Air Quality Data Clause Samples

Air Quality Data. This factor considers the Lead design values (in µg/m3) for air quality monitors in Collin County in the Frisco area as well as the surrounding area based on data for the 2006-2008 period. A monitor’s design value indicates whether that monitor attains a specified air quality standard. The 2008 Lead NAAQS are met at a monitoring site when the identified design value is valid and less than or equal to 0.15 µg/m3. A design value is only valid if minimum data completeness criteria are met. A Lead design value that meets the NAAQS is generally considered valid if it encompasses 36 consecutive valid 3-month site means (specifically for a 3-year calendar period and the two previous months). For this purpose, a 3-month site mean is valid if valid data were obtained for at least 75 percent of the scheduled monitoring days in the 3-month period. A Lead design value that does not meet the NAAQS is considered valid if at least one 3-month mean that meets the same 75 percent requirement is above the NAAQS. That is, a site does not have to monitor for three full calendar years in order to have a valid violating design value; a site could monitor just three months and still produce a valid (violating) design value. The 2008 Lead NAAQS design values for Collin County in Frisco and surrounding area are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Air Quality Data County State Recommended Nonattainment? Monitor Name Monitor Air Quality System ID Monitor Locatio Lead Design Value, 2006 - 2008 (µg/m3) Lead Design Value 2007-2009 (µg/m3) Collin Yes ▇▇▇ ▇▇. ▇▇-▇▇▇- ▇. ▇▇▇ ▇▇. 0.28 0.33 County, 0003 Texas Ash St. 48-085- 6931 Ash St. 0.17 0.17 0007 N. property 48-085- Next to north 1.26* 1.26* 0009 property line on facility property *Monitor in Bold has the highest design value in the respective county. As discussed in the response to comments, this monitor has been listed as a SLAMS monitor and the data has been reported by the State as ambient data for the last three years. EPA understands that Texas now believes the data from this monitor should be designated as non-regulatory data. This issue will be addressed through future discussions with the State. As noted by TCEQ, there are two other monitors in the area that have recorded measurements above the NAAQS for lead. So even if the data from 480850009 were not considered, a nonattainment designation would still be appropriate. Collin County shows a violation of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Therefore some area in this county and possibly additional a...
View SourceView Similar (2)
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including design values (in ppb) calculated for the 2009-11 time period for all air quality monitors within 50 kilometers of the Indiana County monitor. The 2009-11 1-hour SO2 design value for the Strongstown monitor located in Indiana County is shown in Table 7. The Commonwealth also provided data indicating that the 2012 design value was 81 ppb and EPA verified this design value is correct.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including design values (in ppb) calculated for all air quality monitors in Beaver County based on certified data for the 2009-2011 period. In addition, more recent air monitoring data included in the Commonwealth’s response to EPA’s proposal was also considered. The 2011 1-hour SO2 design value for the monitors located in Beaver County is shown in Table 4. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 42-007- 0002 153 122 109 72 58 101 80 Brighton Township 42-007- 0005 170 165 176 161 136 167 158 One-hour SO2 design values at the Hookstown monitor have been falling over the last several years. As supporting information, the Commonwealth indicated that the preliminary 2012 design value for this monitor is 57 ppb while the 2012 design value at the Brighton monitor was 149 ppb. These values were confirmed by EPA. Monitors within the 50 kilometer zone of the violating monitors in the neighboring counties in PA (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Allegheny and Washington) are not recording violations. The Commonwealth also looked at exceedances at the Brighton Township and Hookstown monitors in Beaver County. Both monitors showed distinctly different patterns as to when 1-hr SO2 exceedances occurred. The Brighton Township monitor tended to have exceedances during the overnight hours while exceedances at the Hookstown monitor tended to occur during the daytime hours. EPA examined 1-hr SO2 concentrations from 2009-11 for both monitors and generally confirmed the Commonwealth’s findings. EPA would add that while exceedances at the Brighton Township monitor generally occurred during the overnight hours, there were still a number of exceedances observed during the daytime. EPA also calculated the correlation coefficients for both the Brighton Township and Hookstown monitors. One-hour SO2 concentrations from the Brighton Township and Hookstown monitors are not well correlated, which supports designating only a portion of Beaver County as nonattainment.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the lead design values (in µg/m3) for air quality monitors in ▇▇▇▇ County in Chicago and the surrounding area based on data for the 2008 – 2010 period. A monitor’s design value indicates whether that monitor attains a specified air quality standard. The 2008 lead NAAQS are met at a monitoring site when the identified design value is valid and less than or equal to 0.15 µg/m3. A design value is only valid if minimum data completeness criteria are met. A lead design value that meets the NAAQS is generally considered valid if it encompasses 36 consecutive valid 3-month site means (specifically for a 3-year calendar period and the 2 previous months). For this purpose, a 3-month site mean is valid if valid data were obtained for at least 75 percent of the scheduled monitoring days in the 3-month period. A lead design value that does not meet the NAAQS is considered valid if at least one 3-month mean that meets the same 75 percent requirement is above the NAAQS. That is, a site does not have to monitor for 3 full calendar years in order to have a valid violating design value; a site could monitor just 3 months and still produce a valid (violating) design value. The 2008 lead NAAQS design values for ▇▇▇▇ County in Chicago and the surrounding area are shown in Table 2 below, and ▇▇▇▇ County shows a violation of the 2008 lead NAAQS. Therefore, some area in this county and possibly additional areas in surrounding counties must be designated nonattainment. It should be noted there are multiple monitors in ▇▇▇▇ County, but the remainder of the monitors in ▇▇▇▇ County have recorded air quality data showing that the 2008 lead NAAQAS has not been violated. IEPA has recommended only the area surrounding the violating monitor as nonattainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. This particular monitor, located at ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇. (AQS ID 17310110), is in very close proximity to ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ & Company (▇▇▇▇▇▇). The primary products manufactured at this facility are brass and copper ingots. The location of this monitor will be discussed in the section addressing emissions for ▇▇▇▇ County. However, the absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient reason to eliminate nearby areas as candidates for nonattainment status. Each area has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of these factors and other relevant information. County State Recommended Nonattainment? Monitor Name Monitor Air Quality System ID Monitor Location Lead Design Value, 2008-2010 (µg...
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including the design value (in ppb) calculated for the air quality monitor in ▇▇▇▇▇▇ County based on certified data for the 2009-2011 period. The 2010 1-hour SO2 design value for the monitor located in ▇▇▇▇▇▇ County is shown in Table 12. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 42-123- 0004 153 146 113 109 94 123 105 The Commonwealth indicated that the design value for 2010-2012 was 102 ppb and this was confirmed by EPA. The Commonwealth examined hourly SO2 concentrations at the ▇▇▇▇▇▇ County, PA monitor and noted exceedances of the 1-hr SO2 NAAQS generally occurred during the overnight hours. This was attributed to limited mixing during nocturnal inversions. EPA examined the ▇▇▇▇▇▇ County, PA monitor’s hourly SO2 concentrations from 2009-11 and confirmed that peak concentrations and exceedances primarily occur during the overnight hours. This would support that meteorological conditions, namely nocturnal inversions, are contributing to exceedances in the area of the ▇▇▇▇▇▇ County, PA monitor.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including the design values (in ppb) calculated for all air quality monitors in Sullivan County in the Sullivan County Area and the surrounding area based on data for the 2009-2011 period. TDEC Commissioner ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ recommendation was based on data from the Federal Equivalent Method monitor located in the State (Tennessee Designation Recommendation Letter, June 3, 2011), in accordance with 40 CFR Part 53. The 2011 SO2 NAAQS design values for the county in the Sullivan County area and surrounding area are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Air Quality Data for Nonattainment Designations in Sullivan County, Tennessee County State Recommended Nonattainment? Monitor Name Monitor Air Qualit System ID Monitor Location SO2 Design Value, 2009-2011 (ppb) Sullivan County, TN Yes ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 36.5348, -82.5171 196 Monitors in Bold have the highest 2009-2011 design value in the respective county. Sullivan County shows a violation of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Therefore, some area in this county and possibly additional areas in surrounding counties must be designated nonattainment. The absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient reason to eliminate nearby counties as candidates for inclusion in a nonattainment area. Each area has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of the five factors and other relevant information.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including the design values (in ppb) calculated for all air quality monitors in Hillsborough County and the surrounding area based on data for the 2009- 2011 period. Secretary ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ recommendation was based on data from a Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) monitor located in the State (Florida Nonattainment Designation Recommendation Letter, June 13, 2011), in accordance with 40 CFR Part 53. The 2011 SO2 NAAQS design values for all monitors in the Hillsborough Area and surrounding area are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Air Quality Data for Nonattainment Designations in Hillsborough County, FL County State Recommended Nonattainment? Monitor Name Monitor Air Qualit System ID Monitor Location SO2 Design Value, 2009-2011 (ppb) Hillsborough County Yes East Bay (Gibsonton) ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 27.856389, -82.383667 103 No E.G. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 27.740032, 22 Park -82.465145 No Coast Guard ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 27.928056 43 Station – Davis -82.454722 Island No Sydney ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 27.965650, 15 -82.2304 Hillsborough County shows a violation of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Therefore, some area in Hillsborough County and possibly additional areas in surrounding counties must be designated nonattainment. The violating monitor (12-057-0109) near Gibsonton is located approximately 1 kilometer to the southeast of the Mosaic Riverview phosphate fertilizer plant, a major source of SO2 emissions. The primary emissions units at this facility are three sulfuric acid plants. The absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient reason to eliminate nearby counties as candidates for inclusion in a nonattainment area. Each area has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of the five factors and other relevant information.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 air quality monitoring data, including the design values (in ppb) calculated for all air quality monitors in Nassau County and the surrounding area based on data for the 2009-2011 period. Florida’s recommendation was based on data from a FEM monitor located in the State (Florida Nonattainment Designation Recommendation Letter, November 28, 2011), in accordance with 40 CFR Part 53. The 2011 SO2 NAAQS design values for all monitors in the Nassau County and surrounding area are shown in Table 5. Table 5. Air Quality Data for Nonattainment Designations in Nassau County, Florida County State Recommended Nonattainment? Monitor Name Monitor Air Quality System ID Monitor Location SO2 Design Valu 2009-2011 (ppb) Nassau County, FL Yes FBHWWTP ▇▇-▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇ 30.3583, -81.4633 129 Nassau County shows a violation of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Therefore, some area in this county and possibly additional areas in surrounding counties must be designated nonattainment. The absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient reason to eliminate nearby counties as candidates for inclusion in a nonattainment area. Each area has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of the five factors and other relevant information. The violating monitor (12-089-0005) in Fernandina Beach is located less than one kilometer to the southeast of the Rayonier Performance Fibers plant, a major source of SO2. All other SO2 monitors in the northeast Florida area are in compliance with the ambient standard.
View Source
Air Quality Data. This factor considers the SO2 design values (in ppb) for air quality monitors in Allegheny County based on certified data for the 2009-2011 time period. As supporting information, the Commonwealth and ACDH reported that the preliminary 2010-12 design value at the Liberty monitor, located in the southeast portion of Allegheny County was 141 ppb. Monitors in other portions of Allegheny County and nearby Washington County do not show violations of the standard and have significantly lower concentrations than Liberty. Monitors not showing violations of the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in other portions of the county support reducing the initial nonattainment area to include only portions of southeastern Allegheny County. One-hour SO2 design values for the five monitors located in Allegheny County are shown in Table 2.
View Source

Related to Air Quality Data

  • Air Quality To the extent applicable, Consultant must fully comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations in furnishing or using equipment and/or providing services, including, but not limited to, emissions limits and permitting requirements imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and/or California Air Resources Board (CARB). Although the SCAQMD and CARB limits and requirements are more broad, Consultant shall specifically be aware of their application to "portable equipment", which definition is considered by SCAQMD and CARB to include any item of equipment with a fuel-powered engine. Consultant shall indemnify City against any fines or penalties imposed by SCAQMD, CARB, or any other governmental or regulatory agency for violations of applicable laws, rules and/or regulations by Consultant, its subconsultants, or others for whom Consultant is responsible under its indemnity obligations provided for in this Agreement.

  • Musculoskeletal Injury Prevention and Control The hospital in consultation with the Joint Health and Safety Committee (JHSC) shall develop, establish and put into effect, musculoskeletal prevention and control measures, procedures, practices and training for the health and safety of employees.

  • Use; Quality Control a. Neither party may alter the other party’s trademarks from the form provided and must comply with removal requests as to specific uses of its trademarks or logos. b. Each party agrees to use, and to cause its Permitted Sublicensees to use, the other party’s trademarks only in good faith and in a dignified manner consistent with such party’s use of the trademarks. Upon written notice to the breaching party, the breaching party has 30 days of the date of the written notice to cure the breach or the license will be terminated.

  • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Contractor shall establish and maintain a quality assurance/quality control program which shall include procedures for continuous control of all construction and comprehensive inspection and testing of all items of Work, including any Work performed by Subcontractors, so as to ensure complete conformance to the Contract with respect to materials, workmanship, construction, finish, functional performance, and identification. The program established by Contractor shall comply with any quality assurance/quality control requirements incorporated in the Contract.

  • Water Quality 8.1. The Supply shall comply with the quality standards imposed by the Act and the Water Quality Regulations, PROVIDED ALWAYS that where a particular standard is the subject of a legal instrument accepted or issued by the Secretary of State or the Chief Inspector of Drinking Water under the provisions of the Act or the Water Quality Regulations, compliance with the terms of the relevant legal instrument shall be deemed to be compliance with the relevant quality standard imposed by the Act or the Water Quality Regulations (as the case may be), in which case the Water Company shall provide the New Appointee with a certified copy of any such authorised departure or undertaking. Each party undertakes to keep the other party fully informed of any discussions which take place at any time hereafter with the Secretary of State for the proposed issue of a legal instrument and of the outcome thereof. 8.2. The Water Company shall act as a reasonable and prudent operator to ensure that the Water Company’s Distribution Network does not cause any contamination of the water in the New Appointee’s Water Distribution Network including suspending the Bulk Supply and, in any event, shall: 8.2.1. notify the New Appointee of the existence and cause (if known) of any contamination that it considers (acting as a reasonable and prudent operator) could affect the New Appointee’s Water Distribution Network as soon as practicable after the same have come to the Water Company’s attention; and 8.2.2. keep the New Appointee notified of the steps being taken to remedy the contamination. 8.3. Without prejudice to clause 8.1, the Water Company reserves the right to supply water of a different nature and composition or with different characteristics from that previously supplied where this results from the characteristics of the source or sources from which the Supply is taken, or the Water Company’s Distribution Network, beyond the reasonable control of the Water Company or if, in the due discharge of its statutory duty to supply water, it considers it necessary or desirable to do so acting reasonably and in good faith. 8.4. In addition, both parties agree to be bound by the provisions of the Water Quality Protocol or such modified version of such Water Quality Protocol as may from time to time be agreed in writing by the parties.