Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0225-0130
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-08-16T04:00Z

Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US 

07/16/2007 05:00 PM

	

To

"Johansson, Robert" <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>

cc

Subject

Fw: Message 1  -- Ozone RIA Proposal Final Files for Review

Dear Rob:

Attached is what should be the final RIA.  Enclosed is a response to
each of your comments tied to your list of RIA items remaining which you
sent last week, in addition is a copy of each changed chapter.  Note
that we have not resent chapters 1, 7 and chapter 6 appendices b and c
since you had not comments on them, thus the previous edition of those
is final.  Table of contents and table list will follow tomorrow.

The only remaining outstanding issues are the 2 we have left to Art and
Lydia, e.g.  quantitative calculation for UV-B and the cost
effectiveness calculation (i.e. QALYs for ozone).  Lydia is awaiting
Art's call.

You will note that the estimates of monetized benefits and incidence in
this version of the RIA  have changed following our QA/QC of the
results.  These changed slightly for four reasons:

First, due to a previously unknown error in the lag adjustment feature
of the BenMAP model, the extrapolated PM2.5 co-benefit estimates
included in the previous drafts of the RIA were slightly overstated.  We
have corrected this problem. All estimates of PM co-benefits in this
version of the chapter feature the appropriate lag adjustment. Because
this feature was only recently added to BenMAP, this error does not
affect previous analyses; prior analyses featured lag-adjusted PM2.5
benefits estimates calculated outside of the BenMAP model. We will
correct this programming error in BenMAP prior to the release of the
final ozone analysis.

Second, we have adjusted the number of extrapolated NOx tons used to net
out the PM co-benefits of attaining the 0.084 ppm baseline nationwide.
This adjustment corrects an inconsistency between the approach used to
net out the PM co-benefits of attaining 0.084 nationally versus
California alone. 

Third, we have corrected an error in the post-2020 California 0.075 PM
co-benefits estimate, where we used the incorrect extrapolated ton
estimate due to an incorrect cell reference. 

Fourth, we have updated the incidence extrapolation estimates to account
for the change in the extrapolated ton estimation. 

The combined result of these individual changes is a very modest
increase in monetized benefits and incidence.   Note that the
interaction of these items are not directionally consistent depending on
the alternative standard being considered, i.e. you can not necessarily
predict and explain the change in the final numbers.  It was our
judgement that the changes were small and immaterial to the overall
estimate of the benefits.

Please send a note to Ron and me upon receipt of this e-mail.  We
suggest that we plan to touch base on Wed afternoon at the latest to
confirm we are done, hopefully including the 2 outstanding issues as
well.

Attached please find Chapters 2, 3, and 3 Appendix

Marjorie C. Jones

Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards

Air Benefit and Cost Group, Mail Code C439-02

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

RTP, NC 27711

voice: (919) 541-2508

fax:     (919) 541-0839

Shipping/receiving: 4930 Old Page Rd.

Durham, NC 27709