This
workbook
contains
the
air
quality
data
used
to
estimate
the
urban
excess
for
calculating
weighted
emissions
scores
found
in
the
spreadsheet
"
For
states­
PM25
areas
with
emissions
score
061404.
xls"

Contacts:
Tesh
Rao,
Neil
Frank,
and
Mark
Schmidt;
Air
Quality
Trends
Analysis
Group;
OAQPS;
EPA
Urban
Excess
PM2.5
DESIGNATIONS
­
DATA
USED
IN
CALCULATING
URBAN
EXCESS
PERCENTAGES
BY
PM2.5
COMPONENT
PM2.5
Speciation
Data
from
the
period
4/
02
­
3/
03
State
County
MSA
EPA
Air
Quality
System
(
AQS)

Site
Code
Carbon
Mass
Crustal
Mass
Amm.
Sulfate
Mass
Amm.
Nitrate
Mass
Carbon
%

of
Mass
Crustal
%
of
Mass
Sulfates
%

of
Mass
Nitrates
%

of
Mass
Sum
of
4
Urban
Components
Site
Code
Site
Name
State
Carbon
Mass
Athens,
GA
GEORGIA
CLARKE
Athens,
GA
130590001
5.9
0.8
7.7
1.5
37%
5%
48%
10%
15.9
COHU1
Cohutta
Georgia
3.0
Atlanta,
GA;
Macon,
GA
GEORGIA
DE
KALB
Atlanta,
GA
130890002
6.3
0.5
6.5
1.3
43%
3%
45%
9%
14.6
COHU1
Cohutta
Georgia
3.0
Baltimore,
MD
MARYLAND
BALTIMORE
Baltimore,
MD
240053001
6.5
0.6
7.7
2.3
38%
4%
45%
13%
17.2
AREN1
Arendtsville
Pennsylvania
3.3
Birmingham,
AL
ALABAMA
JEFFERSON
Birmingham,
AL
010732003
6.5
1.5
7.3
1.7
38%
9%
43%
10%
17.0
SIPS1
Sipsey
Wilderness
Alabama
3.7
Canton,
OH;
Youngstown,
OH;

Steubenville,
OH­
WV
OHIO
MAHONING
Youngstown­
Warren,
OH
390990014
5.5
1.0
6.5
3.1
34%
6%
40%
19%
16.1
MKGO1
M.
K.
Goddard
Pennsylvania
3.5
Charleston,
WV;
Parkersburg,
WV­
OH;

Huntington,
WV­
KY­
OH
KENTUCKY
BOYD
Huntington­
Ashland,
WV­
KY­
OH
210190017
5.7
0.5
8.1
1.7
36%
3%
51%
11%
15.9
QUCI1
Quaker
City
Ohio
3.0
Chattanooga,
TN­
GA
TENNESSEE
HAMILTON
Chattanooga,
TN­
GA
470654002
6.3
1.0
7.0
1.5
40%
7%
44%
10%
15.9
COHU1
Cohutta
Georgia
3.0
Chicago,
IL­
IN­
WI;
Elkhart,
IN
ILLINOIS
COOK
Chicago,
IL
170310076
4.9
0.8
6.2
4.0
31%
5%
39%
25%
15.9
BOND1
Bondville
Illinois
2.6
Cincinnati,
OH­
KY­
IN
KENTUCKY
KENTON
Cincinnati,
OH­
KY­
IN
211170007
4.4
0.5
6.9
3.0
30%
3%
47%
20%
14.8
LIVO1
Livonia
Indiana
2.8
Cleveland,
OH
OHIO
CUYAHOGA
Cleveland­
Lorain­
Elyria,
OH
390350060
6.5
1.3
6.9
4.3
34%
7%
36%
23%
19.0
MKGO1
M.
K.
Goddard
Pennsylvania
3.5
Columbus,
GA­
AL
ALABAMA
MONTGOMERY
Montgomery,
AL
011011002
5.5
0.7
6.1
1.0
42%
5%
46%
7%
13.3
SIPS1
Sipsey
Wilderness
Alabama
3.7
Columbus,
OH;
Dayton,
OH
OHIO
BUTLER
Hamilton­
Middletown,
OH
390171004
4.3
0.6
6.2
3.2
30%
4%
43%
22%
14.3
LIVO1
Livonia
Indiana
2.8
Detroit,
MI
MICHIGAN
WAYNE
Detroit,
MI
261630001
5.3
0.7
6.0
4.2
33%
5%
37%
26%
16.1
MKGO1
M.
K.
Goddard
Pennsylvania
3.5
Evansville,
IN­
KY
KENTUCKY
DAVIESS
Owensboro,
KY
210590014
3.8
0.8
7.3
3.0
26%
5%
49%
20%
14.9
MACA1
Mammoth
Cave
National
PKentucky
3.3
Greensboro,
NC
NORTH
CAROLINA
GUILFORD
Greensboro­
Winston
Salem­
High
Point,
NC
370810013
6.9
2.3
7.3
1.6
38%
13%
40%
9%
18.1
JARI1
James
River
Face
Virginia
3.8
Greenville,
SC
SOUTH
CAROLINA
GREENVILLE
Greenville­
Spartanburg­
Anderson,
SC
450450009
5.9
0.5
7.1
1.2
40%
3%
48%
8%
14.7
SHRO1
Shining
Rock
Wilderness
North
Carolina
2.9
Hickory,
NC
NORTH
CAROLINA
MECKLENBURG
Charlotte­
Gastonia­
Rock
Hill,
NC­
SC
371190041
5.8
0.5
6.8
1.3
40%
3%
47%
9%
14.3
LIGO1
Linville
Gorge
North
Carolina
3.0
Indianapolis,
IN
INDIANA
MARION
Indianapolis,
IN
180970078
5.2
0.7
6.9
4.2
31%
4%
40%
25%
17.1
LIVO1
Livonia
Indiana
2.8
Knoxville,
KY
NORTH
CAROLINA
BUNCOMBE
Asheville,
NC
370210034
4.8
0.5
6.4
1.1
37%
4%
50%
9%
12.7
SHRO1
Shining
Rock
Wilderness
North
Carolina
2.9
Lexington,
KY
KENTUCKY
FAYETTE
Lexington,
KY
210670012
4.1
0.5
7.2
3.1
27%
3%
49%
21%
14.9
LIVO1
Livonia
Indiana
2.8
Lincoln
County,
MT
MONTANA
LINCOLN
Not
in
a
MSA
300530018
14.5
0.6
1.0
0.8
85%
4%
6%
5%
17.0
CABI1
Cabinet
Mountains
Montana
2.4
Los
Angeles,
CA
CALIFORNIA
RIVERSIDE
Riverside­
San
Bernardino,
CA
060658001
9.4
1.4
4.6
15.9
30%
4%
15%
51%
31.2
SAGO1
San
Gorgonio
Wilderness
California
2.9
Louisville,
KY­
IN
KENTUCKY
JEFFERSON
Louisville,
KY­
IN
211110043
5.5
0.7
6.8
2.9
35%
4%
43%
18%
15.8
LIVO1
Livonia
Indiana
2.8
New
York,
NY­
NJ­
CT­
PA
NEW
JERSEY
UNION
Newark,
NJ
340390004
7.9
0.7
5.9
3.1
45%
4%
34%
17%
17.5
BRIG1
Brigantine
National
WildlifeNew
Jersey
3.4
Philadelphia,
PA­
NJ­
DE­
MD
PENNSYLVANIA
DELAWARE
Philadelphia,
PA­
NJ
420450002
6.1
0.6
6.9
3.1
36%
4%
41%
19%
16.7
BRIG1
Brigantine
National
WildlifeNew
Jersey
3.4
Reading,
PA;
Lancaster,
PA
PENNSYLVANIA
LANCASTER
Lancaster,
PA
420710007
5.6
0.6
7.9
5.5
29%
3%
40%
28%
19.6
AREN1
Arendtsville
Pennsylvania
3.3
San
Diego,
CA
CALIFORNIA
SAN
DIEGO
San
Diego,
CA
060730003
6.6
0.7
4.1
5.1
40%
4%
25%
31%
16.5
AGTI1
Agua
Tibia
California
2.7
San
Joaquin,
CA
CALIFORNIA
KERN
Bakersfield,
CA
060290014
8.9
1.4
2.7
8.1
42%
7%
13%
38%
21.1
DOME1
Dome
Lands
Wilderness
California
3.5
St,
Louis,
MO­
IL
MISSOURI
ST
LOUIS
(
CITY)
St,
Louis,
MO­
IL
295100085
6.1
1.3
6.2
3.8
35%
8%
36%
22%
17.4
MING1
Mingo
Missouri
2.5
Toledo,
OH
OHIO
LUCAS
Toledo,
OH
390950026
4.7
0.5
5.4
4.6
31%
3%
35%
30%
15.3
QUCI1
Quaker
City
Ohio
3.0
Washington,
DC­
MD­
VA­
WV
DISTRICT
OF
COLUMBIA
WASHINGTON
Washington,
DC­
MD­
VA­
WV
110010043
5.5
0.6
7.5
2.4
34%
4%
47%
15%
15.9
AREN1
Arendtsville
Pennsylvania
3.3
Wheeling,
WV­
OH;
Pittsburgh,
PA;

Marion
County,
WV;
Johnstown,
PA
PENNSYLVANIA
WESTMORELAND
Pittsburgh,
PA
421290008
5.7
0.7
8.7
2.3
33%
4%
50%
13%
17.4
DOSO1
Dolly
Sods
/
Otter
Creek
WWest
Virginia
3.1
York,
PA;
Harrisburg,
PA
PENNSYLVANIA
DAUPHIN
Harrisburg­
Lebanon­
Carlisle,
PA
420430401
6.1
0.5
7.0
3.6
35%
3%
41%
21%
17.2
AREN1
Arendtsville
Pennsylvania
3.3
URBAN
PM2.5
SPECIATION
MONITORING
SITE
INFORMATION
REGIONAL
PM2.5
SPECIATION
MONITORING
SITE
Metropolitan
Area(
s)
with
Violating
Monitor
Page
2
Urban
Excess
Page
3
Urban
Excess
Page
4
Urban
Excess
Crustal
Mass
Amm.
Sulfate
Mass
Amm.
Nitrate
Mass
Carbon
%

of
Mass
Crustal
%
of
Mass
Sulfates
%

of
Mass
Nitrates
%

of
Mass
Sum
of
4
Regional
Components
Carbon
Mass
Crustal
Mass
Sulfates
Mass
Nitrates
Mass
Sum
of
4
Components
Carbon
%
Crustal
%
Sulfates
%
Nitrates
%

0.5
6.2
1.2
28%
5%
57%
11%
10.9
2.9
0.3
1.5
0.4
5.1
57%
5%
30%
7%

0.5
6.2
1.2
28%
5%
57%
11%
10.9
3.3
0.0
0.4
0.1
3.8
88%
0%
10%
3%

0.6
7.2
2.5
24%
4%
53%
19%
13.6
3.3
0.1
0.5
0.0
3.8
85%
2%
13%
0%

0.7
6.6
1.4
30%
5%
53%
11%
12.3
2.8
0.8
0.7
0.3
4.7
60%
18%
16%
6%

0.6
6.0
1.9
29%
5%
50%
16%
11.9
2.1
0.4
0.5
1.2
4.2
49%
10%
11%
30%

0.8
7.8
1.5
23%
6%
59%
12%
13.1
2.7
0.0
0.3
0.2
3.2
84%
0%
10%
6%

0.5
6.2
1.2
28%
5%
57%
11%
10.9
3.3
0.5
0.8
0.4
5.1
66%
10%
17%
7%

0.8
5.3
3.7
21%
6%
43%
30%
12.3
2.3
0.1
0.9
0.3
3.6
65%
2%
25%
8%

0.7
6.8
2.7
21%
6%
52%
21%
13.0
1.6
0.0
0.1
0.3
2.1
78%
0%
7%
15%

0.6
6.0
1.9
29%
5%
50%
16%
11.9
3.0
0.8
0.9
2.4
7.1
42%
11%
13%
34%

0.7
6.6
1.4
30%
5%
53%
11%
12.3
1.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
100%
0%
0%
0%

0.7
6.8
2.7
21%
6%
52%
21%
13.0
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.6
2.1
73%
0%
0%
27%

0.6
6.0
1.9
29%
5%
50%
16%
11.9
1.8
0.2
0.0
2.3
4.3
42%
4%
0%
54%

0.7
6.8
1.8
26%
5%
54%
14%
12.7
0.5
0.1
0.4
1.1
2.2
23%
6%
20%
51%

0.6
6.9
0.9
31%
5%
56%
8%
12.2
3.1
1.7
0.5
0.6
6.0
52%
29%
8%
11%

0.7
7.6
0.5
25%
6%
66%
4%
11.6
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.7
3.8
81%
0%
0%
19%

0.5
6.7
0.6
28%
5%
62%
5%
10.7
2.8
0.0
0.1
0.7
3.6
77%
0%
3%
20%

0.7
6.8
2.7
21%
6%
52%
21%
13.0
2.4
0.0
0.1
1.6
4.1
59%
0%
3%
38%

0.7
7.6
0.5
25%
6%
66%
4%
11.6
1.9
0.0
0.0
0.6
2.5
75%
0%
0%
25%

0.7
6.8
2.7
21%
6%
52%
21%
13.0
1.3
0.0
0.5
0.4
2.2
60%
0%
22%
19%

0.8
0.8
0.3
56%
20%
18%
6%
4.2
12.1
0.0
0.2
0.6
13.0
93%
0%
2%
5%

1.2
1.8
4.6
28%
11%
17%
44%
10.5
6.5
0.2
2.8
11.3
20.7
31%
1%
14%
55%

0.7
6.8
2.7
21%
6%
52%
21%
13.0
2.7
0.0
0.0
0.2
2.9
93%
0%
0%
7%

0.5
5.5
1.4
32%
5%
51%
13%
10.9
4.4
0.2
0.4
1.6
6.6
67%
3%
6%
25%

0.5
5.5
1.4
32%
5%
51%
13%
10.9
2.6
0.1
1.4
1.7
5.8
45%
2%
24%
29%

0.6
7.2
2.5
24%
4%
53%
19%
13.6
2.3
0.0
0.7
3.0
6.0
39%
0%
11%
50%

1.2
2.8
2.6
29%
13%
30%
28%
9.3
3.9
0.0
1.3
2.5
7.7
51%
0%
16%
33%

1.2
1.6
2.0
42%
15%
20%
23%
8.4
5.4
0.2
1.0
6.1
12.8
42%
2%
8%
48%

1.0
5.6
2.0
22%
9%
51%
18%
11.1
3.6
0.3
0.5
1.8
6.2
58%
5%
8%
29%

0.8
7.8
1.5
23%
6%
59%
12%
13.1
1.7
0.0
0.0
3.1
4.8
36%
0%
0%
64%

0.6
7.2
2.5
24%
4%
53%
19%
13.6
2.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
2.5
88%
1%
11%
0%

0.5
7.2
0.9
26%
5%
62%
8%
11.7
2.6
0.2
1.5
1.4
5.7
46%
3%
27%
24%

0.6
7.2
2.5
24%
4%
53%
19%
13.6
2.8
0.0
0.0
1.1
3.9
72%
0%
0%
28%

TE
INFORMATION
URBAN
EXCESS
INFORMATION
Page
5
Urban
Excess
Page
6
Urban
Excess
Page
7
Urban
Excess
Page
8
Urban
Excess
Page
9
Urban
Excess
Page
10
Urban
Excess
Page
11
Urban
Excess
Page
12
Urban
Excess
Page
13
Urban
Excess
Page
14
Urban
Excess
Page
15
Urban
Excess
Page
16
Urban
Excess
Page
17
Urban
Excess
Page
18
Urban
Excess
Page
19
Data
Analysis
Process
1.
Chemical
composition
data
from
urban
sites
(
from
the
EPA
Speciation
Network,
or
ESpN)
and
regional
sites
(
from
the
IMPROVE
visibility
monitoring
network)
were
analyzed
for
the
12
months
extending
from
April
2002
to
March
2003.
Complete
sites
were
chosen
if
they
had
11
complete
observations
per
quarter
for
all
major
PM2.5
species
for
all
4
quarters
of
interest.
The
worksheet
'
Map
1'
displays
the
locations
of
urban
and
regional
monitors
that
met
the
2.
For
every
complete
urban
ESpN
site,
the
nearest
IMPROVE
site
was
identified
using
a
geographic
information
system.
Note
that
in
some
cases,
the
same
IMPROVE
site
is
used
as
the
"
regional
site"
for
more
than
one
of
the
urban
locations.
Sipsey,
Shining
Rock,
Cohutta,
Brigantine,
Quaker
City,
Livonia,
and
Arendtville
are
IMPROVE
sites
that
are
used
more
than
once
to
represent
regional
concentrations
for
metro
areas
in
the
eastern
U.
S.
The
worksheet
'
Map
2'
shows
the
137
urban
sites
and
the
IMPROVE
sites
paired
with
them.
These
site
pairings
were
then
used
to
estimate
urban
excess
percentages
by
PM2.5
component.
3.
Only
data
for
site
pairs
associated
with
metro
areas
having
a
violating
monitor
are
included
in
this
PM2.5
designations
worksheet.
If
a
metro
area
did
not
have
an
urban
speciation
site
with
complete
data,
then
PM2.5
urban
excess
percentages
from
the
closest
urban­
regional
site
pair
were
used
as
a
surrogate
for
the
area.
Some
violating
metro
areas
had
more
than
one
complete
urban
ESpN
site;
in
those
situations,
the
urban
ESpN
site
with
the
highest
gravimetric
mass
was
used
to
calculate
the
weighted
emissions
scores.

4.
Ammonium
sulfate
(
a.
k.
a.
'
sulfates')
is
calculated
as
4.125
*
sulfur.
Ammonium
nitrate
(
a.
k.
a.
'
nitrates')
is
calculated
as
1.29
*
nitrate.
TCM
is
equal
to
elemental
carbon
+
(
1.4
*
organic
carbon).
Crustal
mass
is
calculated
according
to
the
methodology
used
in
the
IMPROVE
program.
All
data
have
been
corrected
for
elevation.

5.
For
each
PM2.5
component,
the
urban
increment
mass
is
estimated
by
subtracting
the
regional
mass
from
the
urban
mass.
The
sum
of
these
four
components
is
the
total
urban
increment
mass.
(
In
cases
where
regional
mass
for
a
component
exceeds
the
urban
mass,
the
urban
increment
mass
for
that
component
was
assumed
to
be
zero.)
The
percentage
that
each
PM2.5
component
comprises
of
the
total
urban
increment
mass
was
then
calculated.
These
component
percentages
were
used
in
calculating
the
weighted
emissions
scores
in
the
spreadsheet
"
For
states­
PM25
areas
with
emissions
score
061404.
xls."
Complete
Urban
and
Rural
Monitors
for
Apr
02­

Blue
Closed
Circles
are
Complete
ESPN
Monitors
(
N=
137)
Pink
Open
Squares
are
Complete
IMPROVE
Monitors
(
N=
1
pr
02­
Mar
03
=
137)
s
(
N=
155)
MATCHED
URBAN
and
RURAL
SITES
(
April
2002­
M
Pink
Squares:
Rural
Locations
(
N
=
58)
Blue
Dots:
Urban
Locations
(
N
=
137)
002­
Mar
2003)
