Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Technical Basis for the EPA's Development of
Significant Impact Levels for PM2.5 and Ozone,
Appendices
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
EPA-454/D-16-001b
July 2016
Technical Basis for the EPA's Development of Significant Impact Levels for PM2.5 and Ozone,
Appendices
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Air Quality Analysis Division
Air Quality Modeling Group
Research Triangle Park, NC
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Contents
1 Bootstrap examples 6
2 Ozone results 12
2.1 2011-2013 ozone bootstrap results 12
2.2 2010-2012 ozone bootstrap results 15
2.3 2009-2011 ozone bootstrap results 18
2.4 2008-2010 ozone bootstrap results 21
2.5 2007-2009 ozone bootstrap results 24
2.6 2006-2008 ozone bootstrap results 27
2.7 2005-2007 ozone bootstrap results 30
2.8 2004-2006 ozone bootstrap results 33
2.9 2003-2005 ozone bootstrap results 36
2.10 2002-2004 ozone bootstrap results 39
2.11 2001-2003 ozone bootstrap results 42
2.12 2000-2002 ozone bootstrap results 45
3 Air quality variability results for years 2002-2013 for PM2.s 48
3.1 2011-2013 PM2.5 bootstrap results 48
3.2 2010-2012 PM2.5 bootstrap results 53
3.3 2009-2011 PM2.5 bootstrap results 58
3.4 2008-2010 PM2.5 bootstrap results 63
3.5 2007-2009 PM2.5 bootstrap results 68
3.6 2006-2008 PM2.5 bootstrap results 73
3.7 2005-2007 PM2.5 bootstrap results 78
3.8 2004-2006 PM2.5 bootstrap results 83
3.9 2003-2005 PM2.5 bootstrap results 88
3.10 2002-2004 PM2.5 bootstrap results 93
3.11 2001-2003 PM2.5 bootstrap results 98
3.12 2000-2002 PM2.5 bootstrap results 103
4 Comparison plots of nearby sites 108
5 Comparison of air quality variability for ozone sensitivity tests 192
5.1 All available data, no quarterly subsets 192
5.2 All available data, with quarterly subsets 194
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
List
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
of Figures
Example from site 10732003
Example from site 21700008
Example from site 60195001
Example from site 481410053
Example from site 560210001
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2013
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2013
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2012
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2012
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2011
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2011
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2010
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2010
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2009
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2009
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2008
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2008
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2007
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2007
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2006
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2006
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2005
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2005
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2004
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2004
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2003
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2003
Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2002
Distribution of ozone bootstrap results for 2002
Summary of bootstrap results for 2013
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2013
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2013
Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2013
Summary of bootstrap results for 2012
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2012
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2012
Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2012
Summary of bootstrap results for 2011
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2011
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2011
Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2011
Summary of bootstrap results for 2010
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2010
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2010
Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2010
Summary of bootstrap results for 2009
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2009
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2009
Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2009
Summary of bootstrap results for 2008
Distribution of bootstrap results for 2008
Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2008
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
16
17
19
20
22
23
25
26
28
29
31
32
34
35
37
38
40
41
43
44
46
47
49
50
51
52
54
55
56
57
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
69
70
71
72
74
75
76
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
53 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2008 77
54 Summary of bootstrap results for 2007 79
55 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2007 80
56 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2007 81
57 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2007 82
58 Summary of bootstrap results for 2006 84
59 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2006 85
60 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2006 86
61 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2006 87
62 Summary of bootstrap results for 2005 89
63 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2005 90
64 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2005 91
65 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2005 92
66 Summary of bootstrap results for 2004 94
67 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2004 95
68 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2004 96
69 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2004 97
70 Summary of bootstrap results for 2003 99
71 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2003 100
72 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2003 101
73 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2003 102
74 Summary of bootstrap results for 2002 104
75 Distribution of bootstrap results for 2002 105
76 Scatterplot of 50% CI bootstrap results for 2002 106
77 Map of the 50% CI bootstrap results for 2002 107
78 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150031001 and 150031001 109
79 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180190006 and 180190006 110
80 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180970078 and 180970078 Ill
81 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 190450019 and 190450019 112
82 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 220330009 and 220330009 113
83 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 271630447 and 271630447 114
84 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 320310016 and 320310016 115
85 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 350010023 and 350010023 116
86 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420950025 and 420950025 117
87 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010047 and 421010047 118
88 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010055 and 421010055 119
89 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 440070022 and 440070022 120
90 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 490353006 and 490353006 121
91 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 100032004 and 100032004 122
92 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 110010043 and 110010043 123
93 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 130670003 and 130670003 124
94 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150011006 and 150011006 125
95 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150011012 and 150011012 126
96 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150012016 and 150012016 127
97 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150031001 and 150031001 128
98 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150032004 and 150032004 129
99 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180190006 and 180190006 130
100 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180970078 and 180970078 131
101 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 190450019 and 190450019 132
102 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 191032001 and 191032001 133
103 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 191390015 and 191390015 134
104 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 211110051 and 211110051 135
105 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 220330009 and 220330009 136
106 Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240150003 and 240150003 137
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
Comparison
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
PM2
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
data
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
for
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
sites
240251001
240290002
240313001
240330030
261630001
270031002
270530963
271630447
290370003
290470005
290990019
291893001
295100007
300490004
300630024
310550019
320310016
330050007
330150018
340171003
340210008
350010023
360810124
380570004
420010001
420030008
420070014
420110011
420410101
420450002
420710007
420910013
420950025
421010047
421010055
421250005
421250200
421255001
421290008
421330008
440030002
440070022
450190048
450450015
450630008
482011035
490353006
490490002
490570002
530530029
530610005
530610020
530611007
550090005
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
240251001
240290002
240313001
240330030
261630001
270031002
270530963
271630447
290370003
290470005
290990019
291893001
295100007
300490004
300630024
310550019
320310016
330050007
330150018
340171003
340210008
350010023
360810124
380570004
420010001
420030008
420070014
420110011
420410101
420450002
420710007
420910013
420950025
421010047
421010055
421250005
421250200
421255001
421290008
421330008
440030002
440070022
450190048
450450015
450630008
482011035
490353006
490490002
490570002
530530029
530610005
530610020
530611007
550090005
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
161 Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2013 193
162 Summary of ozone bootstrap results for 2013 195
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
1 Bootstrap examples
Bootstrap examples from selects PM2.5 sites for the 2008-2010 DV period. Top left, top right, and middle
left plots show the distribution of daily PM concentrations for 2008, 2009, and 2010, respectively. The
vertical red line shows the annual mean and the vertical blue line shows the annual 98th percentile. Middle
left plots show sample distributions of resampled data from 2008, along with the annual mean and the 98th
percentile from each resample. The bottom left plots show the distribution of the annual DVs from the
20,000 resampled DV periods (2008-2010). The bottom right plots show the distribution of the 24-hr DVs
from the 20,000 resampled DV periods (2008-2010)
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2008 PM measurements, n = 360
•
0.075-
f "V
— 0.050- y
c /
0 /
0.025- /
n nnn -L .
1 1
n '
i
Vrh
• "'q
• U '
[fjffUkmn
0 10 20 30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2009 PM measurements, n = 360
I
0.075-
-550-050-
0
•Q
0.025-
o.ooo-
kl
I I
10 20 30
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2010 PM measurements, n = 356
boot samples
0.075-
••^0.050-
c
0
0.025 -
o.ooo-
J
/.
1
I !
•wi 1
V
V
.
"In '
1 H ri i 1 1 n i
10 20 30
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
w 0.04 -
c
0
0.02-
0.00-
10 20 30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
PM annual design value boot results
PM 24-hr design value boot results
900-
§600-
0
O
300-
— r
—
~L
o
1 1 1 1
12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5
400-
"c
0
°200-
25
-i
"-
-i
r
tk
i i i
0 27.5 30.0 32.5
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
Figure 1: Example from site 10732003.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2008 PM measurements, n = 110
2009 PM measurements, n = 88
0.15-
/
-^0.10- 1
tf)
c
0
T3
0.05-
n nn
1 1
1 & *'
tt>
11 0 /
\ "DO. 05-
ftfL. !
-1 Tlmm!- m n n nn
•i
1
•\
1
1
1
1
1 1
MlUJL
10 20 30
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
0 10 20 30
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2010 PM measurements, n = 102
I I
0.20-
00.10-
0.05-
0.00-
\
JWL
.-P-^T1
10 20 30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
0.15-
.010-
c
•D
0.05-
boot samples
i i
10 20 30
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
500-
400-
-^300-
8200-
100-
o-
PM annual design value boot results
678
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
PM 24-hr design value boot results
300-
8
100-
o-
JK,.
20 25 30 35
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
Figure 2: Example from site 21700008.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2008 PM measurements, n = 107
I I
0.075 -
0.050 -
0.025-
o.ooo-
20 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2009 PM measurements, n = 295
I
0.06 -
c
•Q
°-°2~
o.oo-
I I
20 40 60
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2010 PM measurements, n = 357
0.075 -
o.ooo-
I
20 40 60
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
80
°-04~
0.03-
CO
c
0.00-
boot samples
II
II
10 20 30 40 50
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
400-
300-
§200-
O
O
100-
0-
PM annual design value boot results
16 17 18 19
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
PM 24-hr design value boot results
300 -
|200
o-
J
40 45 50
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
i
55
Figure 3: Example from site 60195001.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2008 PM measurements, n = 56
2009 PM measurements, n = 57
•
0.09-
_>> n
•"55 0.06 -
0 /'
0.03- ¥
y
n nn -III .
0.125- n
0.100-
1
1 -5*0.075-
co
ffL
i.
I
0 0.050 - [<'
Ofl i /
T'' n m m n 0.025- I
f x--[()-_[iLl [f
1 1
1 1
1 1
\
i
a n
s^....
IE
1
1 1
1
"'Ik fl fl
10 20 30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
50
I I I I I
10 20 30 40 50
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2010 PM measurements, n = 49
0.15-
-2^0.10-
tf)
c ,
0 1
T3
0.05 - /
Ooo -UL
.UU
fl '
1 1
1 1
II '
' i
1
1 „
II MflUlL J
i i i i
0 20 40 60
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
0.06-
CO
c
0
0.02-
0.00-
boot samples
i i : :
t
10 20 30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
I
50
PM annual design value boot results
300-
200-
0
o
100-
0-
I I
14 16
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
18
PM 24-hr design value boot results
200-
150-
100-
0-
i
30 40
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
50
Figure 4: Example from site 481410053.
10
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
0.20-
0.15-
^
£0.10-
0
T3
0.05-
0.00-
2008 PM measurements, n = 113
I
2009 PM measurements, n = 1 17
I
5 10 15 20
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
0.20 - /
-&* ' /
1 f
00.10- F
n nn — U—
y
^
1
\
N
i
1, rv n
5 10 15 20
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
2010 PM measurements, n = 120
I
0.20-
00.10-
0.05-
0.00-
4 8
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
i
12
0.20 -
boot samples
5 10 15
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
20
1500-
1000-
0
O
500-
o-
4
i —
1000-
*- 750-
8 500-
250- r
I i r\ _H I
K _
u
0 4.5 8 10 12 14 16
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
PM2.5 (ug/m3)
Figure 5: Example from site 560210001.
11
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2 Ozone results
Bootstrap results for ozone data from the years 2000-2013. Each section containts a single DV period, e.g..
the results for 2013 include data from 2011-2013.
2.1 2011-2013 ozone bootstrap results
12
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
_Q
100-
§
Q.
s
o
o
.Q
75-
50-
70
Daily DV (ppb)
90
110
o-
50
70
Daily DV (ppb)
90
bootstrap metric
Figure 6: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2013 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
13
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2013 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
6%-
CO
t
0
4%-
0
J2 2% -
0
mean 1.528%
Median 1.425%
*jtf •'•
70 90
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2013 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
110
&
t 4-
0
o
0
-I—•
^ 2-
O
w
.0
CO
fl-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
mean 1.085
median 1.000
70
90
110
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 7: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2013 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 20f 3 ozone DV at each site.
14
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.2 2010-2012 ozone bootstrap results
15
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
125-
.a
a.
A100-
Q.
ro
o
° 50-
70
Daily DV (ppb)
90
0)
o
CD
25-
%20-
15-
10-
5-
o-
50
70
Daily DV (ppb)
90
25-
bootstrap metric
Figure 8: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2012 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
16
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2012 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
6% -
co
t
0
0
'co
t 4
0
o
§3
0
.a
to 1
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
%iedian 1.449%
70
90
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2012 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.135
median 1.000
70
90
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
Figure 9: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2012 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 20f 2 ozone DV at each site.
17
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.3 2009-2011 ozone bootstrap results
18
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
125-
.n
o.
• 100-
Q.
ro
o
o
.Q
50-
70
Daily DV (ppb)
90
110
o-
25-
^-20-
0)
c 15-
0)
50
70
Daily DV (ppb)
110
10-
> 5-
Q
o-
4,4,-4=
& .^ *& <^ *6
bootstrap metric
Figure 10: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2011 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
19
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2011 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
-^ 6% -
'co
0
£4%-
0
J2 2% -
0
mean 1.537%
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
70 90
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2011 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
110
&
4-
0
o
0
-I— •
2 2-
O
w
.0
CO
fl-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
mean 1.088
median 1.000
•\
• •
70
90
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
110
Figure 11: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2011 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2011 ozone DV at each site.
20
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.4 2008-2010 ozone bootstrap results
21
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
g
50-
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
CD
O
CD
25-
%20-
15-
10-
5-
o-
40
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
bootstrap metric
Figure 12: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2010 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2010 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.572% median 1.463%
1 4% -
'co
t
o 3% -
3
0
> 2% -
-I—•
co
co
t
0
o
I2'
0
o
V)
.a
CO
CO
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
40
40
60 80
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
100
2010 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.115 median 1.000
80
100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
Figure 13: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2010 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 20fO ozone DV at each site.
23
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.5 2007-2009 ozone bootstrap results
24
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
125-
Q.
Sioo
Q.
OT
o
o
.Q
50-
75
Daily DV (ppb)
100
o-
25-
75
Daily DV (ppb)
100
bootstrap metric
Figure 14: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2009 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
1 4% -
'co
t
o 3% -
3
0
> 2% -
-I—•
co
2009 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.594%
50
75
100
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2009 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.164
median 1.167
co
t
0
o
I2'
0
o
V)
.a
CO
50
75
100
CO
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 15: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2009 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2009 ozone DV at each site.
26
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.6 2006-2008 ozone bootstrap results
27
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
xO25-
Q.
Q.
IT'100-
75-
8 50-
£1
25-
o-
25-
j£
0)
CD
15-
10-
TD
> 5-
Q
o-
75
Daily DV (ppb)
100
50
75
Daily DV (ppb)
iUU
^ ^ ^ ^
bootstrap metric
Figure 16: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2008 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
28
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2008 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
0
0
•J; 2% -
03
4-
'ro
t
0
o
o
V)
ro
1 -
'
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
mean 1.638%
median
*
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
50
75
100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2008 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.247
meyian 1.167
75
100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 17: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2008 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2008 ozone DV at each site.
29
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.7 2005-2007 ozone bootstrap results
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
"0.120-
o.
§
Q.
CO
-t— •
0)
8
-Q
90-
75
Daily DV (ppb)
100
125
o-
50
75
Daily DV (ppb)
125
bootstrap metric
Figure f 8: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2007 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
31
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
0
£3%-
3
0
£ 2% -
_ro
0
2007 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.627%
median 1.515%
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
75 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2007 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
125
c
'co
0
o
0 2-
-I—•
"o
.0 1 -
CD
0-
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
mean 1.270
••• t
50
75
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
long
100
125
Figure 19: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2007 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2007 ozone DV at each site.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.8 2004-2006 ozone bootstrap results
33
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
§
0. 90-
2
8 60-
-Q
40
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
120
25-
££ 20-
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
120
25-
^-20-
5-
Q
o-
iJ=4=
J..U4"
& .^ *& <^ &
bootstrap metric
Figure 20: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2006 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
34
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2006 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
5%- mean 1.656%
1 4% -
'ro
t
o 3% -
§
0
> 2% -
median 1.546%
40
4-
'ro 3-
0)
o
I"
O
(/>
^1
03
40
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2006 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.272
median 1.'
••
60
80
100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
-120
-100
-80
120
long
Figure 21: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2006 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2006 ozone DV at each site.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.9 2003-2005 ozone bootstrap results
36
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
_Q
0.120-
Q.
2
8
-Q
75
100
125
Daily DV (ppb)
25-
^20-
0
815-
2>
J§10-
T3
s«-
o-
25-
75 100
Daily DV (ppb)
125
bootstrap metric
Figure 22: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2005 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
37
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2005 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.850%
median 1^45%
4% -
03
t
0
3% -
0
.> 2%
-I— •
os
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
50
4-
&
Is-
0
o
02-
-I—•
"o
w
mean 1.444
75 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
2005 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
jriedian *333
125
& ~C» "•
75 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
125
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 23: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2005 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2005 ozone DV at each site.
38
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.10 2002-2004 ozone bootstrap results
39
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
"0.120-
o.
8
-Q
CD
O
CD
25-
%20-
15-
10-
5-
o-
60
80 100
Daily DV (ppb)
120
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
120
bootstrap metric
Figure 24: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2004 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
40
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2004 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.865% median 1.75^%
1 4% -
03
t
0
o 3% -
3
0
> 2% -
-I—•
os
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
40
60 80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
120
4-
&
Is-
0
o
02-
-I—•
"o
w
mean 1.500
2004 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
median 1.3i3___ •
40
80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
120
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 25: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2004 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2004 ozone DV at each site.
41
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.11 2001-2003 ozone bootstrap results
42
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
-§.120-
Q.
§
Q.
90-
8 6°-
£i
60
80 100
Daily DV (ppb)
120
0)
O
0)
25-
%20-
15-
_ 10-
5 ~
o-
25-
CP~
^20-
5-
Q
o-
60
80 100
Daily DV (ppb)
120
iiU^
B
bootstrap metric
Figure 26: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2003 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
43
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2003 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.876% media* 1.789%
1 4% -
'ro
t
o 3% -
3
0
> 2% -
•i •
•
40
• •
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
120
ro
0 3-
o
3 2-
_3
O
w
mean 1.562
2003 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
. .* :
median 1.50C
40
80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDAS, rel uncert (%)
120
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 27: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2003 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2003 ozone DV at each site.
44
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2.12 2000-2002 ozone bootstrap results
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
"0.120
Q.
§
Q.
co
90-
8
-Q
CD
O
CD
25-
%20-
15-
10-
5-
o-
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
120
60
80
Daily DV (ppb)
100
120
bootstrap metric
Figure 28: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2002 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
46
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2002 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.792% median 1.698%
1 4% -
'ro
t
o 3% -
3
0
> 2% -
LONG
-80
-100
-120
-140
40
60 80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
120
4-
'ro
t
0
o
"o
mean 1.486
2002 bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
median 1-33^
ro
1 -
'
40
80 100
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
120
03
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
fti
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 29: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for the 2002 ozone DVs. The top panel shows the relative
difference between the CI and the actual DV, the middle panel shows the absolute difference between the
values for the DVs at each site and the CI, and the bottom panel shows the spatial distribution of the relative
difference between the 50% CIs for the 2002 ozone DV at each site.
47
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3 Air quality variability results for years 2002-2013 for PA/h.s
Bootstrap results for PM2.5 data from the years 2000-2013. Each section containts a single DV period, e.g..
the results for 2013 include data from 2011-2013.
3.1 2011-2013 PM2.5 bootstrap results
48
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
|100-
1 75-
50-
§
Q.
1 25
o
£
Annual bootstrap results
i
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
i
IS
20
i
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-*- max/min
+- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-*- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
i
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
i
15
Cl limits
-*- median
-*- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
^ 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
Daily DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-*- median
-*- max/min
^- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-^- 95% Cl
Figure 30: Bootstrap results for the 2013 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
49
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
I
£r
CD
E
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
1
0
£
in
CN
i
c
—
gs
LO
1
CD
£
s
1
c
=!
;:
s
1
c
:f:
in
i
3
n
gS
in
i
c
gs
LO
1
CD
Q.
n
.;:
LD
•~.
1
X
Eo
£
i
c
CD
£
i
c
—
CD
E
i
c
£
—
CO
bootstrap metric
Figure 31: Bootstrap results for the 2013 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
50
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
6% - K
mean 1.775 %
median 1.700 °A
1%-
/-.-.
10 15
annual NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
so%- mean 4.268 %
g 20% -
CD
O
CD
median 3.650 %
1 •*•• /
""""^i-'i '
••..,!!•&«• 7 * »
0% -
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 0.158 e- mean 0.905
0.5- . .
'media* 0,155 .median °-750
0.4- . •
£
CD n o
O U.o -
.D
CD
0.2-
0.1 -
•. -v\. •
»:&r- .** i
10 15
annual NAAQS
^4-
1
CD
O
CD o _
0-
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 32: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
51
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
i
-80
long
Figure 33: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2013 PM2.5 DVs.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.2 2010-2012 PM2.5 bootstrap results
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
15-
10-
5-
_JOO-
f)
§> 75-
Q
Q.
CO
o
o
.0
50-
25-
o-
200-
8 12
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
16
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
60
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 34: Bootstrap results for the 2012 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
54
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
5-
o-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
.u-U
a.
Q.
If)
•-. I
O
LO
a.
Q.
LO
05
CD
E
c
CO
CD
c
CD
ID
0)
E
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
X
CO
E
c
CO
c
CO
=5
a)
bootstrap metric
E -a
Figure 35: Bootstrap results for the 2012 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.801
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
so%- mean 4.133%
median 1.73C
c
'ro
CD
o
i 3%
CD
8 12
annual NAAQS
16
median 3.600 %
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
0.5-
0.4-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 0.161
•
•
median 0.16
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
6- mean 0.900
median 0.750
£.4-
80.3-
to
.a
CO
0.2-
0.1 -
>•!:••>
._•/ %» . •
• • • • •a^kAMM .
8 12
annual NAAQS
16
CD
O
CO
.a
cc
2-
0-
20
40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 36: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
56
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 37: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2012 PM2.5 DVs.
57
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.3 2009-2011 PM2.5 bootstrap results
58
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
20-
15-
5-
120-
> 90-
60-
% 30~
o
o-
40-
300-
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
15
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
30 40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
15
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-»- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
10
30 40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
50
60
Figure 38: Bootstrap results for the 2011 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
59
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
5-
o-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
B
a.
Q.
2L |
0. E
c
CO
CD
c
CD
ID
0)
E
O o
P; 05 &
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
x
CO
E
c
ca
c
CD
=5
0)
bootstrap metric
E T3
Figure 39: Bootstrap results for the 2011 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
• mean 1.856 %
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
so%- mean 4.190%
median 1.780 %
c
'ro
CD
o
=> 3%
CD
0.5-
5 10 15
annual NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 0.175
•
". **
median 0.170
"c 20% -
cc
CD
o
c
=!
CD
JS
^ 10%-
median 3.700
10 20 30 40
24-hr NAAQS
50 60
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
6- mean 0.946
median 0.800
0.1 -
5 10 15
annual NAAQS
CD
O
CO
J2
CC
2-
0-
10 20 30 40 50
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 40: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
61
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
long
Figure 41: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2011 PM2.5 DVs.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.4 2008-2010 PM2.5 bootstrap results
63
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
.25-
,20-
Q 15-
Q.
£ 10-
CO
_J20-
??
|> 90-
>
Q 60-
Q.
CO
30-
400-
•300-
Annual bootstrap results
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
20
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
20
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
^- 75% Cl
-^- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 42: Bootstrap results for the 2010 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
64
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
o-
a.
Q.
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
a.
CD
E
c
CO
CD
O
LO
LO
h-
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
20-
2
o 15_
c
^^H
1
1
^^H
•
1
^^m
1
1
o-
I I
S 8
r- en
bootstrap metric
c
CD
ID
0)
E
ii
CO TO CO
E « =5
E a)
Figure 43: Bootstrap results for the 2010 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
7.5% -
40% -
'ro
CD
5.0% -
_co
CD
2.5% -
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
.£ 30% -
cc
CD
o
c
=!
.> 20% -
10%-
mean 4.459 %
median 3.800 %
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
0.6-
mean 0.185
6-
mean 1.019
ro 0.4-
CD
o
co
.a
ro
0.2-
median 0.175
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
CD
O
CO
J2
CC
2-
0-
median 0.850
'»' .V* '
• • «*->•• ••
• •
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 44: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
66
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 45: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2010 PM2.5 DVs.
67
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.5 2007-2009 PM2.5 bootstrap results
68
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
20-
Q.
(0
a 10
•300-
200-
100-
o-
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
20
20
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-»- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 46: Bootstrap results for the 2009 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
5- I
..J-J-
i i
a.
Q.
CM ft
25-
20-
5-
o-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
i i
O
LO
a.
Q.
LO
05
I I
x
CO
E
c
CO
CD
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
i i
X
CO
E
r- 55
bootstrap metric
c
CD
ID
0)
E
E -a
CO CO
Figure 47: Bootstrap results for the 2009 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
40% -
•1*6%-
'ro
CD
o
c
=!
CD
._> 4% -
JS
CD
2%-
rrlean 1.991 %
median 1.880 %
-*%>:
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
-5* 30% -
'ro
CD
o
c
=!
CD 20% -
10%-
mean 4.582 %
median 4.000 %
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
0.6-
6-
mean 0.206
5 10 15
annual NAAQS
20
CD
O
co
.a
cc
2-
mean 1.123
median 0.950
o-
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 48: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
71
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
long
Figure 49: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2009 PM2.5 DVs.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.6 2006-2008 PM2.5 bootstrap results
73
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
25-
0120-
Q 15-
Q.
Iio-
5-
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
20
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
60
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Figure 50: Bootstrap results for the 2008 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
74
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
5- I
o-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
a.
Q.
a.
Q.
CD
E
c
CO
CD
c
CD
ID
0)
E
E T3
O
LO
LO
h-
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
•
1 : ' i
20- :
^ i
V i
9i 15-
01 .
*> . 1
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
40% -
30% -
-5*6%-
'ro
CD
o
c
=!
.> 4% -
me»n 1.991 %
median 1.885 %
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
'ro
CD
o
20% -
mean 4.471 %
median 3.800 %
CD
jo
CD
10%-
p. ..-2$. • •
'• ••• • •
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
0.6-
mean 0.218
6-
mean 1.152
median 1.000
'•i
0.4-
0.2-
mediai%0«a<5
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
4-
CD
O
CO
.a
cc
2-
o-
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 52: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
76
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 53: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2008 PM2.5 DVs.
77
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.7 2005-2007 PM2.5 bootstrap results
78
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
75-
0-
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
15
20
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
60
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-»- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 54: Bootstrap results for the 2007 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
20-
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
20-
815-
e
£10-
>
Q
5-
•
•
^_^_
<
<
1
<
»
»
1
»
<
<
>
>
•
i
4
1
I
»
»
1
<
1
<
t
1
1
I
1
!
!
!
f
X
CO
E
co
=5
a
C C.
TO CO
g =5
E a)
s
"
bootstrap metric
Figure 55: Bootstrap results for the 2007 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
80
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
10.0%-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
30% - mean 4.499 %
7.5% -
mean 2.007 %
rttedian 1.900%
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
. "mean 0.234
median 4.050 %
40
24-hr NAAQS
60
6-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.262
0.5-
0.4-
.&
c
median 0.230
.•^O.:
.'*•** -
0.1 -
10
15
20
annual NAAQS
CD
O
to
J2
CD
2-
median 1.150
• •
0-
20
40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 56: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
81
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
long
Figure 57: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2007 PM2.5 DVs.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.8 2004-2006 PM2.5 bootstrap results
83
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
100-
§> 75
50-
25
o
600-
g
|
i 200-
0-
10
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
15
20
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
60
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
jj
^ _
20 40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 58: Bootstrap results for the 2006 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
84
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
;g10
5-
o-
25-
20-
03
£
J!= ID-
S'
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
•
„
I I
a.
Q.
a.
Q.
CD
E
c
CO
CD
c
co
ID
0)
E
fJj
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
X
<°
E
c
co
T3
bootstrap metric
E -a
Figure 59: Bootstrap results for the 2006 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
10.0%-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
30% - mean 4.567 %
'ro
CD
o
c
=!
CD
7.5% -
5.0% -
mean 1.982 %
m»djjin 1.900 %
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
0.5-
0.4-
0.3-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
Tnean 0.231
median 0.230
to
.Q
CC
0.2-
0.1 -
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
"c 20% - •
median 4.200 %
10%-
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
6-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.275
median 1.200
• •
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 60: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
86
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 61: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2006 PM2.5 DVs.
87
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.9 2003-2005 PM2.5 bootstrap results
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
25-
!10°-
I1 75-
50-
25-
o
.0
400-
•300-
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
20
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
60
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
20
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Figure 62: Bootstrap results for the 2005 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
89
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
x s
5-
o-
25-
20-
815-
|10-
Q
0-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
a.
Q.
I I
O
LO
a.
Q.
P; 05 35
bootstrap metric
CD
E
c
CO
CD
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
! !
I I
I I
X
(D
E
C
(0
S
LO
h-
P- * OJ
bootstrap metric
c
CD
ID
0)
E
c
CD
T3
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.980 %
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
30% - mean 4.674 %
median 1.910 %
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 0.234
0.5-
0.4-
80.3-
to
.a
CO
0.2-
w^
median 0.230
„'• •
0.1 -
•dfW*'
3$%r-
10 15
annual NAAQS
20
median 4.400 %
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
6-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.335
median 1.250
CD
O
CO
.a
cc
2-
o-
20
40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 64: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
91
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
long
Figure 65: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2005 PM2.5 DVs.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.10 2002-2004 PM2.5 bootstrap results
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
§"20-
§
Q.
£ 10-
tn IU
o-
300-
10 15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
20
25
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
60
10
15
Annual DV (ug/m3)
20
25
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 66: Bootstrap results for the 2004 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
94
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
g
8*15-
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.956 %
30% -
mean 4.932 %
10 15 20
annual NAAQS
25
0.5-
0.4-
80.3-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 0.228 %
meflitn 0.225
to
.a
CO
0.2-
0.1 -
10 15 20
annual NAAQS
25
'co
CD
«
=!
CD
20% -
median 4.500 %
10%-
20 40
24-hr NAAQS
60
6-
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
9 njean 1.386
median 1.250
(D
O
to
.a
CD
2-
20
40
24-hr NAAQS
60
Figure 68: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
96
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 69: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2004 PM2.5 DVs.
97
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.11 2001-2003 PM2.5 bootstrap results
98
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual bootstrap results
30-
21
10-
50~
20
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
40
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
60
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
20
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
40
Daily DV (ug/m3)
60
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-•- 75% Cl
-•- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 70: Bootstrap results for the 2003 PM2.5 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
20-
x s
;g10
5-
o-
•
uW
t
o-
£. |
Q- o
i i
O
LO
a.
Q.
£ 05 g
bootstrap metric
CD
E
c
CO
CD
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
25-
20-
8 15-
£
CD
^
5-
*
t
1
<
<
!
>
i
:
<
<
j
i
i
1
>
»
|
1
i
I
<
4
I
»
»
!
<
i
:
>
>
i
i
i
i
^^m
^^m
^^K
*
^^m
I I
I I
X
CO
E
C
co
SO ^ &> LO J)
(O h- |^ 05 oj
bootstrap metric
c
CD
ID
0)
E
E -a
ra
=5
a)
T3
<«
Figure 71: Bootstrap results for the 2003 PM2.5 DVs, showing distribution of the relative differences between
the bootstrap DVs and the actual DV at the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with the mean, median,
maximum, minimum, standard deviations of the relative differences.
100
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.981 %
30% -
mean 4.959 %
median 1.890 %
CD
O
c
=!
CD
4% -
10 20
annual NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
'CD
CD
«
=!
CD
JO
CD
20% -
median 4.500 %
10%-
20 40 60
24-hr NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean
0.5-
CD
to
.a
cc
0.2-
0.1 -
10 20
annual NAAQS
6-
&
c
2
CD
O
§4-
co
.Q
CD
2-
0-
mefcn 1.438
•
median 1.300
20 40 60
24-hr NAAQS
Figure 72: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
101
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 73: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2003 PM2.5 DVs.
102
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
3.12 2000-2002 PM2.5 bootstrap results
103
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
30-
10-
90-
60-
.
ro
2 30-
o
o
.0
o-
o-
Annual bootstrap results
20
30
Annual DV (ug/m3)
24-hr bootstrap results
50
24-hr DV (ug/m3)
75
Difference between DVs and boot results, Annual NAAQS
Annual DV (ug/m3)
Difference between DV and boot results, Daily NAAQS
50
Daily DV (ug/m3)
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-•- 50% Cl
^- 75% Cl
-^- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- mean
-•- median
-•- max/min
-+- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-*- max/min
-^ 50% Cl
-*- 75% Cl
-*- 95% Cl
Cl limits
-•- median
-•- max/min
-^- 50% Cl
-+- 75% Cl
-+- 95% Cl
Figure 74: Bootstrap results for the 2002 PM2.s DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top two panels show the values for the DVs at the various CIs,
while the bottom two panels show the relative difference between the Cl and the actual DV.
104
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
25-
20-
g
8*15-
c
E
i£
it 10-
o-
25-
20-
8 15-
c
0)
5-
o-
a.
0-
Annual NAAQS bootstrap summary
i i
s.
50-
^
E
£ fG 8 g
bootstrap metric
24-hr NAAQS bootstrap summary
i
i i
S 8
12
h-
i i
S ,
05 0)
-o
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
mean 1.993 %
40% -
median* 1.910%
30% -
'ro
CD
o
c
=!
CD
20% -
mean 4.810%
median 4.200 %
10%-
10 20
annual NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
30 25 50 75
24-hr NAAQS
boot 50th percentile uncert, all sites
0.6-
0.4-
CD
o
to
.a
cc
0.2-
•mean 0.243* •
• •
** % *
mafia* O.Z40 . •
10 20
annual NAAQS
7.5-
'•§5.0-
CD
O
CO
.a
cc
2.5-
0.0-
30
mean 1.421
25 50
24-hr NAAQS
75
Figure 76: Bootstrap results from the 50% CIs for PM2.5 DVs. The top two panels show the relative difference
between the CI and the actual DV and the bottom two panels show the absolute difference between the values
for the DVs at each site and the CI.
106
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
Annual NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
24-hr NAAQS, rel uncert (%), all sites
-120
-100
-80
long
10.0%
7.5%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
Figure 77: Spatial distribution of the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV from the 50%
CIs for the 2002 PM2.5 DVs.
107
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
4 Comparison plots of nearby sites
Comparison of PM2.5 data for paired, nearby sites for the spatial analysis conducted in Section 3.1.2.
108
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Honolulu State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150031001 & 150031004
20-
15- •
•
m
CM
Q-
* *•*
••• £•••
,
•
• •
.'* *..
10-
5-
o-
• •• * *» J t • • *.
* * • 2** w • • • •
*«?'. •;•:•«: tftL- :vv :t»\ -i *
^
w
SL5,
t. ••
*M!
•^v>..
SiteJD
150031001
• 150031004
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
20-
15-
s
fl
5-
delta 1.699km
m = 0.84; r2 = 0.614
0-
i
D
i i
5 10
150031001
i
i:
20
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 78: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150031001 and 150031001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn*t?ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Clark State 1: Indiana
Sites: 180190006 & 211110067
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
: . V Sit
'*:*** *'* :: v 'i i.. s: : :
* > Ji-v r**: :«& • y i rtu..*
^•^t^i.-iatetl iit3Ks9
•.
•
*
ii «
w
•
•<•
• •
•
; :
*
Site_ID
• 180190006
• 211110067
»'
«'•'
»•*?•«
0-
I
I
I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 9.256 km
40-
30-
N-
CD
8
10-
o-
m = 0.83; r2 = 0.818
I
0
10
20
180190006
I
30
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 79: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180190006 and 180190006. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn-'cfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Marion State 1: Indiana
Sites: 180970078 & 180970081
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
180970078
• 180970081
i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 8.915 km
40-
30-
CO
8
h-
§
"20-
10-
o-
m = 0.99; r2 = 0.922
i
0
10
I
20
180970078
I
30
i
to
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 80: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180970078 and 180970078. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim-ldata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
40-
County 1: Clinton State 1: Iowa
Sites: 190450019 & 190450021
30-
!20-
10-
•
. <
• • • i.* *
SiteJD
190450019
• 190450021
o-
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13
40-
30-
§20-
m ^u
s
10-
o-
I
0
07/01/13
DATE
01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
delta 6.425 km
m = 0.89; r2 = 0.909
10
i
20
190450019
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
40
Figure 81: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 190450019 and 190450019. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witft-rfetta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: East Baton Rouge State 1: Louisiana
Sites: 220330009 & 221210001
40-
30-
§20
10-
o-
ft
SiteJD
220330009
• 221210001
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
30-
§20-
CN
10-
delta5.419km
m = 0.76; r2 = 0.637
o-
i
0
i
10
20
220330009
i
JO
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
40
Figure 82: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 220330009 and 220330009. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn-'ffata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Washington State 1: Minnesota
Sites: 271630447 & 271630448
30-
SiteJD
271630447
• 271630448
10-
o-
I I 1 I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
30-
S
20-
10-
delta 1.04 km
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.857
o-
I I
10 20
271630447
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 83: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 271630447 and 271630447. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn-'aata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
100-
County 1: Washoe State 1: Nevada
Sites: 320310016 & 320311005
75-
•
•
•
50-
25-
o-
i
SiteJD
320310016
• 320311005
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.522 km
100-
75-
50-
25-
o-
i
0
m = 0.95; r2 = 0.779
i
25
50
320310016
i
75
100
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 84: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 320310016 and 320310016. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Bernalillo State 1: New Mexico
Sites: 350010023 & 350010024
80-
60-
•
SiteJD
| » 350010023
• 350010024
20-
o-
i i i i i ^^^ i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 7.947 km
80-
60-
§
§40-
20-
o-
m = 0.43; r2 = 0.209
20
i
40
350010023
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
80
Figure 85: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 350010023 and 350010023. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnWata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Northampton State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420950025 & 420950027
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
420950025
420950027
•• •
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.702 km
m = 0.88; r2 = 0.835
40-
(s.
CM
g
20-
o-
•« . •
• * ••
i
0
20
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
420950025
Figure 86: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420950025 and 420950025. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn-yata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Philadelphia State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421010047 & 421010057
40-
30-
20-
• t * i*
t ** • • • /
• • i* **^ «t* !».••*» • • «••
l¥iLl',^M ^
10-
&&>.
SiteJD
421010047
421010057
*y
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 2.605 km
40-
30-
8
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.769
10
20 30
421010047
i
4
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 87: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010047 and 421010047. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Philadelphia State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421010055 & 421010047
40-
30-
10
0-
* t
•
| 5,
:*!!•*
• •
20-
10-
0-
to *«
SiteJD
421010047
421010055
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 3.052 km
40-
30-
N-
•«*
§
5
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.8; r2 = 0.737
i
0
10
I I
20 30
421010055
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 88: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010055 and 421010055. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim-wata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Providence State 1: Rhode Island
Sites: 440070022 & 440071010
40-
30-
10-
o-
I
SiteJD
440070022
440071010
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.871 km
40-
30-
o
o
|20-
10-
o-
m = 1; r2 = 0.894
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
i
( I
20
440070022
30
40
Figure 89: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 440070022 and 440070022. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Salt Lake State 1: Utah
Sites: 490353006 & 490353010
60-
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
490353006
• 490353010
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 7.274 km
60-
m = 0.92; r2 = 0.888
40-
20-
o-
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
i
20
i
40
60
490353006
Figure 90: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 490353006 and 490353006. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: New Castle State 1: Delaware
Sites: 100032004 & 420450002
40-
30-
10-
o-
SiteJD
100032004
420450002
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 19.141 km
40-
30-
CM
o
8
ID
S20-
CM
10-
o-
m = 0.93; r2 = 0.687
'W
l» •/ «
* •
i
0
10
I
20
100032004
i
30
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 91: Comparison of PM2.s data for sites 100032004 and 100032004. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: District of Columbia State 1: District Of Columbia
Sites: 110010043 & 510590030
40-
30-
820-
0-
10-
o-
SiteJD
110010043
• 510590030
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
30-
o
§20-
10-
delta 18.335km
m = 0.83; r2 = 0.878
o-
i
0
I
10
20
110010043
I
3C
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 92: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 110010043 and 110010043. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Cobb State 1: Georgia
Sites: 130670003 & 130890002
30- •
20-
10
0-
10-
• t * * * •
SiteJD
130670003
• 130890002
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 46.772 km
30-
m = 0.89; r2 = 0.817
20-
CM
O
8
10-
o-
I
0
I
1C
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
130670003
Figure 93: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 130670003 and 130670003. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Hawaii State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150011006 & 150012023
30- •
20-
10
D.
10-
SiteJD
150011006
• 150012023
o- •
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 18.068km
30-
m = 0.55; r2 = 0.314
20-
§
10-
o-
I
10
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
150011006
Figure 94: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150011006 and 150011006. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Hawaii State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150011012 & 150012020
30-
20-
10
D.
10-
o-
SiteJD
150011012
• 150012020
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
30-
,20-
§
10-
o-
delta 45.916 km
m = 0.7; r2 = 0.258
I
IQ
20
30
150011012
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 95: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150011012 and 150011012. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn49)ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
100-
75-
County 1: Hawaii State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150012016 & 150012020
50-
SiteJD
150012016
• 150012020
25-
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
100-
75-
50-
§
25-
0-
delta 32.771 km
m = 0.28; r2 = 0.0749
50
150012016
i
75
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
100
Figure 96: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150012016 and 150012014. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Honolulu State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150031001 & 150031004
20-
15- •
•
,
I
.'l
10-
*•* i* *•* *** * • *• *• •
SiteJD
150031001
150031004
5-
o-
•i w
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 1.699km
20-
m = 0.84; r2 = 0.614
15-
8
5-
0-
i
D
i i
5 10
150031001
i
i:
20
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 97: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150031001 and 150031001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Honolulu State 1: Hawaii
Sites: 150032004 & 150031004
20-
15-
10-
5-
o-
SiteJD
150031004
• 150032004
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 14.223 km
20-
15-
10-
3
5-
o-
m = 0.59; r2 = 0.453
i
0
i i
5 10
150032004
i
15
20
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 98: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 150032004 and 150032004. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4?ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Clark State 1: Indiana
Sites: 180190006 & 211110067
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
: . V Sit
'*:*** *'* :: v 'i i.. s: : :
* > Ji-v r**: :«& • y i rtu..*
^•^t^i.-iatetl iit3Ks9
•.
•
*
ii «
w
•
•<•
• •
•
; :
*
Site_ID
• 180190006
• 211110067
»'
«'•'
»•*?•«
0-
I
I
I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 9.256 km
40-
30-
N-
CD
8
10-
o-
m = 0.83; r2 = 0.818
I
0
10
20
180190006
I
30
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 99: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180190006 and 180190006. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^Sata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Marion State 1: Indiana
Sites: 180970078 & 180970081
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
180970078
• 180970081
i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 8.915 km
40-
30-
CO
8
h-
§
"20-
10-
o-
m = 0.99; r2 = 0.922
i
0
10
I
20
180970078
I
30
i
to
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 100: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 180970078 and 180970078. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
40-
County 1: Clinton State 1: Iowa
Sites: 190450019 & 190450021
30-
!20-
10-
•
. <
• • • i.* *
SiteJD
190450019
• 190450021
o-
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13
40-
30-
§20-
m ^u
s
10-
o-
I
0
07/01/13
DATE
01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
delta 6.425 km
m = 0.89; r2 = 0.909
10
i
20
190450019
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
40
Figure 101: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 190450019 and 190450019. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim4feta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Johnson State 1: Iowa
Sites: 191032001 & 191130040
40-
30-
20-
10-
o-
•
•
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
SiteJD
191032001
• 191130040
delta 38.713 km
40-
30-
o
§20-
10-
o-
i
0
m = 0.97; r2 = 0.898
i
IQ
i
20
191032001
i
30
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 102: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 191032001 and 191032001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Muscatine State 1: Iowa
Sites: 191390015 & 191630015
60- •
40-
10
D.
20-
•
•
•
•
: • .
• ? •
•• «
A
•
».
i» ^»
kC: ^ •,
•
• . •
•
• * *
»i
. ^:K: • 1
t • . • *.£ • • «. ^ *
Site_ID
« 191390015
• 191630015
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
60-
40-
10
§
20-
o-
delta 42.566 km
m = 0.59; r2 = 0.577
i
0
i i
20 40
191390015
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 103: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 191390015 and 191390015. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^lata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Jefferson State 1: Kentucky
Sites: 211110051 & 180190006
40-
30-
•• :?•'#%
, • ««:*
SiteJD
180190006
• 211110051
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
30-
g
05
10-
o-
delta 27.806 km
•
m = 0.84; r2 = 0.707
i
0
10
20
211110051
I
30
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 104: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 211110051 and 211110051. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: East Baton Rouge State 1: Louisiana
Sites: 220330009 & 221210001
40-
30-
§20
10-
o-
ft
SiteJD
220330009
• 221210001
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
30-
§20-
CN
10-
delta5.419km
m = 0.76; r2 = 0.637
o-
i
0
i
10
20
220330009
i
JO
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
40
Figure 105: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 220330009 and 220330009. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wittraata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Cecil State 1: Maryland
Sites: 240150003 & 420290100
40-
SiteJD
240150003
420290100
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 16.762 km
40-
30-
20-
10-
o-
m = 0.95; r2 = 0.786
i
10
i
20
240150003
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
30
40
Figure 106: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240150003 and 240150003. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Harford State 1: Maryland
Sites: 240251001 & 245100040
30-
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
240251001
245100040
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
30-
g
!20-
10-
o-
i
0
delta 29.292 km
m = 0.89; r2 = 0.794
10
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
240251001
Figure 107: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240251001 and 240251001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn4fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Kent State 1: Maryland
Sites: 240290002 & 240150003
40-
30-
§20-
10-
.
'
; ; «.
' •:. •: •;*
• - * » • * ~ *^ » • •
t.'£ :*•&• * ^:* :i' ^. V ;;
SiteJD
240150003
240290002
•
t •
o-
I ! I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 44.457 km
40-
30-
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.92; r2 = 0.727
i
0
I
10
20
240290002
30
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 108: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240290002 and 240290002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim4?ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Montgomery State 1: Maryland
Sites: 240313001 & 240330030
30-
it
-v
20-
10
0-
~ •. • /»• •
SiteJD
240313001
• 240330030
10-
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 20.812 km
30-
m = 0.87; r2 = 0.764
,20-
8
10-
o-
'••Al-CtW
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
240313001
Figure 109: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240313001 and 240313001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnTiata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Prince George's State 1: Maryland
Sites: 240330030 & 110010043
30-
.' .
• • •
*.•
• •
•
20-
10
0-
10-
SiteJD
110010043
• 240330030
• •
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
30-
,20-
§
10-
o-
delta 18.887km
m = 0.88; r2 = 0.759
I
0
20
30
240330030
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 110: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 240330030 and 240330030. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Wayne State 1: Michigan
Sites: 261630001 & 261630039
30-
820-
a.
10-
; : -t f
*;V &• >'i^* J.'2
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 15.608km
SiteJD
261630001
• 261630039
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.828
30-
820-
S
10-
o-
i
0
i
10
20
261630001
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 111: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 261630001 and 261630001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'Wata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Anoka State 1: Minnesota
Sites: 270031002 & 270530963
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
270031002
• 270530963
• •
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 20.867 km
30-
m = 0.97; r2 = 0.827
,20-
10-
o-
i
0
i
I,
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
270031002
Figure 112: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 270031002 and 270031002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'Wata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Hennepin State 1: Minnesota
Sites: 270530963 & 271230871
• •
30-
0-
SiteJD
270530963
• 271230871
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 17.526 km
30-
m = 0.85; r2 = 0.806
^20-
10-
o-
I
0
I
I,
I
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
270530963
Figure 113: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 270530963 and 270530963. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnTiata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Washington State 1: Minnesota
Sites: 271630447 & 271630448
30-
SiteJD
271630447
• 271630448
10-
o-
I I 1 I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
30-
S
20-
10-
delta 1.04 km
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.857
o-
I I
10 20
271630447
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 114: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 271630447 and 271630447. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Cass State 1: Missouri
Sites: 290370003 & 290950034
30-
20-
10
D.
10-
o-
SiteJD
290370003
• 290950034
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 38.413 km
m = 0.6; r2 = 0.463
30-
20-
g
10-
o-
i
0
i
10
I
20
i
'
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
290370003
Figure 115: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 290370003 and 290370003. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'Wata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Clay State 1: Missouri
Sites: 290470005 & 290950034
30-
«,20-
D.
10-
o-
SiteJD
290470005
• 290950034
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 27.712 km
30-
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.88; r2 = 0.758
I
0
i
10
20
290470005
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 116: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 290470005 and 290470005. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Jefferson State 1: Missouri
Sites: 290990019 & 295100007
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
290990019
• 295100007
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
g
o
20-
delta 15.725 km
m = 0.93: r2 = 0.819
0-
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
i
20
290990019
i
40
Figure 117: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 290990019 and 290990019. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'Wata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Saint Louis State 1: Missouri
Sites: 291893001 & 295100085
40-
20- •,
o-
SiteJD
291893001
• 295100085
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
g
o
'20-
delta13.216km
m = 0.89: r2 = 0.784
o-
i
0
20
291893001
I
-:
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 118: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 291893001 and 291893001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: St. Louis City State 1: Missouri
Sites: 295100007 & 295100085
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
295100007
• 295100085
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 13.89km
m = 0.96: r2 = 0.842
40-
g
o
'20-
0-
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
D
i
20
40
295100007
Figure 119: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 295100007 and 295100007. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnM$ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Lewis and Clark State 1: Montana
Sites: 300490004 & 300490026
40-
10
D.
20-
o-
SiteJD
300490004
• 300490026
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 21.435 km
60-
m= 1.1; r2 = 0.45
40-
CD
CM
I
I
20-
0-
i
20
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
300490004
Figure 120: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 300490004 and 300490004. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnHiata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
100-
County 1: Missoula State 1: Montana
Sites: 300630024 & 300630037
*
75-
50-
25-
o-
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13
07/01/13
DATE
i i
01/01/14 07/01/14
SiteJD
300630024
• 300630037
01/01/15
delta 24.47 km
100-
75-
g
CO
g 50-
i
25-
0-
m = 0.8; r2 = 0.837
i
25
i
50
300630024
i
75
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
100
Figure 121: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 300630024 and 300630024. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimHfeta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Douglas State 1: Nebraska
Sites: 310550019 & 311530007
40-
30-
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
310550019
• 311530007
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 12.791 km
40-
30-
8
8
'20-
10-
o-
i
0
m = 0.99; r2 = 0.829
10
20 30
310550019
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 122: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 310550019 and 310550019. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnHfeta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
100-
County 1: Washoe State 1: Nevada
Sites: 320310016 & 320311005
75-
•
•
•
50-
25-
o-
i
SiteJD
320310016
• 320311005
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.522 km
100-
75-
50-
25-
o-
i
0
m = 0.95; r2 = 0.779
i
25
50
320310016
i
75
100
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 123: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 320310016 and 320310016. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimMJrata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Cheshire State 1: New Hampshire
Sites: 330050007 & 330115001
40-
30-
S20-
Q.
10-
o- %
SiteJD
330050007
• 330115001
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 33.029 km
40-
m = 0.26; r2 = 0.286
30-
120-
o
10-
o-
• •
I
10
I
20
330050007
I
3C
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
40
Figure 124: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 330050007 and 330050007. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
20-
10-
County 1: Rockingham State 1: New Hampshire
Sites: 330150018 & 330115001
• •
• •
••- *
• • ****c *
SiteJD
330115001
• 330150018
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 40.652 km
m = 0.55; r2 = 0.502
20-
10-
o-
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
!*•• * *^ « «
f»Y* •• * •
I
10
I
20
330150018
Figure 125: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 330150018 and 330150018. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnHfPata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Hudson State 1: New Jersey
Sites: 340171003 & 340390004
•
50-
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
• 340171003
• 340390004
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
40-
delta16.157km
30-
20-
m = 1;r2 = 0.82
*s
' :&*
•S ••
¥
\*
•
• *
seas
•
•
«
•
DJF
JJA
MAM
SON
10-
o-
I
10
20
340171003
i
JO
40
Figure 126: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 340171003 and 340171003. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnHiata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Mercer State 1: New Jersey
Sites: 340210008 & 420170012
40-
30-
20-
10-
• •
-- %( ^• • •
SiteJD
340210008
420170012
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 16.34km
40-
30-
(M
§
!20-
10-
o-
m= 1; r2 = 0.714
10
20 30
340210008
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 127: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 340210008 and 340210008. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnHfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Bernalillo State 1: New Mexico
Sites: 350010023 & 350010024
80-
60-
20-
o-
SiteJD
350010023
• 350010024
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 7.947 km
80-
60-
§
§40-
20-
o-
m = 0.43; r2 = 0.209
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
20
i
40
350010023
60
80
Figure 128: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 350010023 and 350010023. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimHfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Queens State 1: New York
Sites: 360810124 & 340171003
30-
•
20-
10
a.
•• •
10-
.. .
.., t, .. t , •
o-
Site_ID
340171003
• 360810124
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 19.502km
30-
m = 0.98; r2 = 0.757
20-
•• >/
\ xX
• '/
'X
• • • ^
• •,'/
• -^X •
•• *v^
•:J^
•*>^*
^r:
* * •
•
•
•
seas
•
•
«
•
DJF
JJA
MAM
SON
10-
o-
i
0
i i
10 20
360810124
i
3C
Figure 129: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 360810124 and 360810124. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnM$ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Mercer State 1: North Dakota
Sites: 380570004 & 380650002
40-
30-
10
0-
10-
0-
SiteJD
380570004
• 380650002
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 28.522 km
40-
30-
CM
O
8
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.68; r2 = 0.405
i
C
i
1D
i
20
380570004
30
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 130: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 380570004 and 380570004. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnniata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Adams State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420010001 & 420410101
50-
40-
30-
•
•
10
0-
20-
10-
o-
•• » * *• M
lv» vS :t^
SiteJD
420010001
420410101
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 37.824 km
50-
40-
30-
S
CN
20-
10-
o-
i
0
m = 0.9; r2 = 0.613
i
I0
I I
20 30
420010001
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
! ]
Figure 131: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420010001 and 420010001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnnfeta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Allegheny State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420030008 & 420030064
60-
40-
•
i
10
0-
• «
20-
o-
SiteJD
420030008
420030064
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
80-
delta 17.618 km
60-
8
§40-
20-
o-
i
0
m = 1.3; r2 = 0.538
• * •
• '• '•'.*
*•?%•; 3V A
20
40
420030008
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 132: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420030008 and 420030008. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnnfeta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Beaver State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420070014 & 421255001
30-
20-
10
0-
10-
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
SiteJD
420070014
421255001
delta34.812km
30-
^20
O
g
10-
o-
m = 0.55; r2 = 0.495
XL* **** • -
-f**T*\ * »**
•"••^afi***t*-''* *
V*i ••**-'••
£x*C..
* k • • * •
f/;v« •
I
10
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
420070014
Figure 133: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420070014 and 420070014. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimMiata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Berks State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420110011 & 420750100
50- •
40-
30-
10
0-
20-
10-
o-
- V-* *>*»
SiteJD
• 420110011
• 420750100
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 35.559 km
40-
o
1
CN
20-
o-
m= 1;r2 = 0.725
i
0
10
20 30
420110011
I
40
i
50
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 134: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420110011 and 420110011. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witRHJata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Cumberland State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420410101 & 420430401
50-
40-
30-
10
0-
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
420410101
420430401
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 28.868 km
50-
40-
30-
S
20-
10-
o-
m = 0.93; r2 = 0.773
i
0
i
10
20 30
420410101
i
40
50
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 135: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420410101 and 420410101. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimnrata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Delaware State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420450002 & 421010055
40-
30-
20-
10-
o-
ttlk &&£&£
T"7*5 f£ • * «
• • ,. f *
SiteJD
420450002
421010055
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 18.595km
40-
30-
m = 0.72; r2 = 0.544
i
0
i
10
I
20
420450002
30
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 136: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420450002 and 420450002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn*yata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Lancaster State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420710007 & 420750100
50-
40-
s •«
• *
30-
10
0-
20-
10-
o-
vfc
t . •
• *• . * •
•• **^t* . ** • \
+
SiteJD
420710007
420750100
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 33.457 km
50-
40-
30-
o
1
CN
20-
10-
0-
m = 0.95; r2 = 0.745
I
10
20 30
420710007
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 137: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420710007 and 420710007. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnnfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Montgomery State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420910013 & 421010057
40-
30-
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
420910013
421010057
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 22.121 km
40-
30-
8
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.93; r2 = 0.725
I
0
I
IQ
20 30
420910013
i
4
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 138: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420910013 and 420910013. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wimnfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Northampton State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 420950025 & 420950027
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
420950025
420950027
•• •
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.702 km
m = 0.88; r2 = 0.835
40-
(s.
CM
g
20-
o-
•« . •
• * ••
i
0
20
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
420950025
Figure 139: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 420950025 and 420950025. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'cfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Philadelphia State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421010047 & 421010057
40-
30-
20-
• t * i*
t ** • • • /
• • i* **^ «t* !».••*» • • «••
l¥iLl',^M ^
10-
&&>.
SiteJD
421010047
421010057
*y
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 2.605 km
40-
30-
8
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.769
10
20 30
421010047
i
4
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 140: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010047 and 421010047. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'data points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Philadelphia State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421010055 & 421010047
40-
30-
10
0-
* t
•
| 5,
:*!!•*
• •
20-
10-
0-
to *«
SiteJD
421010047
421010055
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 3.052 km
40-
30-
N-
•«*
§
5
§20-
10-
o-
m = 0.8; r2 = 0.737
i
0
10
I I
20 30
421010055
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 141: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421010055 and 421010055. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witR'efata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Washington State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421250005 & 420030064
60-
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
420030064
421250005
8
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 19.927km
•
60-
m = 0.94; r2 = 0.381
40-
20-
o-
I
0
20
40
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
421250005
Figure 142: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421250005 and 421250005. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'cPata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Washington State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421250200 & 421250005
30-
20-
10
0-
10-
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
SiteJD
421250005
421250200
30-
20-
§
fl
10-
o-
delta 30.672 km
m = 0.9; r2 = 0^78
• •
... A .•'
% V V •*••• /
•
i
0
I I
10 20
421250200
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 143: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421250200 and 421250200. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'aata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1 : Washington State 1 : Pennsylvania
Sites: 421 255001 & 421250200
30-
20-
10
0-
'•* •••:- • .:. : i ' ; ••>
10-
0 i
01/01/12
07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13
DATE
i i i
01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
delta 33.443 km
30-
m = 0.82; r2 = 0.538
20-
o
o
8
10-
o-
I
0
i i
10 20
421255001
SiteJD
421250200
421255001
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 144: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421255001 and 421255001. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'd'ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Westmoreland State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421290008 & 420030064
60-
40-
10
D.
20-
o-
SiteJD
420030064
421290008
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
60-
40-
20-
o-
delta 30.834 km
m = 0.9; r2 = 0.329
•*.
• »•
-VSi:
20
40
421290008
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 145: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421290008 and 421290008. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'cPata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
50-
County 1: York State 1: Pennsylvania
Sites: 421330008 & 420430401
40-
30-
10
D.
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
420430401
421330008
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 33.782 km
50-
40-
^30-
O
s
§
20-
10-
o-
m = 0.96; r2 = 0.704
i
0
20 30
421330008
i
40
50
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 146: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 421330008 and 421330008. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'data points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Kent State 1: Rhode Island
Sites: 440030002 & 440070022
40-
30-
'20-
10-
0-
SiteJD
440030002
440070022
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 33.186 km
40-
30-
g
§20-
5
10-
o-
m = 0.93; r2 = 0.532
• •
• .•• < ••
• •. V •• V
• ••*•* . -X
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
10
20
440030002
30
40
Figure 147: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 440030002 and 440030002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim'cfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Providence State 1: Rhode Island
Sites: 440070022 & 440071010
40-
30-
10-
o-
I
SiteJD
440070022
440071010
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 5.871 km
40-
30-
o
o
|20-
10-
o-
m = 1; r2 = 0.894
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
i
( I
20
440070022
30
40
Figure 148: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 440070022 and 440070022. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn'aata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Charleston State 1: South Carolina
Sites: 450190048 & 450190049
40-
30-
10
0-
20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
450190048
• 450190049
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 23.295 km
40-
30-
8
05
20-
10-
o-
m = 0.67; r2 = 0.626
i
0
i
10
I I
20 30
450190048
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 149: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 450190048 and 450190048. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn9$ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Greenville State 1: South Carolina
Sites: 450450015 & 450830011
30-
20-
10
0-
10-
SiteJD
450450015
• 450830011
a**«r« tt
«**t • * $
o-
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 46.412 km
30-
m = 0.9; r2 = 0.866
20-
10-
o-
i
0
10
20
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
450450015
Figure 150: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 450450015 and 450450015. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^iata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Lexington State 1: South Carolina
Sites: 450630008 & 450790019
30-
S20-
a.
10-
o-
SiteJD
450630008
• 450790019
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13
07/01/13
DATE
01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
delta 13.767 km
30-
3
20-
10-
o-
i
0
m = 0.86; r2 = 0.851
i
10
i
20
450630008
30
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 151: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 450630008 and 450630008. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^feta points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Harris State 1: Texas
Sites: 482011035 & 482011039
30-
20-
10
D.
10-
•
* •
• I * • * • .
f * * * * * •
• • • ,/• • •
• * **• * • •*,!! «**• * *•• •
•"\*«h«i ' S*-*..:^ '
SiteJD
482011035
482011039
r*
va
x sw
• .<
.'•;•*••
* n :
**»• .
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
10 20
482011035
i
30
Figure 152: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 482011035 and 482011035. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim^Pata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Salt Lake State 1: Utah
Sites: 490353006 & 490353010
60-
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
SiteJD
490353006
• 490353010
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 7.274 km
60-
m = 0.92; r2 = 0.888
40-
20-
o-
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
i
0
i
20
i
40
60
490353006
Figure 153: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 490353006 and 490353006. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn<^rata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Utah State 1: Utah
^^ Sites: 490490002 & 490494001
120-
80-
10
0-
40-
o-
SiteJD
490490002
• 490494001
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 10.672 km
m = 1; r2 = 0.934
100-
50-
o-
40 80
490490002
120
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 154: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 490490002 and 490490002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Weber State 1: Utah
Sites: 490570002 & 490353010
80-
60-
10
0.
20-
o- •
»«
•
SiteJD
490353010
• 490570002
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta47.136km
60-
40-
20-
o-
m = 0.97; r2 = 0.784
i
0
20
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
60
490570002
Figure 155: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 490570002 and 490570002. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), wim^Pata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Pierce State 1: Washington
Sites: 530530029 & 530332004
40-
30-
10
°-20-
10-
o-
SiteJD
530332004
• 530530029
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 27.817 km
40-
30-
!20-
10-
o-
m = 0.73; r2 = 0.81
i
0
i
10
20
530530029
30
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 156: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 530530029 and 530530029. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Snohomish State 1: Washington
Sites: 530610005 & 530330080
30-
-
20-
10
D.
10-
o-
SiteJD
530330080
• 530610005
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta26.519km
30-
20-
10-
o-
m = 0.57; r2 = 0.561
• •
• •
« •
10
20
30
530610005
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 157: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 530610005 and 530610005. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^fata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Snohomish State 1: Washington
Sites: 530610020 & 530611007
60-
40-
10
0-
20-
•h>
*•
•:*•
r
SiteJD
530610020
• 530611007
o-
I I I I I I I
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 47.348 km
60-
m = 0.58; r2 = 0.368
40-
r~-
o
o
20-
o-
•.
20
i
40
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
530610020
Figure 158: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 530610020 and 530610020. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^«ata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Snohomish State 1: Washington
Sites: 530611007 & 530610005
60-
40-
10
0-
20-
o-
I I
01/01/12 07/01/12
SiteJD
530610005
• 530611007
i i i i i
01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
60-
40-
20-
o-
i
0
delta 29.645 km
m = 0.65; r2 = 0.739
20
i
40
60
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
530611007
Figure 159: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 530611007 and 530611007. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witn^cfata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
County 1: Brown State 1: Wisconsin
Sites: 550090005 & 550870009
40- •
30-
'•20-
10-
o-
<
SiteJD
*f* 550090005
• 550870009
i i i i i i i
01/01/12 07/01/12 01/01/13 07/01/13 01/01/14 07/01/14 01/01/15
DATE
delta 38.931 km
40-
30-
CT)
O
g
i20-
10-
o-
m = 0.93; r2 = 0.913
i
0
i
IQ
i
20
550090005
30
i
40
seas
• DJF
• JJA
• MAM
• SON
Figure 160: Comparison of PM2.5 data for sites 550090005 and 550090005. Top panel shows time series for
both sites for years 2012-2014. Bottom panel shows scatter plot of paired data, along with slope for the
linear regression and correlation coefficient (r2), witnniata points are colored by month.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
5 Comparison of air quality variability for ozone sensitivity tests
Results from the ozone sensitivity analysis discussed in Section 2.2.3.
5.1 All available data, no quarterly subsets
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2013_files_no_QT_all_sens_test bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
CO
0
y 4% -
0
JS 2% -
0
mean 1.512%
itledian 1.427%
40
60 80
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
100
2013_files_no_QT_all_sens_test bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
0
o
mean 1.075
median 1.000
2-
O
C/3
JD
TO
0-
60 80
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
100
to
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 161: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2013 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
193
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
5.2 All available data, with quarterly subsets
194
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
2013_files_QT_sens_test bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
mean 1.517% median 1.423%
.E 4%
CO
t
o 3%
12%
-I—*
_co
.E 3-
CD
tr
0
o
2-
0>
-I—•
"o
.Q
CD
1-
0-
CD
50-
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
30
30
50 70
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
90
110
2013_files_QT_sens_test bootstrap 50th percentile uncert
•
mean 1.073 median 1.000
50
70
90
110
4th 8-hr high NAAQS
4th MDA8, rel uncert (%)
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
-120
-100
-80
long
Figure 162: Bootstrap results for the ozone 2013 DVs, showing the 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% CIs, along with
the mean and median bootstrap DVs. The top panel shows the DVs at the various CIs, the middle panel
shows the relative difference between the CI and the actual DV, and the bottom panel shows the distribution
of the relative differences between the CI and the actual DV.
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
-------
Does Not Represent Final Agency Action; Draft for Public Review & Comment, July 29, 2016
United States Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Publication No. EPA-454/D-16-001b
Environmental Protection Air Quality Analysis Division July, 2016
Agency Research Triangle Park, NC
------- |