio Montgomery 35.61 25.99 26.05 24.62 24.67 24.54 24.63

420030116 Pennsylvania Allegheny 35.59 27.97 28.03 26.34 26.39 26.14 26.20

*Monitors are in order of decreasing 2012 base case Maximum DV.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

48

** Identify receptors that have maximum design values greater than or equal to 35.5 g/m3at the $500 cost threshold in 2014 (as modeled in 

AQAT in the TR).

***Assessments consider the emission budget changes from the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

49

Table 41. The Percentage of the Direct Final Annual NOx Emission Increase (tons) as a Function 

of Total Annual NOx Emissions from all Source Sectors (tons) Including the Final Revisions 

Rule Emissions.

State

2014 “Remedy” 

Control Scenario Total 

Annual NOx Emissions

Direct Final

Annual NOx

Emission

Increase

Direct Final 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 13,198 3.3%

Illinois 540,361 

Indiana 424,250 

Iowa 217,221 

Kansas 240,384 5,533 2.3%

Kentucky 286,806 

Louisiana 466,098 

Maine 61,657 

Maryland 181,533 

Massachusetts 175,316 

Michigan 447,772 

Minnesota 338,438 

Mississippi 216,224 

Missouri 352,631 26 0.0%

Nebraska 173,170 

New Hampshire 47,482 

New Jersey 210,520 

New York 461,412 727 0.2%

North Carolina 317,230 

North Dakota 127,127 

Ohio 508,054 1,644 0.3%

Oklahoma 305,859 

Pennsylvania 514,563 

Rhode Island 18,808 

South Carolina 202,118 

South Dakota 65,500 

Tennessee 293,339 

Texas 1,369,987 991 0.1%

Vermont 22,824 

Virginia 333,985 

West Virginia 155,245 

Wisconsin 257,462 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

50

Table 42. The Percentage of the Direct Final Ozone-Season NOx Emission Increase (tons) as a 

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

Final Revisions Rule Emissions.

State

2014 “Remedy” Control 

Scenario Total OzoneSeason NOx Emissions

Direct Final OzoneSeason NOx Emission 

Increase

Direct Final

Ozone-Season NOx

Emission Increase 

as a Percentage of 

2014 “Remedy” 

Total Emissions

Alabama 126,382 

Arkansas 87,920 73 0.1%

Connecticut 31,133 

Delaware 13,693 

District of 

Columbia 3,805 

Florida 261,497 

Georgia 161,301 5,762 3.6%

Illinois 221,011 

Indiana 176,143 

Iowa 97,478 

Kansas 97,635 

Kentucky 117,179 

Louisiana 199,940 110 0.1%

Maine 24,427 

Maryland 74,401 

Massachusetts 68,324 

Michigan 180,549 

Minnesota 144,960 

Mississippi 91,480 115 0.1%

Missouri 149,213 26 0.0%

Nebraska 74,095 

New Hampshire 18,785 

New Jersey 84,110 

New York 184,723 350 0.2%

North Carolina 130,132 

North Dakota 59,336 

Ohio 208,281 1,807 0.9%

Oklahoma 125,457 3,066 2.4%

Pennsylvania 208,800 

Rhode Island 7,251 

South Carolina 83,215 

South Dakota 31,739 

Tennessee 119,966 

Texas 578,301 2,438 0.4%

Vermont 8,796 

Virginia 136,976 

West Virginia 63,770 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

51

Wisconsin 104,890 
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

52

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_2300 rem TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem GA. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem IN. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem KS. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem NE. xlsx
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

53

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem NY. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem OH. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem SC. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem all. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 rem. xlsx (recreating the final TR 

file)

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT GA. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT IN. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT KS. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT NE. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT NY. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT OH. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT SC. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT all. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_2300 CT. xlsx (recreating the final TR 

file)

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT GA. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT IN. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT KS. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT NE. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT NY. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT OH. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT SC. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT all. xlsx

dailyPM_adjusted sulfate contributions and RRF_2014_500 CT. xlsx (recreating the final TR 

file)

dailyPM_allyears_high_quarters_finalrevdirfinal.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 and remedy simulations. 

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_2300 rem TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem GA. xlsx
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

54

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem IN. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem KS. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem NE. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem NY. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem OH. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem SC. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem all. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 rem. xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT GA. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT IN. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT KS. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT NE. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT NY. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT OH. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT SC. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT all. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_2300 CT. xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT TX NY WI. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT GA. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT IN. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT KS. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT NE. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT NY. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT OH. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT SC. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT all. xlsx

dailyPM_all_years_all_quarters_500 CT. xlsx (recreating the final TR file)

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 for the final 

TR. A new file, containing the annual AQAT estimates for this assessment (the final revisions 

rule and direct final rule) is called “annualPM25 AQAT_rev_final.xlsx”

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 final 

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

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

55

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Indiana as well as the emission changes for Texas, New

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Kansas as well as the emission changes for Texas, New 

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Nebraska as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for New York as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Ohio as well as the emission changes for Texas, New 

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for South Carolina as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, 

and South Carolina as well as the emission changes for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin

included in the final revisions rule.

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

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Indiana as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Kansas as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Nebraska as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for New York as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Ohio as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

56

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for South Carolina as well as the emission 

changes for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

emission revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New 

York, Ohio, and South Carolina as well as the emission changes for Texas, New York, and 

Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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 

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

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Indiana as well as the emission changes for Texas, New 

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Kansas as well as the emission changes for Texas, New 

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Nebraska as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for New York as well as the emission changes for Texas, 

New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Ohio as well as the emission changes for Texas, New 

York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for South Carolina as well as the emission changes for 

Texas, New York, and Wisconsin included in the final revisions rule.

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

revisions in the direct final rule made for Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, 

and South Carolina as well as the emission changes for Texas, New York, and Wisconsin

included in the final revisions rule.

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

the final Transport Rule.